Chinese shun Pakistan Exodus

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

:)
how cute is this
USA does not give peanuts to Paksitan but
don't forget USA does not demand peanuts from Pakistan
since many decades :) USA is mengling in Pakistani politics
and dictating internal and external policies.

The aid USA gives to Pakistan
from that 40 % employees who have to take care that the aid
is well spent in Pakistan. Another demand of USA is that Pakistan MUST
spend the Aid in buying goods from USA at their terms.

Most important USA did impose sanctions on Pakistan several times
China never did that.

22

[QUOTE]
Most important USA did impose sanctions on Pakistan several times
China never did that.
[/QUOTE]
China also did not prevent Pakistan from being conquered and further dismembered by India like the US did in 1971 (speaking of 71', where was the "ummah"'? Did Saudi Arabia cut off oil to India?). That decision sure did backfire on the US didn't it?! The US also gave Pakistan cover to back down from war in 1999. Without it there would have been a war and Pakistan would have lost. Again, it backfired on the US. My guess is the next time Pakistan is threatened with conquest by India the US will remain on the sidelines...As they say in the US, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...

[QUOTE]
USA is mengling in Pakistani politics
and dictating internal and external policies.
[/QUOTE]
"Dictating"? What polices are being "dictated"? For years the US has asked Pakistan to crush the terrorists in Wazirstan and Pakistan has not done it. Pakistan signed several "peace deals" with them--over US objections. Since Pakistan will not do it the US would like to do it but Pakistan will not allow the US to launch regular air strikes on terrorist bases or send ground troops to crush them. This is "control"?

I never cease to be amazed and amused at how Pakistanis (and Arabs) blame the US for 300+ years of decay and decline (you know, before the US even existed).

[QUOTE]
Another demand of USA is that Pakistan MUST
spend the Aid in buying goods from USA at their terms.
[/QUOTE]
That is par for the course. If you are giving, say, $100 million to build a road you would prefer that road be built by a company in your country rather than a UK or Japanese firm.

23

I am not interested in anwsering someone who is not able to see things without putting Indian specs and rhetoric. :) its a waist of my precious time :)

How tall are you?
24

Re: Chinese shun Pakistan Exodus

It is because you cannot defend your ridiculous myths.

LOL was President Nixon wearing "Indian specs"? He hated Indira Gandhi, was anti-India and pro-Pakistan. He just wasn't an idiot. He understood military realities, tried to explain them to Yahya Khan. What was Khan's response? He brushed off the military facts, citing the "superiority of Muslim fighting men." (when is the last time "superior" Muslims won a war against a non-Muslim force?) The only people on the planet who think Pakistan even has a shot at beating India in a war are Pakistanis.

Set aside the dangerous myths about Pakistani military superior over India (which led to Kargil in 99'). What evidence do you have of US "control" of Pakistan? I have yet to see anyone come up with concrete proof of "control" when asked to...

25

Every country in the world that gives financial aid to another demands the use of its labour and material. Actually, even China does that. It is Chinese engineers that are building Gwadar port. China didn't say here is the money to go get Americans or Russians to build your port. And China does not impose sanctions because they want to Pakistan to do its bidding 5 days a week and the weekend. China is not Pak's all waether friend, it is more like all weather malik. That is why I haven't heard a pip from you of China's terrible treatment of its Muslims.

I need...
I need...
26

Re: Chinese shun Pakistan Exodus

Lets start off with the facts and not the rose tinted glasses some of you lot wear. The US is the only country in the world that Pakistan specific resolutions that curb our right to take our own national interest at heart. Confused? I bet. The Pressler amendment. Ever heard of it? It is the only legislation that asks the US President to state that Pakistan is not engaged in nuclear technology. If it is engaged in such acts it should suffer sanctions. The US had placed Pakistan under sanctions since 1991 (I believe.) George Bush Sr. was responsible for that.

China has never placed us under sanctions at any point.

As for US saving Pakistan in 1971. Now that is a figment of your imagine. If Pakistan was indeed saved by the US, then why did Indian's cross the international border, killing Pakistanis and assaulting both East and West Pakistan.

Reason when was the last time "superiority of Muslim fighting men" beat a non-muslim force? Afghanistan in the 80s. Hell if you look at it from the insurgent point of view they won in Iraq as well. The US mission in Iraq has been a failure.

Col vs Greece, Urg vs C.Rica, Eng vs Italy predictions
27

[QUOTE]
As for US saving Pakistan in 1971. Now that is a figment of your imagine. If Pakistan was indeed saved by the US, then w*hy did Indian's cross the international border*, killing Pakistanis and assaulting both East and West Pakistan.
[/QUOTE]

Simple: Nixon threatened to intervene if India did that. Needless to say, that worked...

[QUOTE]
Reason when was the last time "superiority of Muslim fighting men" beat a non-muslim force? Afghanistan in the 80s.
[/QUOTE]

Afghans killed: 1 million
Soviets killed: 15,000

That is "winning"? The Soviets withdrew for financial reasons and never had more than 2% of their 5 million man military deployed in Afghanistan. If they wanted to they could have easily taken Afghanistan by sending a massive number of troops and fighting a total war.

[QUOTE]
Hell if you look at it from the insurgent point of view they won in Iraq as well. The US mission in Iraq has been a failur
[/QUOTE]

The US won the war in about a week. What you are arguing is whether the US won the peace. Look at the record. Failure? Iraq is more stable than Pakistan now and has a nascent democracy. You are stuck in 2006.

28

You did not read the text. I said why did Indian then cross the international border with all this support from the US? It still crossed the border. Attacked Pakistan and invaded the territory. Nixon's actions helped in no way when we were being attacked and my people being killed.

[quote]
Afghans killed: 1 million
Soviets killed: 15,000

That is "winning"? The Soviets withdrew for financial reasons and never had more than 2% of their 5 million man military deployed in Afghanistan. If they wanted to they could have easily taken Afghanistan by sending a massive number of troops and fighting a total war.
[/quote]

Back up yur claims with sources. Those figures are incorrect. Secondly victory on the battlefield as per the rules of engagemet is per the last man standing or who holds the most ground. Signalling a retreat which is what the Russians defacto did is a loss. Its not based on numbers, its based on who controls Afghanistan and the Afghans did. That is a victory for them.

[quote]
The US won the war in about a week. What you are arguing is whether the US won the peace. Look at the record. Failure? Iraq is more stable than Pakistan now and has a nascent democracy. You are stuck in 2006.
[/QUOTE]

No you simply lack basic knowledge regarding operations in a theater of war. In modern warfare one has the standard military battle and then prepares for the guerrilla war that is to follow. The americans should have remembered that considering the failure in Vietnam. You don't win peace. Typical American government bull****. Peace is arrived as a mutually agreed settlement between the two or more warring factions. Do you see that happening in Iraq? No.

As for Iraq being more stable than Pakistan, I am sorry, in Pakistan we don't have the insurgents running a majority of the towns and cities. Hell the Americans don't even control Baghdad. They only control the Green zone.

29

Brother, I appreciate ur ability as a fortune teller, good to have someone who is blessed with divine powers to see the future.

The first part of ur post is hillarious though. U mean to say that those terrorists hiding in ur tribal areas are converted and uncircumcised hindus who are unleshing terrorist activities in Pakistan. And ur army and ISI is unable to stop them in first place??? I dont feel that ur army and ISI is so incompetent to allow all this to happen.

Arms, funds and logistics including training being provided from Indian consulates in Afganistan..........sounds amusing. Its high time that U wake up to hard realities. Check those religious fundamentalists and Maulvis who preach hatred in form of religion. Check those preachers of hatred who twist interpretation of holy quran and brainwash ur ppls to kill infidels. Ur enemy is very much inside ur own fortress of religion than in kuffar India.

Peace.

The English Challenge - The clips.
30

His threat was regarding West Pakistan. He wanted to help in East Pakistan but couldn’t because all of Congress and nearly all the public and media favored Bangladesh/India because of the atrocities Pakistan committed there. Why did Gandhi stop at Bangladesh and not go after Kashmir or other parts of Pakistan?

The 15,000 figure is well-known. Here is a source: page. 307 of The Soviet Colossus. The one million figure is more murky but it is clear that at least hundreds of thousands of Afghans died, far more than the number of Soviets who died.

[

Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls

They never had more than 2% of their troops in Afghanistan. Do you think the Afghans, who took nearly a decade of fighting each other to resolve their civil war, could have won if the USSR sent even 10% of their troops (500,000)? How about half? 2.5 million? The Soviets fought a limited war with limited objectives. If they fought a total war they would have won easily.

Iraq’s democratic government has not fallen. Is not this the standard you used in Afghanistan where the Communist government fell? Iraq is increasingly improving. Its economy is growing and the number of terrorist attacks have plummeted.

There were no separate military and guerrilla phases in Vietnam. The Vietnam effort was a combination of both.

Good post, Raj. It is ridiculous how many fail to see that there is a thing called Islamist ideology and believe any horrendous act committed by a Muslim has to be an Israeli, US, or Indian (in the case of Pakistanis since Arabs don’t care about India) plot.

ٹائم پاس ماہ جون - Time Pass June 2014 - الوقت ممر يونيو
31

Re: Chinese shun Pakistan Exodus

Lost my original post so to summarize.

Basically you are changing your tune. You stated originally that:

[quote]
Simple: Nixon threatened to intervene if India did that. Needless to say, that worked...
[/quote]

Yet history proves that India still attacked Pakistan. Then you say:

[quote]
His threat was regarding West Pakistan.
[/quote]

So really his threat didn't help at all. Pakistan was still attacked and Pakistanis were still killed. Nice work on the backpeddling.

I am sorry but bull**** links that are webhosted by some shmuck don't count as valid sources. Provide sources that are authentic. Same goes for the Afghanistan figure which you agree is murky. So you basically stated the wrong figures first and now agree that they are wrong. Well done. You are making progress.

[quote]
They never had more than 2% of their troops in Afghanistan. Do you think the Afghans, who took nearly a decade of fighting each other to resolve their civil war, could have won if the USSR sent even 10% of their troops (500,000)? How about half? 2.5 million? The Soviets fought a limited war with limited objectives. If they fought a total war they would have won easily.
[/quote]

This is not a what if comic from Marvel. This is reality. Meaning the Russians lost in Afghanistan and proved your claim wrong. End of story. Even the American's accept that Russia lost in Afghanistan, why are you being such a fool?

[quote]
Iraq's democratic government has not fallen. Is not this the standard you used in Afghanistan where the Communist government fell? Iraq is increasingly improving. Its economy is growing and the number of terrorist attacks have plummeted.
[/quote]

Nope. Where did I say that was my standard? Please show me proof of your claim.

[quote]
There were no separate military and guerrilla phases in Vietnam. The Vietnam effort was a combination of both.
[/quote]

I was refering to the fact that Vietnam is a complete failure and the American's repeated the same actions in Iraq. They don't even control 20% of the capital city, how they are gonna control the country?

32

[QUOTE]
So really his threat didn't help at all. Pakistan was still attacked and Pakistanis were still killed. Nice work on the backpeddling.

[/QUOTE]

LOL his threat helped Pakistan from being conquered and then either made into a big Kashmir or dismembered into several smaller states.

You are unaware of history. It is well-known that many Afghans died and the number was in the hundreds of thousands.

This is your military plan? Hope the other side sends only 2% of its forces and use "superior fighting men" to win? If so, why spend billions on the military when mere guerrillas and jihadists can work alleged miracles?

You said the Russians lost in Afghanistan. Why? Do you know why they went to Afghanistan in the first place?

Vietnam was a failure because a full war was not fought. Sadly the same things were done in Afghanistan...

We'll see what happens in Iraq when the US leaves. My prediction is the democratic government will survive. In Afghanistan without the US Karzai will fall. If you want shariah in Iraq don't be hopeful but you likely will get it in Afghanistan and perhaps in Pakistan...

33

Chinese (majority) is dirt dirt poor.

That's why they run like little animals from their home country.

Just get out of your madrassah and see that America, Europe, Africa etc. is filled with Chinese running from the abject poverty.

In a way Chinese are the true ABCs (Anything But China) closely followed behind by the Indians, Pakistanis, and other 3rd class world country people.

So if some of these guys get a job in Pakistan, they happily accept it, then offer "Fatiha", wrap themselves up in "kafan", kiss their families and their @r$es good bye and come to Pakistan.

You cannot expect that non-military non-government people from Rich West would endanger their lives like Chinese. However there are plenty of soldiers from the Rich West who come riding on Humvees to say "kiya haal chaal hai" to anyone who threatens their motherlands.

It is just basic math guys.

No need to beat the "phatta huwa dhol" of Pak-Chini bhai-bahi. just pray that our situation improves and Chinese, Americans and others feel safe to come visit us without their humvees and Apachees.

34

Like I said. Not the What If comic from Marvel. Facts and figures.

[quote]
You are unaware of history. It is well-known that many Afghans died and the number was in the hundreds of thousands.
[/quote]

That is why you yourself said it was Murky right? Odd. Do you really contridict yourself like this all the time?

[quote]
This is your military plan? Hope the other side sends only 2% of its forces and use "superior fighting men" to win? If so, why spend billions on the military when mere guerrillas and jihadists can work alleged miracles?
[/quote]

Again facts and Figures. Not your imaginaton.

[quote]
You said the Russians lost in Afghanistan. Why? Do you know why they went to Afghanistan in the first place?
[/quote]

Not me. The world does. You don't read much do you?

[quote]
Vietnam was a failure because a full war was not fought. Sadly the same things were done in Afghanistan...
[/quote]

I didn't mention Afghanistan i mentioned Iraq. Which is a failure.

[quote]
We'll see what happens in Iraq when the US leaves. My prediction is the democratic government will survive. In Afghanistan without the US Karzai will fall. If you want shariah in Iraq don't be hopeful but you likely will get it in Afghanistan and perhaps in Pakistan...
[/QUOTE]

Again facts and figures. Your predictions aren't worth squat.

35

Thanks Reason. More ironic is that they guys know that Its only Islamist ideology which is wrecking havoc on their innocent ppls, still they wont miss a chance to drag in India, US, Israel into it.

Perhaps an average Muslim is yet to gather courage to speak against religious fundamentalism for fear of hellfire. But its equally good to see some raising their voice. Hope more will come ahead and speak their heart out.

36

[QUOTE]
Like I said. Not the What If comic from Marvel. Facts and figures.

[/QUOTE]

Fact: Nixon believed Gandhi's goal was to invade and dismember West Pakistan.
Fact: Nixon threatened to intervene if India did that.
Fact: India promptly gave up any consideration of that.

[QUOTE]
That is why you yourself said it was Murky right? Odd. Do you really contridict yourself like this all the time?

[/QUOTE]

Murky in that it is unknown whether it was 800,000 or 1 million. What is known is it was in the hundreds of thousands.

[QUOTE]
Again facts and Figures. Not your imaginaton.
[/QUOTE]

Fact: The Soviet Union had a 5 million man military.
Fact: The Soviet Union never had more than 104,000 of its 5,000,000 troops in Afghanistan.

[QUOTE]
Not me. The world does. You don't read much do you?
[/QUOTE]

I read more than book, which is what many Islamists do. I just finished reading a history of the USSR. The purpose of the USSR's intervention was to preserve the Communist government of Afghanistan. It failed in that. The United State's post-war goal is to preserve the democratic government of Iraq. That is very likely to happen. Even your heroes Al-Qaeda have practically given up on Iraq and moved to Afghanistan/Pakistan and now China.

[QUOTE]
More ironic is that they guys know that Its only Islamist ideology which is wrecking havoc on their innocent ppls, still they wont miss a chance to drag in India, US, Israel into it.
[/QUOTE]

Some of them are intentionally seeking to mislead people (the best example is regarding shariah. They will always say that, mysteriously, shariah has been misapplied everywhere it has been implemented--yet they never spell out what "true shariah" is just as Communists never said what "true Communism" was). They want to divert the public furor over jihadism from the jihadists to foreign actors, who are predictably "kuffar" (notice that no one here accuses Iran, which has a similar role as India in Afghanistan, of anything). Fortunately they are losing the war of information. As more people learn about jihadism/Islamism their support plummets. Just compare the level of support for Al-Qaeda in Pakistan just 2-3 years ago to their minuscule support today.

[QUOTE]
Perhaps an average Muslim is yet to gather courage to speak against religious fundamentalism for fear of hellfire.
[/QUOTE]

It is fear of being beaten or even murdered by "peaceful" Islamists. They are even extending this into dar-al-Harb ("The House of War"), "kafir lands", by issuing fatwas against critics of Islam anywhere on the globe. They want to use violence to spread this fear to non-Muslim nations to enforce the shariah provision against criticism or questioning of Islam. This is just the first step in their project. If they succeed in this they will make more threats. For instance, Amsterdam will be majority Muslim by 2015. You can expect a push to implement shariah there. This will be resisted by the Netherlands. Guess what will happen then? A flurry of fatwas from the Middle East and Pakistan will come to "enforce" that "shariah" be allowed in Amsterdam.

We are not in a clash of civilizations but a war for civilizations and the civilized world--which includes moderate and the small number of liberal Muslims--must stand firm against them like we stood firm (eventually) against Hitler's fascism and Soviet Communism.

37

Re: Chinese shun Pakistan Exodus

  1. If its a fact provided sources.
  2. Thank you again for pointing out the figures are not authentic. Discussion over.
  3. Hey you are the one that supports Al-Qaeda's view points not me. You have proven that in the thread in world affairs.