What exactly hinders Pakistan and India from becoming a Franco-German type neighbors?

What exactly hinders Pakistan and India from becoming a Franco-German type neighbors?

  • Unresolved territorial disputes (Primarily Kashmir)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Something else

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    5
Average IQ score of Germany: 100
Average IQ score of France: 97
Average IQ score of India: 77

Source: https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php.

As evident from IQ scores, Indians are not intelligent enough to recognize the importance of keeping good relations with neighboring states. They have conflicts with many different neighboring states --> Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Maldives.
 
Because the 1965 war hurt Indian pride really hard and 1962 war with China wasn't Pakistan fault but India needed some enemy to defeat and look strong again

So here you are openly gloating about a War that was initiated by Pakistan and then on the other hand you blame India for being hostile ? This sort of rogue mentality is the EXACT reason for India to have negligible relationship with Pakistan.

Anyhow you recognize this Picture ?

 
Not sure about Srilanka and Maldives. They both are in Indian fold again. Especially Maldives who were so anti-India. They had to wag their tail in front of India
Indians have low IQ. Yet their dominate fields that require the most brain power. :salute
Lol dude takes self goal seriously , in that list North Koreans have an IQ of 100 and Bangladeshis at 75.

He might identify as a Kangaroo now though
 
I gave an honest answer in the start of the thread but seeing how the thread has progressed along with OP and the moderator have to say Pakistanis do think highly of their establishment.

I used to do the ignore my dad when he in 1990s thought Pakistan was the issue for India’s lack of economic progress, then the progress happened thanks to sane Indian leaders who couldn’t care less about Pakistan.

Pakistani posters clearly think India is the issue and not their Establishment, I think sane Indians should let them think that because that thought process works for India.
 
Because the 1965 war hurt Indian pride really hard and 1962 war with China wasn't Pakistan fault but India needed some enemy to defeat and look strong again

I think he is lecturing about u only.its in ur own news paper
 
Pakistani posters clearly think India is the issue and not their Establishment, I think sane Indians should let them think that because that thought process works for India.
Establishment will be very happy of that view .years of their efforts have succeeded even with educated posters settled in west.It really makes India's job easy as no one can't call it as generalisation.
 
I gave an honest answer in the start of the thread but seeing how the thread has progressed along with OP and the moderator have to say Pakistanis do think highly of their establishment.

I used to do the ignore my dad when he in 1990s thought Pakistan was the issue for India’s lack of economic progress, then the progress happened thanks to sane Indian leaders who couldn’t care less about Pakistan.

Pakistani posters clearly think India is the issue and not their Establishment, I think sane Indians should let them think that because that thought process works for India.
Have been saying this for a while. If the some of the pak posters are representative of Pak awan, that is good news for India
 
Have been saying this for a while. If the some of the pak posters are representative of Pak awan, that is good news for India


Same can be said of Indian posters to be fair. Rise of Hindutva movement is reflected in their lack of tolerance and this will impact their invention in the long term. Closed mind attitude is a killer for creativity and India under BJP is already starting to curb free speech indirectly through dog whistle politics.
 
Same can be said of Indian posters to be fair. Rise of Hindutva movement is reflected in their lack of tolerance and this will impact their invention in the long term. Closed mind attitude is a killer for creativity and India under BJP is already starting to curb free speech indirectly through dog whistle politics.
Lol at free speech, Indira literally issued a warrant for Salman Rushdie please don’t talk as if free speech made innovation happen, look at China clearly free speech doesn’t lead to anything, only good leaders and Establishment does.

And Pakistanis think their Establishment is peaceful, so then lets wait for 10 more years and see where leadership of each country took their respective nations.
 
Lol at free speech, Indira literally issued a warrant for Salman Rushdie please don’t talk as if free speech made innovation happen, look at China clearly free speech doesn’t lead to anything, only good leaders and Establishment does.

And Pakistanis think their Establishment is peaceful, so then lets wait for 10 more years and see where leadership of each country took their respective nations.

I see India becoming more like Pakistan not less because the eventual aim of hindutva movements like BJP is to build a Hindu Rashtra similar to how Pakistan wanted to build an Islamic nation. Indian posters might be quite coy about it, but that is only because they don't want to admit it for some reason, but actions speak louder than words.
 
Pakistani posters clearly think India is the issue and not their Establishment, I think sane Indians should let them think that because that thought process works for India.

What's strange is many of them posters know, after the Imran Khan arrest saga, that their army is the chief mischief maker in their domestic poltics; but they refuse to apply the same logic to external politics aka India.

If I had to guess, religious animosity might be playing a big part here. Some kind of hatred of India that is probably ingrained in them from childhood that is hard to get past. Just my two cents.
 
I see India becoming more like Pakistan not less because the eventual aim of hindutva movements like BJP is to build a Hindu Rashtra similar to how Pakistan wanted to build an Islamic nation. Indian posters might be quite coy about it, but that is only because they don't want to admit it for some reason, but actions speak louder than words.
I think data speaks louder than words, the data is clear that Hindu demographics have been reducing across Indian states , must be helluva of a Hindu Rashtra where Hindu population is getting reduced.
 
What's strange is many of them posters know, after the Imran Khan arrest saga, that their army is the chief mischief maker in their domestic poltics; but they refuse to apply the same logic to external politics aka India.

If I had to guess, religious animosity might be playing a big part here. Some kind of hatred of India that is probably ingrained in them from childhood that is hard to get past. Just my two cents.
Seems like it , also seeing how Bangladeshis are responding right now, Pakistani Establishment carried out a genocide against them and all they can say is forget that , Muslim brotherhood over everything etc.. so religion does play a part.
 
I think data speaks louder than words, the data is clear that Hindu demographics have been reducing across Indian states , must be helluva of a Hindu Rashtra where Hindu population is getting reduced.

I was talking about the direction long term. If you think BJP and their supporters don't dream of a Hindu Rashtra then maybe they dream of something else. Become part of the Ummah maybe.
 
What's strange is many of them posters know, after the Imran Khan arrest saga, that their army is the chief mischief maker in their domestic poltics; but they refuse to apply the same logic to external politics aka India.

If I had to guess, religious animosity might be playing a big part here. Some kind of hatred of India that is probably ingrained in them from childhood that is hard to get past. Just my two cents.

I think that works both ways. Pakistanis are mostly pretty cynical of the establishment these days, in the past the army was hugely popular. Indian posters seem way more jingoistic and they see no wrong in their hindutva govt. I agree, religion certainly plays a big part, and both sides know how to milk it.
 
I was talking about the direction long term. If you think BJP and their supporters don't dream of a Hindu Rashtra then maybe they dream of something else. Become part of the Ummah maybe.
Well English and Canadians will hopefully become part of Ummah, not sure why Hindus are required to do that.
I’m sure its a multipolar world.
 
I think that works both ways. Pakistanis are mostly pretty cynical of the establishment these days, in the past the army was hugely popular. Indian posters seem way more jingoistic and they see no wrong in their hindutva govt. I agree, religion certainly plays a big part, and both sides know how to milk it.

I know you like to engage in bothside-ism but it's been mentioned to you numerous times that indo-pak hostility predates the rise of BJP/RSS/Hindutva politics ..
 

I think he is lecturing about u only.its in ur own news paper

Or may be about you as I don't live in some fantasy land.
Screenshot_20241219-211450.jpg

Anyways this thread is supposed to address some different issue.
 
I know you like to engage in bothside-ism but it's been mentioned to you numerous times that indo-pak hostility predates the rise of BJP/RSS/Hindutva politics ..

No it doesn't. Hindutva predates Pakistan itself, in fact many would argue it was the reason for partition.
 

Or may be about you as I don't live in some fantasy land.
View attachment 148792

Anyways this thread is supposed to address some different issue.
War ended on sep23 and Australian news paper talks about a battle ended on sep14.(Battle of chawinda).
The other newspaper points out Indian junior leadership was proactive with run away success like reaching lahore while seniors are dumb.

Atleast read before u post .aren't u the one who started 1965 and retracting now?
 
War ended on sep23 and Australian news paper talks about a battle ended on sep14.(Battle of chawinda).
The other newspaper points out Indian junior leadership was proactive with run away success like reaching lahore while seniors are dumb.

Atleast read before u post .aren't u the one who started 1965 and retracting now?
Lol first look why I mentioned 1965 and 1962 war with China and again won't go in details here although I can easily. But if you are interested there is a 1965 war thread too.
 
Why u left gandhi .if he is the father of nation, he must be hardest right wing brigade ever exists

Look at it from the Pakistani perspective .... he did everything to help Pakistan and Jinnah's interests .. so therefore a bit harder to classify him as a Hindutva leader.
 
Look at it from the Pakistani perspective .... he did everything to help Pakistan and Jinnah's interests .. so therefore a bit harder to classify him as a Hindutva leader.
Isn't tribal mentality ? If you say yes u r among us otherwise an enemy.no neutral concept to have an equal ground for all to understand different set's of thought/ideology .
 
Isn't tribal mentality ? If you say yes u r among us otherwise an enemy.no neutral concept to have an equal ground for all to understand different set's of thought/ideology .

thats because right from Day1 they are brainwashed into truly believing that they are the chosen ones by God himself and they can do no wrong at all. Pretty binary mindset. Just look at how doggedly even the most educated just simply will not accept that they have to respect Hindu beliefs.
 
No it doesn't. Hindutva predates Pakistan itself, in fact many would argue it was the reason for partition.

India and Pakistan were established in 1947. The first act of hostility since then was the General Ayub Khan led Pakistan army (equipped with US arms) invading India in 1965 .. i'll wait for you to dream up an argument that this was caused by Hindutva.
 
India and Pakistan were established in 1947. The first act of hostility since then was the General Ayub Khan led Pakistan army (equipped with US arms) invading India in 1965 .. i'll wait for you to dream up an argument that this was caused by Hindutva.

No it wasn't anything to do with hindutva. That was Pakistan attempting to rescue Kashmir which went to India on a technicality against the populations wishes. It was not driven by hatred but injustice.
 
I will go with the fact that right and populist narratives are secondary things. For me the most valid reason is obviously the involvement of establishment from both sides.
 
No it wasn't anything to do with hindutva. That was Pakistan attempting to rescue Kashmir which went to India on a technicality against the populations wishes. It was not driven by hatred but injustice.

^ You are justifying the rogue actions of your army. There's no point discussing this with you any further if you really believe 'injustice' is the reason. Balochistan's population certainly didn't get a say about their sovereignity.

Tbh, I can't stand the current BJP govt and how they behave domestically in India .. but this above is just one of the many reasons why I am not the least bit bothered at how the BCCI is treating Pakistani cricket. Politics and sport can't be separated.
 
at one side you have nationalism and on the other side you have religious nationalism.

Theres your answer.
 
^ You are justifying the rogue actions of your army. There's no point discussing this with you any further if you really believe 'injustice' is the reason. Balochistan's population certainly didn't get a say about their sovereignity.

Tbh, I can't stand the current BJP govt and how they behave domestically in India .. but this above is just one of the many reasons why I am not the least bit bothered at how the BCCI is treating Pakistani cricket. Politics and sport can't be separated.

It's not my army and I don't endorse their actions. But the reasons you gave for their invasion were wrong, it wasn't hostility, it was injustice. If partition happened on the basis of religion then Kashmir should have become part of Pakistan and that is what the population of Kashmir wanted as well. It was still a dumb decision to send the army into India though.
 
Which is the Establishment in India?
Establishment does not mean the army. It simply means those who have control on decision making. One thing is common that is "Rise of populist narrative" in both countries.
 
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was as far as I know an activist against British rule. We were discussing Pak-India hostility I don't think he is relevant to the topic.
might want to read up. on the grand daddu of two nation theory.

activity against british rule... sure

>>>"At this time our nation is in a bad state in regards education and wealth, but God has given us the light of religion and the Quran is present for our guidance, which has ordained them and us to be friends. Now God has made them rulers over us. Therefore we should cultivate friendship with them, and should adopt that method by which their rule may remain permanent and firm in India, and may not pass into the hands of the Bengalis... If we join the political movement of the Bengalis our nation will reap a loss, for we do not want to become subjects of the Hindus instead of the subjects of the "people of the Book..."[153]<<<<

>>>>"Suppose that the English community and the army were to leave India, taking with them all their cannons and their splendid weapons and all else, who then would be the rulers of India?... Is it possible that under these circumstances two nations — the Mohammedans and the Hindus — could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power? Most certainly not. It is necessary that one of them should conquer the other. To hope that both could remain equal is to desire the impossible and the inconceivable. But until one nation has conquered the other and made it obedient, peace cannot reign in the land."[154]<<<<<

>>>>"Our Mussalman brothers, the Pathans, would come out as a swarm of locusts from their mountain valleys, and make rivers of blood to flow from their frontier in the north to the extreme end of Bengal."
<<<<
 
Like Jindal who made the PM of India visit Pakistan? In that logic Indian Establishment wants to do business in Pakistan so the issue is Pakistani Establishment that wants power and not economic progress?
Yeah agree with you on that point. There should be trade between India and Pakistan. It is good for the both countries. If India can do trade with Afghanistan via Pakistani route then why not Pakistan too. I think the leaders should keep politics and trade separately.
 
Like Jindal who made the PM of India visit Pakistan? In that logic Indian Establishment wants to do business in Pakistan so the issue is Pakistani Establishment that wants power and not economic progress?
Have you forgotten who cut economic ties with Pakistan first on a false flag Pulwama? Yet to see any evidence regarding involvement of Pakistan
 
For anyone aware with history should know how much hate existed or may still does exist deep inside among Germans and French people but still they were able to overcome their differences for a better future of their citizens but what exactly keeps Pakistan and India from becoming a good neighborly nations.

Is it the rule of right wing parties or the non resolution of territorial disputes or something else that keeps these nations from being on friendlier terms with each other?
Yeah both countries should keep away the heated arguments and start a friendly talks with each other. It's good for the both coutries and best for the people of the both countries
 
Have you forgotten who cut economic ties with Pakistan first on a false flag Pulwama? Yet to see any evidence regarding involvement of Pakistan
Yeah both countries should keep away the heated arguments and start a friendly talks with each other. It's good for the both coutries and best for the people of the both countries
Exactly, that's the only way mate. But how can we make sure the authority members are thinking the same?

They are just aiming for more money generation through these conflicts.

Common man is equally destroyed in these situations from both countries. Millions of jobless youngsters in both countries, just because we are lacking the proper utilization of resources.

So the result is un-employment but who cares!
 
Have you forgotten who cut economic ties with Pakistan first on a false flag Pulwama? Yet to see any evidence regarding involvement of Pakistan
No evidence on Pulwama, Mumbai , Pan Am flight, Masood Azhar Indian airlines.

It’s ok bro.. India is at fault, Pakistani Establishment is peaceful, just random terrorists keep hijacking flights and landing it in Pakistan or Afghanistan poor peaceful Pakistani Establishment.

I’m 100 % transformed now @big_gamer007 ..
 
No evidence on Pulwama, Mumbai , Pan Am flight, Masood Azhar Indian airlines.

It’s ok bro.. India is at fault, Pakistani Establishment is peaceful, just random terrorists keep hijacking flights and landing it in Pakistan or Afghanistan.
I never claimed total innocence for Pak establishment, just trying to get my point through that Indian Establishment is no less than devil too.
 
I never claimed total innocence for Pak establishment, just trying to get my point through that Indian Establishment is no less than devil too.
Yeah but Indian “Establishment” has reached out multiple times to Pakistan 1998- Lahore, but ended up getting Kargil.

Heck even after 2001 they reached our again to Mushraff inspite of backlash from Indians.

Check what Yasin Malik said about how hard Vajpayee tried, heck even Manmohan Singh did so much , put “Abhinav Bharat” leaders in jail that were involved in Samjhauta blasts apparently for hiring Pakistanis to do the blast.

Indian Home ministry has become massively cold after 2008 but 1998-2008 they did everything in their power to reach out to Pakistan.
 
Yeah but Indian “Establishment” has reached out multiple times to Pakistan 1998- Lahore, but ended up getting Kargil.

Heck even after 2001 they reached our again to Mushraff inspite of backlash from Indians.

Check what Yasin Malik said about how hard Vajpayee tried, heck even Manmohan Singh did so much , put “Abhinav Bharat” leaders in jail that were involved in Samjhauta blasts apparently for hiring Pakistanis to do the blast.

Indian Home ministry has become massively cold after 2008 but 1998-2008 they did everything in their power to reach out to Pakistan.
In actual you are relating only the half story mate, the chenab formula for Kashmir just got botched because of Indian Establishment's procrastination and eventual back down even Jaswant Singh was a witness to that. Musharaf was all in for some semblance of peace after kargil episode
 
In actual you are relating only the half story mate, the chenab formula for Kashmir just got botched because of Indian Establishment's procrastination and eventual back down even Jaswant Singh was a witness to that. Musharaf was all in for some semblance of peace after kargil episode
No Indian would accept the Chenab formula.
If Jaswant Singh did he would be a traitor.
 
In actual you are relating only the half story mate, the chenab formula for Kashmir just got botched because of Indian Establishment's procrastination and eventual back down even Jaswant Singh was a witness to that. Musharaf was all in for some semblance of peace after kargil episode
sure. becos Pakistan would never try something else after getting control of the valley.

face it. Jinnah, with his use of non-state actors made sure there will never not be any peaceful existence between India and pakistan.

best to ignore each other
 
sure. becos Pakistan would never try something else after getting control of the valley.

face it. Jinnah, with his use of non-state actors made sure there will never not be any peaceful existence between India and pakistan.

best to ignore each other
Mountbatten in collusion with INC did the greatest injustice...Jinnah only acted preemptively
 
might want to read up. on the grand daddu of two nation theory.

activity against british rule... sure

>>>"At this time our nation is in a bad state in regards education and wealth, but God has given us the light of religion and the Quran is present for our guidance, which has ordained them and us to be friends. Now God has made them rulers over us. Therefore we should cultivate friendship with them, and should adopt that method by which their rule may remain permanent and firm in India, and may not pass into the hands of the Bengalis... If we join the political movement of the Bengalis our nation will reap a loss, for we do not want to become subjects of the Hindus instead of the subjects of the "people of the Book..."[153]<<<<

>>>>"Suppose that the English community and the army were to leave India, taking with them all their cannons and their splendid weapons and all else, who then would be the rulers of India?... Is it possible that under these circumstances two nations — the Mohammedans and the Hindus — could sit on the same throne and remain equal in power? Most certainly not. It is necessary that one of them should conquer the other. To hope that both could remain equal is to desire the impossible and the inconceivable. But until one nation has conquered the other and made it obedient, peace cannot reign in the land."[154]<<<<<

>>>>"Our Mussalman brothers, the Pathans, would come out as a swarm of locusts from their mountain valleys, and make rivers of blood to flow from their frontier in the north to the extreme end of Bengal."
<<<<

I'm no authority on Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, he was mentioned by an Indian poster so maybe he has read up on him. If you want to discuss him in depth might be worth a separate thread and I can study up and we can take it up there.
 
sure. It was all british and INC. Jinnah was a saint.

I'll maintain, Jinnah saved the hindus with his actions. Otherwise, Nehru and Gandhi would have ruined hindus forwever
A bit off topic but you need to write a book on history @rpant_gabba. Could be a best seller alternate history 🙂
 
France and Germany aren't military controlled Islamic dictatorships sponsoring cross border terorrism for decades. The nature of Pakistani state is a big factor when it comes to resolving such issue.

Now the truth will be labelled as my Racist Islamophobic RSS Nazi-Hindutva propaganda, and thats fine, go ahead. 😂
 
France and Germany aren't military controlled Islamic dictatorships sponsoring cross border terorrism for decades. The nature of Pakistani state is a big factor when it comes to resolving such issue.

Now the truth will be labelled as my Racist Islamophobic RSS Nazi-Hindutva propaganda, and thats fine, go ahead. 😂
They are either Hindutva-controlled states that sponsor cross-border terrorism via the TTP
 
In the epilogue of her excellent book, Shadows at Noon, the first rate Indian historian, Joya Chatterji, argues that we need to look beyond the shouty rhetoric between the two states and acknowledge that pragmatism has more usually defined the actual behaviour of the states.

She quotes at length an amusing exchange between bureaucrats of the two countries who were negotiating what would become the Calcutta Agreement in 1948. Amongst a tense backdrop there was “much laughter and mutual leg-pulling.”

Pallavi Raghavan has also written a book, Animosity at Bay, that argues in those early years the relationship between the two states was actually marked more by cooperation than conflict. “At its heart,” she writes, “the India–Pakistan relationship contains a collaborative element.”

Certainly in the early years mutual agreement was reached in a number of areas as outlined by the following agreements: I) Liaquat-Nehru declaration establishing custodians of evacuee property, 1947; ii) Join Defence Council decision to establish the Military Evacuation Organisation, 1947; iii) Calcutta Agreement on the protection of the cultural rights, property, and lives of minorities, 1948; iv) Karachi Agreement, which established a ceasefire line in Kashmir, 1949; v) Liaquat-Nehru Pact, which dealt with rights of refugees and minorities, 1950.

The arguments of Chatterji and Raghavan are important in providing a more nuanced perspective on the relationship between the two states and showing that it is not one of relentless hostility.

This said, I think what made some of the early collaboration possible was that the men (and they were usually men) often knew each other from the pre-partition days and recognised each other as belonging to the same social class.

I suspect that now there is much more distance and much less mutual empathy between the elites of the states.
 
This said, I think what made some of the early collaboration possible was that the men (and they were usually men) often knew each other from the pre-partition days and recognised each other as belonging to the same social class.
this has been the bane for India and its has been exploited by the Pak establishment.

Having an idiot like Nehru dictating policy unilaterally made things worse.
I suspect that now there is much more distance and much less mutual empathy between the elites of the states.
Yes. tyhe Gandhi Nehru virus is dying a slow death.

The future generation of India will evaluate Pak by its actions post independence instead of pre-partition bhai chara.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In the epilogue of her excellent book, Shadows at Noon, the first rate Indian historian, Joya Chatterji, argues that we need to look beyond the shouty rhetoric between the two states and acknowledge that pragmatism has more usually defined the actual behaviour of the states.

She quotes at length an amusing exchange between bureaucrats of the two countries who were negotiating what would become the Calcutta Agreement in 1948. Amongst a tense backdrop there was “much laughter and mutual leg-pulling.”

Pallavi Raghavan has also written a book, Animosity at Bay, that argues in those early years the relationship between the two states was actually marked more by cooperation than conflict. “At its heart,” she writes, “the India–Pakistan relationship contains a collaborative element.”

Certainly in the early years mutual agreement was reached in a number of areas as outlined by the following agreements: I) Liaquat-Nehru declaration establishing custodians of evacuee property, 1947; ii) Join Defence Council decision to establish the Military Evacuation Organisation, 1947; iii) Calcutta Agreement on the protection of the cultural rights, property, and lives of minorities, 1948; iv) Karachi Agreement, which established a ceasefire line in Kashmir, 1949; v) Liaquat-Nehru Pact, which dealt with rights of refugees and minorities, 1950.

The arguments of Chatterji and Raghavan are important in providing a more nuanced perspective on the relationship between the two states and showing that it is not one of relentless hostility.

This said, I think what made some of the early collaboration possible was that the men (and they were usually men) often knew each other from the pre-partition days and recognised each other as belonging to the same social class.

I suspect that now there is much more distance and much less mutual empathy between the elites of the states.
Excellent post brother @KB. Certainly answer those critics who thought Jinnah created all the mess.

A great analysis overall
 
Excellent post brother @KB. Certainly answer those critics who thought Jinnah created all the mess.

A great analysis overall
What is the great analysis?

It highlights the idiocy of Indian bureaucrats who were bending over backwards to please Pak, while Jinnah was sending on-state actors into Kashmir.

That generation is dying and Pak finds itself not knowing what to do.
 
What is the great analysis?

It highlights the idiocy of Indian bureaucrats who were bending over backwards to please Pak, while Jinnah was sending on-state actors into Kashmir.

That generation is dying and Pak finds itself not knowing what to do.
You are barking the wrong tree, mingling sane people with modern time zealots who don't want the end of hostilities at all.

For instance Jai Shankar may look like a macho diplomat to Indians but in reality is just a mouth piece of a demagogue leader repeating cliches.
 
You are barking the wrong tree, mingling sane people with modern time zealots who don't want the end of hostilities at all.

For instance Jai Shankar may look like a macho diplomat to Indians but in reality is just a mouth piece of a demagogue leader repeating cliches.
and not giving a quarter to pakistan. unlike the idiot Manmohan singh
 
Thanks for directly addressing the thread question... inflexible stubbornness doesn't help any party
hard lessons learned from Pak's past behavior.

There is nothing Pak can offer to India.


>>>if India wants to stop trading, it doesn’t lose anything. Pakistan is not offering (and cannot) anything that India cannot produce itself or get from somewhere else.<<<

Not engaging limits pakistan options and doesn't affect India.

Why throw a life vest to (struggling) country which calls India and Indians dushman mulk?
 
You are barking the wrong tree, mingling sane people with modern time zealots who don't want the end of hostilities at all.

For instance Jai Shankar may look like a macho diplomat to Indians but in reality is just a mouth piece of a demagogue leader repeating cliches.
Don’t be jealous of Jai Shankar, India is able to sell Russian Gas to Europeans and Americans so it could provide for its citizens and keep inflation in control.

Now the so called sane people of India actually ended up not getting permanent UN veto power because they were “sane” and instead send it off to China.
I understand Pakistanis prefers to jail the leaders that think about their well being, but Indians are ok to have such leaders show a mirror to Europe and think about their well being.
 
Don’t be jealous of Jai Shankar, India is able to sell Russian Gas to Europeans and Americans so it could provide for its citizens and keep inflation in control.

Now the so called sane people of India actually ended up not getting permanent UN veto power because they were “sane” and instead send it off to China.
I understand Pakistanis prefers to jail the leaders that think about their well being, but Indians are ok to have such leaders show a mirror to Europe and think about their well being.
In that case I pray for India to get 10 more Jai Shankars, will help the incompetent Pak government to overtake India without any effort. And if you think this is a troll post then could see India's relations with it's immediate neighbors, Canada and others too.
 
In that case I pray for India to get 10 more Jai Shankars, will help the incompetent Pak government to overtake India without any effort. And if you think this is a troll post then could see India's relations with it's immediate neighbors, Canada and others too.
If you say so bro, I have been in this forum longer than you, I can bump threads of Pakistani Poster Prophecies on India if needed.
And hopefully we do get more Jai Shankars and you guys get more Munirs.
 
If you say so bro, I have been in this forum longer than you, I can bump threads of Pakistani Poster Prophecies on India if needed.
And hopefully we do get more Jai Shankars and you guys get more Munirs.
Hahahah...all fine but we don't want munirs but IKs
 
For anyone aware with history should know how much hate existed or may still does exist deep inside among Germans and French people but still they were able to overcome their differences for a better future of their citizens but what exactly keeps Pakistan and India from becoming a good neighborly nations.

Is it the rule of right wing parties or the non resolution of territorial disputes or something else that keeps these nations from being on friendlier terms with each other?
The religion of Islam and Pakistani adaptation to it hinders the relationship. There will never be peace with Pakistan due to the same.
 
Hasn't Munirs been ruling Pak for ever? Looks like you are wishing for some that hasnlt been possible in the history of Pakistan. good luck with that, while India "settles" for Jaishankar.
At least Pakistanis can wish. That is the least they can do until they become a rebels and turn the whole system upside down like Bangladesh.
 
At least Pakistanis can wish. That is the least they can do until they become a rebels and turn the whole system upside down like Bangladesh.
You need fire in the belly to be one.

pakistanis in general are simple-minded folks. Once their lifeline basics like food, shelter, freedom is tapered, they become even more docile.

An egyptian general once said, to control arabs keep their stomachs full. To control persians (and by that inference south asians) keep their stomachs empty. Let pakistanis eat ants, and they will be slaves for eternity.
 
There was report on what Pakistan and India googled most about each other,
very surprising results:

Pakistan googled way more about Indian stuff than Indians did about Pakistan.. yet we keep hearing how Indians are obsessed.. maybe time for me to put up threads like new admins are doing about India.
Ofcourse Indians are obsessed, Not just here, you go to ANY online portal or message board which is Pakistani, it will be targeted by Indians. You go to any YouTube video where even a Western parrot visits Pakistan, the comments will be full of Indians trash talking.

I am a football fan, have spent decades on various football online spaces. Ofcourse all of them Western, every SINGLE thread or mention about Pakistan gets Indians in their droves trash talking and spreading their propagandas.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top