What's new

Does the new defence pact with KSA imply that Saudi will defend Pakistan against Indian aggression?

Does the new defence pact with KSA imply that Saudi will defend Pakistan against Indian aggression?


  • Total voters
    19
Your own leader and his party was created and bought and engineered into power by the army and an elected pm ousted .

Your own leader sung from hymn sheet of army and then started swearing at them

At least pmln or ppp never called for insurrection and to overthrow the military or break pakistan that's only been done by 2 nutters your leader and the now defunct leader altaf hussain
Another pathetic attempt at giving credit to a bunch of criminals that couldn't even fix an election without getting humiliated in front of the World. IK believed the army actually cared for PK and then realised what a pathetic bunch of traitors these Generals were. He stood firm, they wilted and then they killed PKs. Explain why Munir broke his oath the Koran? I dare you
 
Your own leader and his party was created and bought and engineered into power by the army and an elected pm ousted .

Your own leader sung from hymn sheet of army and then started swearing at them

At least pmln or ppp never called for insurrection and to overthrow the military or break pakistan that's only been done by 2 nutters your leader and the now defunct leader altaf hussain
Are you ok. You seem to be delusional like the Gungi tik tok queen. IK won every province and has warned against the breakup because the Generals will do anything for money. When did IK breakup PK. He won Punjab, KP, GB, AJK, Balochistan and Sindh. On the other hand the Generals destroyed PK and Lost BD. I am not sure why they hire losers like you for their cells. Surely they can find someone with a bit of education
 
Sorry there is lots of posts replied to my original quote that make it difficult to multiquote for some reason.

I wasn't a fan of Taliban being brought back to power. There were certain conditions set out to them which they have not fulfilled. They are completely unpredictable and will be a thorn in the side of Pakistanis for years to come. And yes they are pro india and have aligned with TTP to spread terror in Pakistan. The uloo ke pathay came back riding on the coattails of Pakistan, then decided to spread terror in KPK. Pakistan has attacked Afghanistan directly in 2022 and urged the Taliban to take action, but they have done the opposite.

Some action needs to be taken before they take Pakistan down that dark path that it was on all those years ago.
 
Unpopular Opinion..

I hope that Pakistan can reconcile and reconnect with India.. we would have zero need for these glittering military alliances and pacts with nationalies and races which are far removed from our own people. Ok, we share a common faith with them but thats about it..their customs and way of life are way different than ours (Pakistani’s and Indians).

I wish/hope we could stop and drop this stupid ling measuring at every single turn.

One is strong and one therefore is not as strong in comparison, one is higher and one therefore has to be less higher..etc etc

For Pakistani’s, our enemy is within, always was and hopefully never will be..🤲

Can you imagine, if tomorrow, all our grievances were addressed by ourselves, diplomatically and without prejudice and done without those individuals who harbour and cause these issues..

We could share our collective resources, , etc. the world would be very different as a result and pretty much all of us would go back home

In the western world, we work alongside one another and help each other out, why?? Because we are the same pretty much, we can relate to each other better than Arabs, etc

Anyway…
Thing is irl Pakistanis and Indians get alone fine. Can’t even tell em apart outside looking in. But online everybody wears their flags on their fingertip and few elites in both societies want animosity so that they can remain in power

Same ideology Yahud use to keep M.E divided and factioned. Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book
 
Thing is irl Pakistanis and Indians get alone fine. Can’t even tell em apart outside looking in. But online everybody wears their flags on their fingertip and few elites in both societies want animosity so that they can remain in power

Same ideology Yahud use to keep M.E divided and factioned. Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book

In real life, most people get along. They have no choice. They can lose their jobs or face other consequences if they don't. LOL.
 
They are Afghans and basically to them the creation of pakistan is like israel.

As for bagram listen usa doesn't need bagram to attack pakistan it could fly from the arabian sea or fly over any countries air space without permission whether its any gulf country iran or central asia or even india its got aircraft and equipment that are invisible to radars and can jam air defences your not gonna stop usa or nato airpower.

We all saw how Israel and usa bombed iran and literally controlled whole of iranian airspace with their leader in a basement wailing and crying.

They are probably not wrong to be honest. Israel is effectively a US outpost planted in the middle east, and you could argue Pakistan has pretty much operated the same.

But Pakistan has served some useful purpose for the Muslims worldwide in developing nuclear capability and a capable military machine. Not everything is black and white.
 
On a neutral standpoint, I would question why was this not done before?

Pakistan has been the acting custodian of Islam in Asia-Middle east region (both in a positive and negative light). Arabs were always dilly-dallying with Americans but should have focussed on strengthening the region by supporting Pakistan during early 1990’s and 2000’s when Pakistan developed nukes.

Now, nuclear advancements are very limited due to sanctions and only US and Russia has the nerve to be the leaders. It’s too late now I feel as they can never catchup with other geopolitical powers as one cannot showcase their motives openly now.

I feel that Arabs will lose their prominence as energy matrix shifts towards renewable energy in the next 25-30 years. I can see India and China, world’s largest oil importers having ~50% of their energy needs through renewable energy. This means Arab’s have to rely on attracting HNI (rich people) to inhabitat their nations. And in turn losing their dominance.

I expect Pakistan to outgrow Arab regions geo-political power in the next 3 decades.


As far as India is concerned, while many Pak posters may disagree, from our standpoint, our aggression is based on cause-impact scenarios. So, it may never turn into a full fledged war with Pakistan I feel. And I dont want to drag this but India is looking at building indigenous Defense industry and we are at a decent stage (following a similar path to China here I would say). So, Pakistan will not be the aggressor in any scenario as they cant afford it.

China - Have to wait and watch but India will not play into the Western nation hands by starting a war in Asia and destabilizing the region.

So, there may be some unnecessary speculations but if I analyze this as a sane person, it’s a welcome move to strengthen the Asian region.

A secure Pakistani border will in-turn help India too in the long-term. A destabilized economies will hurt everyone. Looking at 40 years from now, Pakistan will be a big consumer market and both India-Pakistan will not lose the opportunity to trade.

This is my unbiased opinion.
 
On a neutral standpoint, I would question why was this not done before?

Pakistan has been the acting custodian of Islam in Asia-Middle east region (both in a positive and negative light). Arabs were always dilly-dallying with Americans but should have focussed on strengthening the region by supporting Pakistan during early 1990’s and 2000’s when Pakistan developed nukes.

Now, nuclear advancements are very limited due to sanctions and only US and Russia has the nerve to be the leaders. It’s too late now I feel as they can never catchup with other geopolitical powers as one cannot showcase their motives openly now.

I feel that Arabs will lose their prominence as energy matrix shifts towards renewable energy in the next 25-30 years. I can see India and China, world’s largest oil importers having ~50% of their energy needs through renewable energy. This means Arab’s have to rely on attracting HNI (rich people) to inhabitat their nations. And in turn losing their dominance.

I expect Pakistan to outgrow Arab regions geo-political power in the next 3 decades.


As far as India is concerned, while many Pak posters may disagree, from our standpoint, our aggression is based on cause-impact scenarios. So, it may never turn into a full fledged war with Pakistan I feel. And I dont want to drag this but India is looking at building indigenous Defense industry and we are at a decent stage (following a similar path to China here I would say). So, Pakistan will not be the aggressor in any scenario as they cant afford it.

China - Have to wait and watch but India will not play into the Western nation hands by starting a war in Asia and destabilizing the region.

So, there may be some unnecessary speculations but if I analyze this as a sane person, it’s a welcome move to strengthen the Asian region.

A secure Pakistani border will in-turn help India too in the long-term. A destabilized economies will hurt everyone. Looking at 40 years from now, Pakistan will be a big consumer market and both India-Pakistan will not lose the opportunity to trade.

This is my unbiased opinion.


To be fair the Arabs have recognised that the future of fossil fuels is limited, although it still has plenty of life in it yet until alternative forms of energy become both cheaper and more efficient. That is why the Gulf States are following Dubai's example and diversifying their economies ahead of any lessening of demand for oil.

Also you have to bear in mind they have a very advantageous location in the middle east which means they will always be at the centre of the hub for trade. That is part of the reason why they are influential in alternative trade bodies like BRICS.
 
My Islamic beliefs are different from what I was born into; I have definitely reasoned into them.

And what are these reasons you have for not believing in religions other than your own ? They can be debunked in this day and age. I think you'll find that being born into it is pretty much the only factor for a large number of people, more than 90%.

Unless people have a convincing spiritual experience (supernatural maybe?), they're unlikely to be reasoned into a new religion.
 
Thing is irl Pakistanis and Indians get alone fine. Can’t even tell em apart outside looking in. But online everybody wears their flags on their fingertip and few elites in both societies want animosity so that they can remain in power

Same ideology Yahud use to keep M.E divided and factioned. Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book
Its a shame isnt it…. By and large we each let things slide (or at least should). I dont mind the aggression that the Pak team are showing currently but keep it within limits and decorum.

A lot of it, i feel is nobody want to back down, many a times over trivial matters
 
On a neutral standpoint, I would question why was this not done before?

Pakistan has been the acting custodian of Islam in Asia-Middle east region (both in a positive and negative light). Arabs were always dilly-dallying with Americans but should have focussed on strengthening the region by supporting Pakistan during early 1990’s and 2000’s when Pakistan developed nukes.

Now, nuclear advancements are very limited due to sanctions and only US and Russia has the nerve to be the leaders. It’s too late now I feel as they can never catchup with other geopolitical powers as one cannot showcase their motives openly now.

I feel that Arabs will lose their prominence as energy matrix shifts towards renewable energy in the next 25-30 years. I can see India and China, world’s largest oil importers having ~50% of their energy needs through renewable energy. This means Arab’s have to rely on attracting HNI (rich people) to inhabitat their nations. And in turn losing their dominance.

I expect Pakistan to outgrow Arab regions geo-political power in the next 3 decades.


As far as India is concerned, while many Pak posters may disagree, from our standpoint, our aggression is based on cause-impact scenarios. So, it may never turn into a full fledged war with Pakistan I feel. And I dont want to drag this but India is looking at building indigenous Defense industry and we are at a decent stage (following a similar path to China here I would say). So, Pakistan will not be the aggressor in any scenario as they cant afford it.

China - Have to wait and watch but India will not play into the Western nation hands by starting a war in Asia and destabilizing the region.

So, there may be some unnecessary speculations but if I analyze this as a sane person, it’s a welcome move to strengthen the Asian region.

A secure Pakistani border will in-turn help India too in the long-term. A destabilized economies will hurt everyone. Looking at 40 years from now, Pakistan will be a big consumer market and both India-Pakistan will not lose the opportunity to trade.

This is my unbiased opinion.
Good points, Pakistan needs to solely focus on itself ,we (sane) Pakistanis are and should be last to be thekidaars of Islam, nobody is or should be thekidaar.. its a lie peddled by the cabal and they have totally ruined and obliterated Pakistan.
 
Thing is irl Pakistanis and Indians get alone fine. Can’t even tell em apart outside looking in. But online everybody wears their flags on their fingertip and few elites in both societies want animosity so that they can remain in power

Same ideology Yahud use to keep M.E divided and factioned. Divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book

Sorry have to disagree. I don't look anything like most Indians.
 
Unpopular Opinion..

I hope that Pakistan can reconcile and reconnect with India.. we would have zero need for these glittering military alliances and pacts with nationalies and races which are far removed from our own people. Ok, we share a common faith with them but thats about it..their customs and way of life are way different than ours (Pakistani’s and Indians).

That's a noble sentiment but you are ignoring the root cause of the animosity.

There's this thing called Democratic peace theory - which simply states that democracies never go to war. You can't find any example atleast since WW2 1945. Stable democracies just dont go to war. If Pakistan had functioned as democracy these last 70 years, there's no way it would have gone to war with India three times. All those wars were pushed by your military dictators who seized domestic power through coups.

Sensible pakistanis should admit that their army is the singlest biggest reason for the hostility between the two countries but I don't see any such acknowledgement on this forum sadly. Religious pride has clouded the brain.
 
That's a noble sentiment but you are ignoring the root cause of the animosity.

There's this thing called Democratic peace theory - which simply states that democracies never go to war. You can't find any example atleast since WW2 1945. Stable democracies just dont go to war. If Pakistan had functioned as democracy these last 70 years, there's no way it would have gone to war with India three times. All those wars were pushed by your military dictators who seized domestic power through coups.

Sensible pakistanis should admit that their army is the singlest biggest reason for the hostility between the two countries but I don't see any such acknowledgement on this forum sadly. Religious pride has clouded the brain.

This is a very poor and incorrect understanding or outright lie, likely the 2nd imo.

The first war was due to Mr Singh going against the people and selling himself to India and attempting to take all of Kashmir, which resulted in Pakistan taking half.

The last war(very recent) was a result of India launching attacks on Pakistan blaming them for the obvious false flag.

Only a complete idiot would think India are the good guys and Pak are the bad guys or maybe less than 5 years in age.
 
That's a noble sentiment but you are ignoring the root cause of the animosity.

There's this thing called Democratic peace theory - which simply states that democracies never go to war. You can't find any example atleast since WW2 1945. Stable democracies just dont go to war. If Pakistan had functioned as democracy these last 70 years, there's no way it would have gone to war with India three times. All those wars were pushed by your military dictators who seized domestic power through coups.

Sensible pakistanis should admit that their army is the singlest biggest reason for the hostility between the two countries but I don't see any such acknowledgement on this forum sadly. Religious pride has clouded the brain.

That makes no sense at all considering just about every stable democracy in the west has been at war in the last few decades.
 
To be fair the Arabs have recognised that the future of fossil fuels is limited, although it still has plenty of life in it yet until alternative forms of energy become both cheaper and more efficient. That is why the Gulf States are following Dubai's example and diversifying their economies ahead of any lessening of demand for oil.

Also you have to bear in mind they have a very advantageous location in the middle east which means they will always be at the centre of the hub for trade. That is part of the reason why they are influential in alternative trade bodies like BRICS.
Innovation has been the only factor that decides being a super power. Infact, it is the actual power. One cannot bring a knife to a gun fight.

All the talk about soft power and influence can only amount to so much in convincing people. But all it took was a narcissistic madman like Hitler to drive extremism among people during WW2.

What China did right was to drive its innovation. Despite all the hurdles it faced, it pushed through and it is second only to the US globally now. Somehow, Europe lost its way and I don't think it will be on track in near future. Asian countries like India, Pakistan should focus on nurturing the sharpest minds and thats the only way, they can be secure in this increasingly polarized world.

Dubai has been attracting lots of successful people and they will definitely contribute in future to their economies. But strategic location and all are futile in the face of absolute power. It is sad to admit that, US Navy can single handedly spank everyone in this world. Supply-chain disruptions happened during Houthi attacks, but look at it now. They are resolved in 6-12 months.

It has come to a scenario where the US decides who can form trade bodies or not. Look at the language Trump used against BRICS. So, the path ahead will be really difficult if the US keeps electing people like Trump.
 
Innovation has been the only factor that decides being a super power. Infact, it is the actual power. One cannot bring a knife to a gun fight.

All the talk about soft power and influence can only amount to so much in convincing people. But all it took was a narcissistic madman like Hitler to drive extremism among people during WW2.

What China did right was to drive its innovation. Despite all the hurdles it faced, it pushed through and it is second only to the US globally now. Somehow, Europe lost its way and I don't think it will be on track in near future. Asian countries like India, Pakistan should focus on nurturing the sharpest minds and thats the only way, they can be secure in this increasingly polarized world.

Dubai has been attracting lots of successful people and they will definitely contribute in future to their economies. But strategic location and all are futile in the face of absolute power. It is sad to admit that, US Navy can single handedly spank everyone in this world. Supply-chain disruptions happened during Houthi attacks, but look at it now. They are resolved in 6-12 months.

It has come to a scenario where the US decides who can form trade bodies or not. Look at the language Trump used against BRICS. So, the path ahead will be really difficult if the US keeps electing people like Trump.

Well I have made this same point several times, using exactly the same language of bringing a knife to a gun fight. Just yesterday I endorsed Saudis for following the Dubai ruler's blueprint of disengaging from hostilities no matter what the provocation from the israeli lobby in the US. Better to speak softly and carry a big stick. You can speak harshly when the time comes, but first you need to acquire the big stick.
 
The first war was due to Mr Singh going against the people and selling himself to India and attempting to take all of Kashmir, which resulted in Pakistan taking half.

1947-48 parition was a brutal chaotic period. Pak and India grabbed half each of Kashmir. It should have ended with that.

Instead .. 18 years later, a clownish military dictator began the 1965 war. A pakistani civilian govt would have never initiated it.
 
That makes no sense at all considering just about every stable democracy in the west has been at war in the last few decades.

Two democracies haven't gone to war with each other since the end of World War 2 aka 1945.

By democracy, I mean a stable country with the elected civilian leader firmly in charge of its military.
 
That's a noble sentiment but you are ignoring the root cause of the animosity.

There's this thing called Democratic peace theory - which simply states that democracies never go to war. You can't find any example atleast since WW2 1945. Stable democracies just dont go to war. If Pakistan had functioned as democracy these last 70 years, there's no way it would have gone to war with India three times. All those wars were pushed by your military dictators who seized domestic power through coups.

Sensible pakistanis should admit that their army is the singlest biggest reason for the hostility between the two countries but I don't see any such acknowledgement on this forum sadly. Religious pride has clouded the brain.
The theory can go to hell.

War was started after India bombed Pakistani civilians.

Although I guess the theory would remain valid if we accept India is a tinpot shamocracy with a vote stealer in charge.
 
Two democracies haven't gone to war with each other since the end of World War 2 aka 1945.

By democracy, I mean a stable country with the elected civilian leader firmly in charge of its military.

But many of them have either individually or collectively gone to war with other countries that don't fall in line with their interests. The most successful democracies are the biggest warmongers in the world.
 
The theory can go to hell.

War was started after India bombed Pakistani civilians.

Although I guess the theory would remain valid if we accept India is a tinpot shamocracy with a vote stealer in charge.

Like I said earlier, religious pride has scrambled your brain. My post was discussing the roots of Indo-Pak hostility, not what happened a few months ago.
 
Like I said earlier, religious pride has scrambled your brain. My post was discussing the roots of Indo-Pak hostility, not what happened a few months ago.
The root cause of the Indo Pak conflict lies in religion. India was partitioned along religious lines, primarily to secure religious freedom for the Muslim minority, who felt underrepresented by the Hindu majority leadership.

The root cause remain the same.
 
But many of them have either individually or collectively gone to war with other countries that don't fall in line with their interests. The most successful democracies are the biggest warmongers in the world.

I guess you're referring to the US. US leaders have engaged in regime change covertly without taking their electorate into confidence (and rightly criticsied for it) but since that knowledge has become more public, their population is now much more informed of a potential war-hungry deep state and have become weary of all these foriegn shenanigans; as a result war-mongering leaders are not elected into power anymore.

The US itself hasn't annexed any territory since 1945, their public won't approve of it. Land grabs don't happen like they used to in the 19th century.
 
I guess you're referring to the US. US leaders have engaged in regime change covertly without taking their electorate into confidence (and rightly criticsied for it) but since that knowledge has become more public, their population is now much more informed of a potential war-hungry deep state and have become weary of all these foriegn shenanigans; as a result war-mongering leaders are not elected into power anymore.

The US itself hasn't annexed any territory since 1945, their public won't approve of it. Land grabs don't happen like they used to in the 19th century.

When did that happen?
 
When did that happen?

I mean .. if you follow US politics, this is a frequent talking point in their presidential campaigns - candidates promising their voters that the days of the US interfering in other countries, like Iraq and Syria, are over and they'll be minding their own business from now on.
 
I mean .. if you follow US politics, this is a frequent talking point in presidential campaigns - candidates promising their voters that the days of the US interfering in other countries, like Iraq and Syria, are over and they'll be minding their own business.
And that all it is, a talking point.
 
The root cause of the Indo Pak conflict lies in religion. India was partitioned along religious lines, primarily to secure religious freedom for the Muslim minority, who felt underrepresented by the Hindu majority leadership.

The root cause remain the same.

The root cause is 1965 war when one country (dictator) attacked the other after 18 years of peace.
 
The root cause is 1965 war when one country (dictator) attacked the other after 18 years of peace.
Kashmir is, and has always been, a disputed territory. It was India that initiated military action by advancing into Pakistan proper.
 
Nothing new, majority of Americans were opposed to war in Iraq.

Yes, and because of that .. the thought of sending US troops abroad for any war now is unthinkable. MAGA has gone even further than that .. they don't want to allow any funding for foriegn wars.
 
Yes, and because of that .. the thought of sending US troops abroad for any war is unthinkable. MAGE has gone even further than that .. they don't want any funding at all.
That’s irrelevant. US citizens are typically given two choices, both of which have historically led to war. Just because you’re describing a hopeful scenario doesn’t make it reality.
 
That’s irrelevant. US citizens are typically given two choices, both of which have historically led to war. Just because you’re describing a hopeful scenario doesn’t make it reality.

Overton window has shifted in recent years. Public opinion in a democracy caused that shift.
 
Overton window has shifted in recent years. Public opinion in a democracy caused that shift.
Public opinion holds little to no weight once one of the two major parties is elected, especially in matters of foreign policy. Even in domestic affairs, public sentiment is often ignored, which is why draconian policies are being implemented with the backing of the Supreme Court.

But if you want to hold on to that fantasy then you be you.
 
This move by Trump comes after this deal. The aim to take Bagram is to attack Pakistan if Israel is involved in any future Saudi/Pak war. The Taliban are not pro Hindutva India, they want to improve their nation by having good relations with all. The TTP is pro India but wont ever be in the main Taliban government.

The problem for the Yanks is their citizens are tired of body bags returning weekly from abroad.
Ths is what I have read as well.

China eg does not want any US presence in Bagram either.
 
Ths is what I have read as well.

China eg does not want any US presence in Bagram either.
It serves many purposes. They can continuously supply the Taliban, attack Pakistan if need be. And most importantly drive a wedge between China and Pakistan. This courting of Munir and Sharifs by Trump has its purpose.
 
Iran welcomes Pak-Saudi defence deal as start of ‘comprehensive regional security system’

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Wednesday welcomed the landmark mutual defence deal struck between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia as the beginning of a “comprehensive regional security system”.

Pakistan and Saudi Arabia entered into a landmark mutual defence agreement, under which any aggression against one state will be considered an attack on both. The pact was signed by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman at the Al-Yamamah Palace in Riyadh last week.

The timing of the accord, coming on the heels of an Arab summit that signalled a shift towards collective security — in the wake of Israel’s attack on Qatar — hints that it is rooted in current world affairs and reflects the defence concerns of both countries. It also comes just months after a deadly India-Pakistan conflict in May, as well as the 12-day war between Iran and Israel in June.

The Iranian president praised the defence deal while addressing the General Debate of the 80th Session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) today.


 
Saudi military is weak but they have lots of money.

I guess it is an alliance between Pakistan's military might and KSA's economic might. One compliments the other.
 
Kashmir is, and has always been, a disputed territory. It was India that initiated military action by advancing into Pakistan proper.

You are more interested in winning an online argument rather than doing an honest introspection of your army's horrible meddling role in your country's internal and external affairs. A bad faith poster.
 
I guess you're referring to the US. US leaders have engaged in regime change covertly without taking their electorate into confidence (and rightly criticsied for it) but since that knowledge has become more public, their population is now much more informed of a potential war-hungry deep state and have become weary of all these foriegn shenanigans; as a result war-mongering leaders are not elected into power anymore.

The US itself hasn't annexed any territory since 1945, their public won't approve of it. Land grabs don't happen like they used to in the 19th century.

I'm not just referring to the US. The rest of the western world falls in line with the US, many of them are part of NATO which is a military conglomerate which has terrorised the rest of the world which doesn't fall in line with their objectives. So these democracies might not go to war with each other, but they certainly are the most warmongering states in the modern world.
 
You are more interested in winning an online argument rather than doing an honest introspection of your army's horrible meddling role in your country's internal and external affairs. A bad faith poster.
I’ve been consistently critical of the Pakistani military’s political role, but that doesn’t mean I should deny reality. Supporting democracy in Pakistan doesn’t require ignoring facts. Kashmir remains a disputed territory, recognized as such under international law. India cannot unilaterally declare the matter settled. It’s not the United States or China.
 
I’ve been consistently critical of the Pakistani military’s political role, but that doesn’t mean I should deny reality. Supporting democracy in Pakistan doesn’t require ignoring facts. Kashmir remains a disputed territory, recognized as such under international law. India cannot unilaterally declare the matter settled. It’s not the United States or China.
Dude, the line of control has remained unchanged for over 50 years now...and to be honest, upwards of 75 years. At some point, we have to consider it settled. Else you'll end up in arguments like is Israelis allowed to live in the Middle-East? Or even more absurdly, have Muslims stolen the land 1500 years ago from the Jews etc. etc.

I genuinely think if both sides had a civilian government, it would be possible to move towards settling this in some informal manner and at least have a China-Taiwan relationship - both sides keep their historical claims for domestic audiences and continue occasional posturing but recognise practical day-to-day reality to work together.
 
Dude, the line of control has remained unchanged for over 50 years now...and to be honest, upwards of 75 years. At some point, we have to consider it settled. Else you'll end up in arguments like is Israelis allowed to live in the Middle-East? Or even more absurdly, have Muslims stolen the land 1500 years ago from the Jews etc. etc.

I genuinely think if both sides had a civilian government, it would be possible to move towards settling this in some informal manner and at least have a China-Taiwan relationship - both sides keep their historical claims for domestic audiences and continue occasional posturing but recognise practical day-to-day reality to work together.
The Line of Control is the de facto reality on the ground and should be officially recognized as such. However, it remains unresolved and unsettled at the official level.

I agree with you on this, it is India that needs to move toward a settlement, especially since it was India that chose to suspend dialogue, largely to project a strongman image for domestic political gain."
 
The Line of Control is the de facto reality on the ground and should be officially recognized as such. However, it remains unresolved and unsettled at the official level.

I agree with you on this, it is India that needs to move toward a settlement, especially since it was India that chose to suspend dialogue, largely to project a strongman image for domestic political gain."
I've no idea what you mean by agreeing with me. It would be practically impossible for India to negotiate with the military government that Pakistan currently have on a matter like this. How could India's civilian government have any confidence that such an agreement or even arrangement negotiated with an unelected, mandateless government would stick?
 
I've no idea what you mean by agreeing with me. It would be practically impossible for India to negotiate with the military government that Pakistan currently have on a matter like this. How could India's civilian government have any confidence that such an agreement or even arrangement negotiated with an unelected, mandateless government would stick?

India needs to decide what it actually wants.

The current regime has shown no interest in engaging with Pakistan, neither with its civilian leadership nor with its military rulers.

Yet, the rest of the world continues to engage with Pakistan pragmatically.
 
India needs to decide what it actually wants.

The current regime has shown no interest in engaging with Pakistan, neither with its civilian leadership nor with its military rulers.

Yet, the rest of the world continues to engage with Pakistan pragmatically.
Impractical. Even if India's current idiot (but legitimate) government wanted to to engage with Pakistan, it would be impossible to talk to a military puppet government on the Pakistan side on such a sensitive issue which could easily bring the masses out on the roads.

I agree with you on this, it is India that needs to move toward a settlement, especially since it was India that chose to suspend dialogue, largely to project a strongman image for domestic political gain."
Also I'm afraid you're mistaken. There's been no dialogue between India and Pakistan since 2019 when Pakistan's previous military puppet government suspended all contact and dialogue. The Indian 'strongman' government suspended nothing except, farcically, handshakes and the Indus Water Treaty.
 
Impractical. Even if India's current idiot (but legitimate) government wanted to to engage with Pakistan, it would be impossible to talk to a military puppet government on the Pakistan side on such a sensitive issue which could easily bring the masses out on the roads.


Also I'm afraid you're mistaken. There's been no dialogue between India and Pakistan since 2019 when Pakistan's previous military puppet government suspended all contact and dialogue. The Indian 'strongman' government suspended nothing except, farcically, handshakes and the Indus Water Treaty.

There is 'why' to what Pakistan government did in 2019.

No masses in Pakistan are coming out to the roads.

What you’re describing sounds more like an alternate reality, one that tries to justify the current status quo. But history shows that such denial and rigidity only pave the way for more conflict, not resolution.

Y'all need to seriously stop indulging on Indian media.
 
There is 'why' to what Pakistan government did in 2019.

No masses in Pakistan are coming out to the roads.

What you’re describing sounds more like an alternate reality, one that tries to justify the current status quo. But history shows that such denial and rigidity only pave the way for more conflict, not resolution.

Y'all need to seriously stop indulging on Indian media.
Do you have a standard set of talking points you trot out in response to anything? Indian Media indeed!

I guess we'll have to leave it at that. Saudi pact or not, I don't see any real value in the Indian government engaging with the Pakistani military at this point. They mind their business, we mind ours and hopefully there's no disruption from either an unbacked or backed terrorist organisation which provokes another flare-up. We certainly can't afford it and I doubt Pakistan can either...though obviously they may feel differently.
 
By allowing as many Afghans as IK did into Pakistan, he allowed the TTP to get stronger and setup camps at the border and inside Pakistan.

The biggest problem is that Taliban and TTP share ideological and tribal ties. What leverage does Pakistan have over the Taliban or anyone for them to kill their own or rein them in?

Instead we have the same scorched earth policy we see from the army, bomb everyone and everything give us aid we have terrorists.

You can’t separate a Talib from an Afghan, how are you supposed to distinguish a TTP militant from a refugee?

Do you let them integrate or keep the border closed and monitor it properly?
Completely agree with this
Since taliban khan has gone top has remerged

As for the op, makes perfect sense seeing as Israel is trying to get revenge for khaybar 1400 years ago
Also both countries were responsible for promoting radical deobandism and Wahhabism across the Muslim world in the 90s and both seem to have calmed down while Radical Zionism and radical hindutva seem to take over as the worlds original religious police
 
Do you have a standard set of talking points you trot out in response to anything? Indian Media indeed!

I guess we'll have to leave it at that. Saudi pact or not, I don't see any real value in the Indian government engaging with the Pakistani military at this point. They mind their business, we mind ours and hopefully there's no disruption from either an unbacked or backed terrorist organisation which provokes another flare-up. We certainly can't afford it and I doubt Pakistan can either...though obviously they may feel differently.
Decide what you want to discuss, because it seem you keep changing the topic.
 
Defence pact has formalised relationship between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, says Khawaja Asif

Defence Minister Khawaja Asif has said that the recently signed Pak-Saudi defence pact had “formalised” a relationship between the two countries that was previously “a bit transactional”.

Asif made the remarks during an interview with journalist Mehdi Hasan for Zeteo. The full interview is behind a paywall but the media company has shared a five-minute preview as well as clips on social media.

On September 17, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had signed a “Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement” in Riyadh, pledging that any attack on either nation would be treated as an act of aggression against both.

Previously, Asif had suggested that Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities could be made available to Riyadh under the new framework. However, in a subsequent interview the minister denied that nuclear weapons were part of the accord, saying they were “not on the radar”.

In the preview posted on Zeteo’s website on Friday night, Hasan asked Asif about the defence pact.

“How much of it is a reaction to the Israeli bombing of Qatar?” he asked.

“It is not a reaction to what happened in Qatar because this was being negotiated for quite some time. So it’s not a reaction; perhaps it must have sped it up a bit but that is all. It was already in the offing,“ Asif replied.

Hasan then pointed out that Pakistan was the only nuclear power in the Muslim world, noting that Saudi Arabia had expressed interest in being the second. He also pointed out that Asif had previously stated that nuclear weapons “were not on the radar” for this pact.

“Is Saudi Arabia protected by Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella per this agreement or not?” he asked.

“We have had a very long defence relationship with Saudi Arabia, spanning five or six decades. We had a military presence over there, perhaps more than four or five thousand at the peak and we still have military presence over there. I think we have just formalised that relationship which was previously a bit transactional,” Asif responded.

“Formalised with or without the nukes?” Hasan probed.

However, the minister refrained from going into the details.

“I will refrain from going into the details but it’s a defence pact and defence pacts are normally not discussed publicly,” he said.

Hasan then pointed out that journalist Bob Woodward, in his 2024 book War, had quoted Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman telling a US senator that he could “just buy” a bomb from Pakistan.

“I think that is just sensationalised […] No, I don’t believe that quote,” the minister replied.

“So you are not in the business of selling nuclear weapons to Saudi Arabia?”

“No. We are very responsible people,” Asif responded.

DAWN NEWS
 
Dear @Red-Indian

You have engaged in whataboutism by bringing "North Indians", "South Indians" etc into the discussion, which is all irrelevant.

It is common and frequent for Indian Muslims to be constantly addressed viz-a-viz Pakistan.
No it isn’t. Pakistan doesn’t even appear in the conversation
 
On a neutral standpoint, I would question why was this not done before?

Pakistan has been the acting custodian of Islam in Asia-Middle east region (both in a positive and negative light). Arabs were always dilly-dallying with Americans but should have focussed on strengthening the region by supporting Pakistan during early 1990’s and 2000’s when Pakistan developed nukes.

Now, nuclear advancements are very limited due to sanctions and only US and Russia has the nerve to be the leaders. It’s too late now I feel as they can never catchup with other geopolitical powers as one cannot showcase their motives openly now.

I feel that Arabs will lose their prominence as energy matrix shifts towards renewable energy in the next 25-30 years. I can see India and China, world’s largest oil importers having ~50% of their energy needs through renewable energy. This means Arab’s have to rely on attracting HNI (rich people) to inhabitat their nations. And in turn losing their dominance.

I expect Pakistan to outgrow Arab regions geo-political power in the next 3 decades.


As far as India is concerned, while many Pak posters may disagree, from our standpoint, our aggression is based on cause-impact scenarios. So, it may never turn into a full fledged war with Pakistan I feel. And I dont want to drag this but India is looking at building indigenous Defense industry and we are at a decent stage (following a similar path to China here I would say). So, Pakistan will not be the aggressor in any scenario as they cant afford it.

China - Have to wait and watch but India will not play into the Western nation hands by starting a war in Asia and destabilizing the region.

So, there may be some unnecessary speculations but if I analyze this as a sane person, it’s a welcome move to strengthen the Asian region.

A secure Pakistani border will in-turn help India too in the long-term. A destabilized economies will hurt everyone. Looking at 40 years from now, Pakistan will be a big consumer market and both India-Pakistan will not lose the opportunity to trade.

This is my unbiased opinion.

Because the Saudis didnt need it.nowsaudis know usAumbrella is porous to israeli attacks

I don’t know how Pakistan was a custodian of islam in Asia?

The two largest Muslim populations are in India and Bd. Pakistan has no leverage over India and Bd people fought a war to separate from Pakistan.

Situation has changed in ME. Because of Israel and its unfettered aggression and inability of uAto do anything about it.

India will not be going to war with china for any one else.

But india Pakistan relations will remain hostile it won’t change because Pakistan will try to act as some Muslim police man and India will have none of it.

Any politician trying to to be too friendly with Pakistan will sign his political desth warrant example vajpayee
 
They are Afghans and basically to them the creation of pakistan is like israel.

As for bagram listen usa doesn't need bagram to attack pakistan it could fly from the arabian sea or fly over any countries air space without permission whether its any gulf country iran or central asia or even india its got aircraft and equipment that are invisible to radars and can jam air defences your not gonna stop usa or nato airpower.

We all saw how Israel and usa bombed iran and literally controlled whole of iranian airspace with their leader in a basement wailing and crying.
Usa has a base in diego garcia,
 
I don’t know how Pakistan was a custodian of islam in Asia?
It may not be the powerful Muslim nation but acts as one getting entangled in unnecessary issues in the name of religion.

But india Pakistan relations will remain hostile it won’t change because Pakistan will try to act as some Muslim police man and India will have none of it.

Any politician trying to to be too friendly with Pakistan will sign his political desth warrant example vajpayee
Countries leaders need to realize that hostility in the neighborhood benefits none. I am not saying to become chummy friends but learn to co-exist without clashes. We don't need to live in hate for someone else or preach on a utopian peace world but be realistic without causing wars. It applies to both the countries. Let us focus our energies on make our lives better.
 
If NATO defense pacts are not solid enough guarantees, none are.
NATO didnt come to aid of UK during falklands war, neither the Suez Canal.
India took Goa from Portugal, NATO didnt do jack.
Same are the case for such defense alliances. Saudis will not care about Pakistan, Pakistan will not be able to help Saudis when actually needed.
There is only one pathway created by this pact, getting nuclear weapons to Saudi from Pakistan.
 
If NATO defense pacts are not solid enough guarantees, none are.
NATO didnt come to aid of UK during falklands war, neither the Suez Canal.
India took Goa from Portugal, NATO didnt do jack.
Same are the case for such defense alliances. Saudis will not care about Pakistan, Pakistan will not be able to help Saudis when actually needed.
There is only one pathway created by this pact, getting nuclear weapons to Saudi from Pakistan.
Neither Falklands or Goa fall within NATOs limits or treaties. It is not an unconditional mutual defence pact.

Pakistan and Saudi have mutual defence pact that both sides have said is unconditional.

Now of course you can speculate that this will happen or won't happen, you can do it for any treaty in history, and it's hypothetical, your response will depend on your bias.

However what is agreed in black or white is important.
 
Because the Saudis didnt need it.nowsaudis know usAumbrella is porous to israeli attacks

I don’t know how Pakistan was a custodian of islam in Asia?

The two largest Muslim populations are in India and Bd. Pakistan has no leverage over India and Bd people fought a war to separate from Pakistan.

Situation has changed in ME. Because of Israel and its unfettered aggression and inability of uAto do anything about it.

India will not be going to war with china for any one else.

But india Pakistan relations will remain hostile it won’t change because Pakistan will try to act as some Muslim police man and India will have none of it.

Any politician trying to to be too friendly with Pakistan will sign his political desth warrant example vajpayee
Pakistan is in the hearts of all Muslims . Soon we will have defence treaty with all major countries and in Asia with Bangladesh too. Bangladeshis are calling for it at all levels.

Your taunts about non custodians etc will haunt you. Indias Muslim population is irrelevant. They are a small and oppressed group with no political voice or identify. Second class citizen at home having to do dance to appease Hindus.
 
It may not be the powerful Muslim nation but acts as one getting entangled in unnecessary issues in the name of religion.


Countries leaders need to realize that hostility in the neighborhood benefits none. I am not saying to become chummy friends but learn to co-exist without clashes. We don't need to live in hate for someone else or preach on a utopian peace world but be realistic without causing wars. It applies to both the countries. Let us focus our energies on make our lives better.


This is especially true of countries which are direct neighbours. European countries learned this the hard way, and now you see very little direct conflict between them, disputes are handled diplomatically and with legislation, not via military resolution.

I am not aligned with Pakistan military so can view this neutrally, as a result I can see that the Pakistan establishment can be tricky to deal with. But India needs to take a lead instead of being reactive here. Follow the example of China and the US. India is culturally and logistically in a better place than all other countries to do this.
 
Pakistan is in the hearts of all Muslims . Soon we will have defence treaty with all major countries and in Asia with Bangladesh too. Bangladeshis are calling for it at all levels.

Your taunts about non custodians etc will haunt you. Indias Muslim population is irrelevant. They are a small and oppressed group with no political voice or identify. Second class citizen at home having to do dance to appease Hindus.
200mnmuslims are irrelevant because they don't scts as per the wishes of pakistsnis.

Allmuslims?


Kuwait had bsnned pakistsnis from entering Kuwait for a long time.
Your defence agreements will not stoop the next brahmod from landing inside Pakistan.

You fee proud that pakistsnis fight and die in other's war. All officially as sodiers of pakistan. Being mercenaries is a proud achievement?
 
Second class citizen at home having to do dance to appease Hindus.
I would vehemently disagree with this.

There are 3 categories to put in black and white. One focusing on education and uplifting themselves through efforts. Two - falling into the political / religious entanglements as a means to survive. And three - who are caught in between.

Muslims by no means are second class citizens. They are infact used by Congress or other muslim leaders just like few religious hindu groups drive masses towards dark paths. Difference? Muslim leaders are more adept at this.

By no means that, religious discrimination is present in hiring corporates. People can criticize all they want but even caste discrimination is negligible in corporate hiring. They have all the opportunities for education, growth and even in positions of power.
 
I would vehemently disagree with this.

There are 3 categories to put in black and white. One focusing on education and uplifting themselves through efforts. Two - falling into the political / religious entanglements as a means to survive. And three - who are caught in between.

Muslims by no means are second class citizens. They are infact used by Congress or other muslim leaders just like few religious hindu groups drive masses towards dark paths. Difference? Muslim leaders are more adept at this.

By no means that, religious discrimination is present in hiring corporates. People can criticize all they want but even caste discrimination is negligible in corporate hiring. They have all the opportunities for education, growth and even in positions of power.
They are second class in that their nationality and allegiance is doubted. It is undeniable.

Even when they express themselves as politically by voting congress you guys denounce them as being used and unable to think.

They have a sorry existence and in terms of Islamic world have no political relevance.

Any by the way yes arnon Muslims are unfortunately second class in Pakistan before you ask. The grass ain't greener there.
 
This is especially true of countries which are direct neighbours. European countries learned this the hard way, and now you see very little direct conflict between them, disputes are handled diplomatically and with legislation, not via military resolution.

I am not aligned with Pakistan military so can view this neutrally, as a result I can see that the Pakistan establishment can be tricky to deal with. But India needs to take a lead instead of being reactive here. Follow the example of China and the US. India is culturally and logistically in a better place than all other countries to do this.
I am hoping for a diplomatic solutions in future. But I also understand the pressure in politics. By no means, sacrificing collateral lives is an option but hopefully leaders on both sides will be wise.

From Indian perspective, BJP has to do justice for terror attacks while from a Pakistan’s perspective, the military needs to consolidate power. I am not arguing on who is right but both have the incentive to make this a military issue. But, I also feel there is a limit. Leaders on both sides are smart for their own good and they wouldn't escalate beyond a limit. So, I don't see an elongated battle in near future.

Look at the scenario now. India benefited from indigenous defense development projects which us a huge sign of a developing nation (as it offers deterrence and jobs in the economy). While Pakistan, played this nicely by getting closer to the US.

I will give credit to Modi here that he has been smart in driving economic growth during turbulent times globally. The Pakistani counterparts on the other hand lack the foresight IMO. They have to tread carefully to secure benefits for Pakistan. This KSA-Pakistan kind of defense pacts particularly reduces the reach of West on smaller nations like Maldives / Srilanka etc, giving a balance to the power.

As you mentioned, the global south can be the next European nations reimagined both economically and politically.
 
Even when they express themselves as politically by voting congress you guys denounce them as being used and unable to think.
I am not doubting them but its the fact. Hyderabad Old city is the prime example. What has it benefitted from electing Owaisi and his chamchas time and again when their lives were not improving.

The sad part in India atleast is that voting among large chunks of Muslim / Christian population is not discretionary for them. These religious mullahs / priests hold too much control over them going as far as making them pledge over Quran / Bible to vote a certain party.
 
200mnmuslims are irrelevant because they don't scts as per the wishes of pakistsnis.

Allmuslims?


Kuwait had bsnned pakistsnis from entering Kuwait for a long time.
Your defence agreements will not stoop the next brahmod from landing inside Pakistan.

You fee proud that pakistsnis fight and die in other's war. All officially as sodiers of pakistan. Being mercenaries is a proud achievement?

Yes Indian Muslims are irrelevant. You have minimized them and ridiculed them yourself but it's convenient now to champion them because they are your only bridge to an area of the world that has turned is back on you.


By the way Kuwait unbanned after sitting down with Indian delegation post failed operation sindoor. The next day they unbanned Pakistani visas. You can check it yourself.

This spin operation from India around mercenary is all lies. India itself contributes it's soldiers to others by supplying troops to UN. If Pakistan and ally agree a defence pact does it make them mercenaries? Is NATO all mercenary? Its a nonsense take.

Regarding Brahman landing on Pakistan, you guys can drink your own kool-aid at home but the world knows the response.

It's why from Washington to China and all across ME Indian narrative was rejected and discarded and on every international forum India tried to lobby it was laughed off the podium.
 
I am not doubting them but its the fact. Hyderabad Old city is the prime example. What has it benefitted from electing Owaisi and his chamchas time and again when their lives were not improving.

The sad part in India atleast is that voting among large chunks of Muslim / Christian population is not discretionary for them. These religious mullahs / priests hold too much control over them going as far as making them pledge over Quran / Bible to vote a certain party.
I don't know much about inner workings of Hyderabad, for the most part I would assume it resembles most of India as is a third world country, but in recent times it's clear that Owaisi is a establishment planted politician.

He can keep the masses enraged and focus their attentions on other causes apart from development.

He was laughed out of most of the overseas meetings that Modi sent him to as people realized his shtick.
 
Yes Indian Muslims are irrelevant. You have minimized them and ridiculed them yourself but it's convenient now to champion them because they are your only bridge to an area of the world that has turned is back on you.


By the way Kuwait unbanned after sitting down with Indian delegation post failed operation sindoor. The next day they unbanned Pakistani visas. You can check it yourself.

This spin operation from India around mercenary is all lies. India itself contributes it's soldiers to others by supplying troops to UN. If Pakistan and ally agree a defence pact does it make them mercenaries? Is NATO all mercenary? Its a nonsense take.

Regarding Brahman landing on Pakistan, you guys can drink your own kool-aid at home but the world knows the response.

It's why from Washington to China and all across ME Indian narrative was rejected and discarded and on every international forum India tried to lobby it was laughed off the podium.
Who has turned its back?

Pakistsnis don't decide who isrelevant who isn't. Hardly anyone takes pakistans opinion seriously imrsn khan wss reduced to ranting on X after every one ignored his pleas for help against India.
 
I don't know much about inner workings of Hyderabad, for the most part I would assume it resembles most of India as is a third world country, but in recent times it's clear that Owaisi is a establishment planted politician.

He can keep the masses enraged and focus their attentions on other causes apart from development.

He was laughed out of most of the overseas meetings that Modi sent him to as people realized his shtick.
You Owaisi is planted by Modi?

If you dont know, then you can do some research and understand. There is nothing farcical than him being planted by Modi.

And no, the issue is that Hyderabad is one of the fastest growing city in Hyderabad. Parts of Hyderabad is as much similar to Dubai (I ve been to Dubai before you question) while Old city entirely has seen zero development be it when Congress was in Power or others.
Fact is that, Muslims in that part are easily instigated compared to Hindus in other parts.
 
Who has turned its back?

Pakistsnis don't decide who isrelevant who isn't. Hardly anyone takes pakistans opinion seriously imrsn khan wss reduced to ranting on X after every one ignored his pleas for help against India.
Situation changed after Gaza and failed Operation Sindoor.

Arab countries looked at themselves and saw weapons but no idea how to use them, and then looked towards Pakistan (and Iran with suspicion).

You should have seen Arab and Turkish media during the successful Bunyan-e-marsos. They were delighted and surprised, and they saw a chance to collaborate with Pakistan.

And then when Trump and China acknowledged the success of the operation they became fully aligned.

Btw we don't answer to you you can't tell us what we can or cannot decide, especially when your views on Indian Muslims are clear.
 
You Owaisi is planted by Modi?

If you dont know, then you can do some research and understand. There is nothing farcical than him being planted by Modi.

And no, the issue is that Hyderabad is one of the fastest growing city in Hyderabad. Parts of Hyderabad is as much similar to Dubai (I ve been to Dubai before you question) while Old city entirely has seen zero development be it when Congress was in Power or others.
Fact is that, Muslims in that part are easily instigated compared to Hindus in other parts.
Honestly he has the workings of a rabble rousing plant. Not by Modi, perhaps by deep state.

I can only take your word for the state of Hyderabad I have no idea about it and it would be foolish for me to say otherwise but all I can say is that until all of India resemble Dubai then it may be naive to put any failures solely down to Muslims.
 
Honestly he has the workings of a rabble rousing plant. Not by Modi, perhaps by deep state.

I can only take your word for the state of Hyderabad I have no idea about it and it would be foolish for me to say otherwise but all I can say is that until all of India resemble Dubai then it may be naive to put any failures solely down to Muslims.
I am not putting failures of Muslims on themselves but the greedy leaders. People are gullible particularly when they are economically backward.

I agree that it not a rejoicing thing if some parts resemble Dubai while others remain in poverty. But at-least, the leaders of respected provinces should aspire that the people that voted for them are also seeing such development.

I agree that being a minority, Muslims can face a bit of religious issues but no way that its a second grade citizen scenario IMO. If not, Muslim population will not be growing in India as there would have been structural discriminations to reduce their population which is not the case.
There will instance where ***-for-tat responses dominate the logic but by-and-large, Muslims live in peace and skirmishes in a country as big as India will be outliers but not the norm.
 
I am not putting failures of Muslims on themselves but the greedy leaders. People are gullible particularly when they are economically backward.

I agree that it not a rejoicing thing if some parts resemble Dubai while others remain in poverty. But at-least, the leaders of respected provinces should aspire that the people that voted for them are also seeing such development.

I agree that being a minority, Muslims can face a bit of religious issues but no way that its a second grade citizen scenario IMO. If not, Muslim population will not be growing in India as there would have been structural discriminations to reduce their population which is not the case.
There will instance where ***-for-tat responses dominate the logic but by-and-large, Muslims live in peace and skirmishes in a country as big as India will be outliers but not the norm.
I never understood how often we hear this statement. The ability to deflect any responsibility is why certain cultures do not progress. History has taught one simple fact, resources for a community are limited. More you spend on validating your religious credentials backwards you will be in real life. and its not specific to just Muslims, its for all ideologies including enforced Atheism in some communist states.
 
I never understood how often we hear this statement. The ability to deflect any responsibility is why certain cultures do not progress. History has taught one simple fact, resources for a community are limited. More you spend on validating your religious credentials backwards you will be in real life. and its not specific to just Muslims, its for all ideologies including enforced Atheism in some communist states.

I don't really understand how you are judging here. Is there a clear demarcation between progressive and backwards culture in India? When you see cows roaming and pooping on the roads is that because of one community in particular?
 
I don't really understand how you are judging here. Is there a clear demarcation between progressive and backwards culture in India? When you see cows roaming and pooping on the roads is that because of one community in particular?
My observation is applicable to all communities of the world.
I know what you are trying to do :P. Usual baiting stuff just to derail any point made.
 
You can't decide anything. You your delf survive on dole outs.

Pakistani actress saba qamar told everyone how indian Muslims woth passports were treated fsr better thsn pakistsnis.


Pakistani opin
Indian Muslims don't answer to pakistan or your overlords so you guys can't decide anything about them they rejected the idea of Pakistani in 1947 and have fought against pakistan in wars
Lol random Lollywood actress is your source.

Saudi Flags are flying interwined with Pakistani flags in Riyadh. Bunyan-e-Marsos that the believers are a strong structure together when fighting became the slogan of the two Holy sites after the announcement.

US acknowledged the success of the operation. China extended it's congratulations. Basically the world powers from east to west acknowledged the Pakistani response.

India in response has self congratulated.
 
Pak can't even secure it's own area in balochistan which is most dangerous place on par with sulu and bermuda triangle that kinda makes me laugh
 
Back
Top