Log in How Pakistan Lost Its Sovereignty-Time Line

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

I remember that, at the time it was the biggest cheque ever written, or so they said.

22

The examples are pretty standard and applicable in general sense. Exceptions are always there.

Some Iranian Mullahs are less Anti-West than others. Does that change the overall anti-US trend in Iran. No.

Same way some military governments in Pakistan were better than the others and so were the civilian governments.

But the overall trend in Pakistan was to be in the American camp. That's just the nature of Pakistani region. We as a nation never believed in commie shenanigans.

Pakistani leadership overall made good decisions "under the given circumstances" compared to the "leadership in our neighboring countries", when it came to allying with the US.

Adding self-deprecating terms like "buckle" simply reflects bias against pro-US policies in Pakistan. And commie parrots used to say that all the time.

In the real world, countries negotiate "best possible" deal under the circumstances. And Pakistan too did its best and so did the USA.

Gen. Zia was a military guy, but he resisted Carter's peanuts and only supported anti-Soviet struggle when Reagan offered a much better deal.

US never wanted a free lunch and the same is true for Pakistan. Both of these countries negotiated every possible deal and got the best terms available at the time.

Thus using the terms "buckle" against Pakistani leadership be it military or civilian is counterproductive and at least Pakistanis should have enough self-respect not to use such terms.

Well it is first and foremost a matter for Afghanis. Isn't it?

Pakistanis should do as best as they can to bring peace and prosperity to Afghanistan.

That basket case hell hole has had enough of death and destruction. Don't you think?

23

This came from Time and Newsweek in the late 70’s…I am sure if you ask the Current PM of India Mr Manmohan Singh…he lived throught that Era of Indian Bankruptcy!..He would be the best source too!

24

Hearsay again...can you substantiate any of this ?

25

Re: Log in How Pakistan Lost Its Sovereignty-Time Line

^ Not heresay, google it and you will see, it was the biggest write off of debt at that time. Get your facts right before accusing others. The American ambassador to India at the time was involved in getting the write off.

26

Yes, NAM was a sham - for Pakistan !! Despite being allied with USA, Pak was a member of NAM :)

This India-Commie connection is another one of those bogeys spread by your leaders in the past as an excuse to serve the US. India had better relations with USSR than US, but being an ally would mean India supported USSR in Afghanistan which we did not. Pak on the other hand did support USA against USSR in Afghanistan.

Its probably a fair statement that USA owned (and still owns) Pakistan given the amount of "khairaat" they have given you :p

27

You got that right bro!

Cuba was member and guess what good ole Fidel castro was one of the chairmen.

In reality NAM amounted to little more that a handful of dirt.
Pretty much like the gahwa party called Oh-I-See.

Because all the members were in fact allies to mostly Commies (with few exceptions).

Now if you say Fidel was the most altruistic non-aligned, then people will laugh at you.

Your reason to bring NAM to prove India's non-begging for rubles was kind of half-baked plan and obviously it didn't work.

I see many Indians these days clamor to the calls and try to re-write history that India was ALWAYS with chacha Sam. We never supported Commies. Never ever never. Obviously a lie. But who knows. If you lie often enough, people may start believing in it as fact.

28

India was always non-aligned, which means that we worked with both blocs based on OUR interests. It might even be fair to say that we were closer to USSR than USA. However, history is proof that we did not support USSR blindly like Pak supported the US :)

29

Re: Log in How Pakistan Lost Its Sovereignty-Time Line

let us say

1 = no align
2 = usa align
3 = russia align

India is 2 & 3

Pakisitan is gone 2 to 0

30

Teri paarasayee ka sabub?
Teri naarasyee hai bhai!

Commies never had a BIG project next to India. So there goes your theory.

Still Indians did serve their Ruski masters when it came to spoil American plans by colluding with commies and socialists in Afghanistan, Bengal, and the Middle East purely to create difficulties for pro-US countries in the region.

BTW India has the same in fact bigger tendencies to bend over backwards for the sooooper powers.

Remember 911, when my man mohan singh and the rest of the Indian clan was jumping up and down like a little kid screaming towards the USA

--- Mujhay be lay lo
--- Mujhay be lay lo
--- Please please please.
--- Pakistan bohot kharab.
--- Bus mujhay lay lo na! Ji.
--- please please.

So save your lectures that India serves UN-blindly.

Americans laughed at the Indian childishness and said, Thank YOU beta. But you are not located next to Afghanistan so uncle Sam cannot make a deals for the army-basis.

Every country makes deals in whatever club they are. Pakistanis, Chinese, Iranians, Indians, BDeshis, Koreans etc. etc everyone made a deal (if one was offered by a super power).

It is just that history deniers in India want to erase their commie-connection. Well good luck.

31

The guy who gave you sovereignty (Quaid-e-Azam), took it away next month? HMMM

32

Afghanistan ? If India had supported USSR in Afghanistan, how is the Afghan India relationship so good ?

Bengal ? You probably need a lesson in 1971 history. I am sure there are a lot of threads in GS itself that can enlighten you.

Middle East ? We have/had a great relationship with all middle eastern countries.

Do you really think India wanted to be involved with the US war on terror ? We are happy standing by the sidelines and watch Pakistan fight that war :p

Yes, the only difference is that some countries make deals only with the bloc they are allied to e.g. Pakistan and other which are "non-aligned" make deals where it benefits their national interest e.g. India which has made deals with both US & USSR.

33

hahaha. Perhaps our Indian friend needs to know a bit of his own history. Here is a small bit of news from an Indian newspaper that clearly shows Indian minister Jaswant singh and CCS both clamoring:

Mujhay lay lo,
maee baap USA,
Mujhay lay lo.
Maee baap

hahha.

India identifies air bases for US - India - The Times of India

------- the [Indian] official emphasised that the USA has not yet indicated whether it wants to use the offer of military facilities.** “we [Indians] have detailed our specific offer which can then be factored into their planning,” said the official. as part of this exercise, us ambassador robert blackwill met navy chief admiral sushil kumar, who is the chairman chiefs of staff committee and the army chief gen padmanabhan tuesday. **military officials say that their understanding is that the indian ports could be used for unloading diego garcia and guam-based marine prepositioning ships that are loaded with ready-to-use equipment which will marry up with the marine forces which will fly in from their stations in the us. they could also be used for “turning around” or replenishing ships that are involved in the operations. according to the official, indian air bases could be used by the us to provide depth to their deployment. given the hostility they are bound to face in pakistan, indian facilities are also considered as being safer.

p.s. shameless turn coats. first suck billions of rubels, then run after the $$$.

34

No only with your leader Altaf who first talked such treason about Pakistan's creation being a blunder.

35

Good analysis!