Pakistan’s Software Industry

Hamidm2 Bhai,

Da jawab nahin.

Regards
Sanatani (Horrible Hindoo)

Pakistan has a serious image problem. If you really want to grow in software, shed your anti-US, pro-jehadi mentality. Currently the only credible item thet Pakistan exports is global terrorism

#342 by tahmed32

[arjun: i see it is impossible for you to get off your habit of monkeying (ha! ha!) with internet material to support your half-brained Indian-chauvinist view of the world:]

And the fact that you can`t do even that suggests that you are worse than a monkey.

arjun: i see it is impossible for you to get off your habit of monkeying (ha! ha!) with internet material to support your half-brained Indian-chauvinist view of the world: Look carefully at both references you provide and they are both pakistani sources (and everyone knows we have islamic extremists in pakistan who no doubt would love to pass the bomb around to their fellow nuts in other countries).

I was not referring to these islamist extremists in my post - I was referring to the international community to whom your brilliant politicans demonstrated in 1998 that Pakistan had a legitimate reason to have a nuclear deterrent. But I suppose that is too hard for you to register. Duh-uh.

Last post to you, and you can come back with your usual ``pakiland pakiland`` howls now.

maheshG: I must have repeated a half-dozen times on this board that I have no doubt that there were others who knew of his shenanigans, but that does not change the fact that (as BJP made crystal clear in 1998) Pakistan has a legitimate reason for building the bomb (i.e. as deterrent to India). Please take the trouble to read what I have actually written and dont simply assume I said something.

#338 by arjun_m and #339 by MaheshG2

And that is why it is difficult to argue with these educated and progressive Pakis. They live in a totally different world, where they have taken care of the Indian threat forever without realizing the fact that once India acquires the Patriot anti-missile system, it will lay to waste Pakistan`s entire nuclear weapons effort. And the next time, Pakistan will never be able to steal any technology, given the intense scrutiny from which there is not going to be any escape for a long, long time to come.

Tahmed, you must be pretty naive to believe that only Khan was involved in nuclear proliferation. And you must be even naiver to think that the US govt believes the same.

#336 by tahmed32 on March 18, 2005 6:55am PT


And yet, that term (``Islamic Bomb``) is in fact hardly ever used anymore nowadays


Yup...just like post 9/11, no Pakistani in the US will admit supporting the jihadis

Is there something wrong with our Pakistani neighbours? ``DESPITE Khan`s attempts to sell Pakistan`s nuclear secrets to enrich himself and DESPITE 9/11. `` Do these guys really believe that AQKhan was only one involved?

When things were going good, only one year ago, all of them were going ga-ga over AQK. And now he has been made only scapegoat!!

And w.r.t did more than anything the Pakistanis could have done in convincing the world that of Pakistan`s case , it appears that these pea-brained pakistanis, who have no work other than sitting on chowk and try to interact with females, now consider themselves world.

rsridhar #335 I think it has been ``unthinkable`` for a lot of countries long before 9/11 that any muslim country should have the nuclear bomb. After all, talk Pakistan`s efforts ``Islamic Bomb`` started as far back as the 1970`s I think. The remains that despite all this, Pakistan went ahead and developed the bomb. And yet, that term (``Islamic Bomb``) is in fact hardly ever used anymore nowadays DESPITE Khan`s attempts to sell Pakistan`s nuclear secrets to enrich himself and DESPITE 9/11. In fact, (just to add to my earlier 4 points a fifth point), the BJP governments shenanigans (which made the world`s headlines) of 1998 in blasting five bombs and following that up with threats to Pakistan, did more than anything the Pakistanis could have done in convincing the world that of Pakistan`s case (i.e. it needed the bomb as deterrent to India). As I said, with enemies like the India, Pakistan never needed any friends. :-)

If you carefully read the cut and paste you yourself provided from this article, you will see that does not refer to any attempt by the US to disarm Pakistan - rather, US efforts are limited to the more specific and limited (and in my view perfectly reasonable) goal of understanding the extent to which Khan`s shenanigans resulted in nuclear know-how being passed on to other people. So, please dont read what you would like to read - see what is actually being said. Also I think that while mentioning Rice`s visit, you ignore a couple of key points - first, that Rice in fact rejected Indian government attempts to dissuade the US from selling F-16`s to Pakistan which in fact would point the other way from what you are arguing.

re:#333 by tahmed32

``So, rest assured that (despite Amir`s predictions), if you are waiting for Pakistan`s nuclear deterrence against India to disappear, I suggest you buy yourself a good book to read...``
Tahmed Sahib,
It is not what i think or what Indians think that matter. The new rules of game are determined by the sole superpower. Since 9/11, it is just unthinkable that a muslim nation should have nuclear weapons. Pak has not been a responsible nuclear power. A.Q.Khan acted like a warlord and helped proliferate the technoology (which he himself had smuggled in from abroad) to North Korea, Iran, Libya. Do u think US is not concerned at this? Do u think US seriously believes it was just Khan`s personal doings and that the Pak State or Army was not involved?
If u have read the news of near collapse of the Oil-pipeline deal with India and Iran, you will know US was not interested in seeing India hobnob with middle east and what looked like a great idea to India, Pak and everyone around there was looked upon with suspicion by US. That is how it is going to be. Condeleeza Rice, on her recent visit to India, was urging India to look for newer technologies for her energy needs. In other words, we may see more US Oil companies interested in doing drilling and finding oil in India than this pipeline materializing.
What i am trying to say is: the groundrules are being framed by the sole Superpower. I was only being factual when i said in my last post that Pak`s nuclear assets are under close scrutiny. Nobody wants them falling into wrong hands in case of an Army Coup or terrorists taking over that country.
Please read the following article:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GC19Df03.html
Excerps:
(Now the US wants hard evidence of this and all of Pakistan`s other dealings so that it can build its case against Iran. This will include full scrutiny of Pakistan`s nuclear program, especially from the late 1980s until the early 1990s, when Pakistan developed the nuclear device, which it eventually tested in 1998.

Importantly, and to the consternation of Pakistan, the US demand includes direct access and interrogation of Pakistan`s former chief of army staff, General Aslam Beg, who has on many occasions openly endorsed nuclear cooperation with Iran, former president Ghulam Ishaq Khan (August 17, 1988 until July 18, 1993) and Dr Khan.

The exhaustive US demand has sent shock waves through General Headquarters Rawalpindi. To date, the belief had been that Pakistan`s cooperation has been sufficient to avoid people like Dr Khan from being handed over. )
Sridhar

ylh #318 I thank you for your kind words of support. These fellows you were directing your post to are indeed a bloody waste even of chowk space, and that is saying a lot :-).

rsridhar #331 On 1998, you start by saying ``You are welcome to hold a different view on this.`` and this would seem to mean that you agree with me that we are beating a dead horse. I have already summarized in four points the basis on which I hold those views and have not heard anything beyond heated denials that fly in the face of facts and common sense from some of your countrymen. You end your post by indicating a desire to continue beating this horse by writing ``The question to ask is: was it all worth it? I need some honest answers here from my Pak friends on Chowk. `` That is fine with me - perhaps you will have better luck with other Pakistanis on chowk who may agree with you. :-)

As for Ayaz Amir, when you refer to him as one of the ``saner voices`` in Pakistan, you indicate that you have found Pakistanis to be in general lacking in sane voices. Please note that people can have different perceptions of the same situations even while both sides are completely sane. As for Amir`s quote - his speculations about Pakistan giving up its nuclear capacity in light of US pressure may thrill Indian hearts, but rest assured it isnt going to happen. As I have said, when it comes to the issue of the defense of Pakistan through the nuclear stalemate, Pakistani leaders demonstrated great resolve despite intense international pressure. So, rest assured that (despite Amir`s predictions), if you are waiting for Pakistan`s nuclear deterrence against India to disappear, I suggest you buy yourself a good book to read while you are waiting since this could turn out to be a much longer wait then you think.

Hamidm ji

Burri baat. Inn sab ko alag alag kar ke ghar bhejiye.
Vaise aap maanege ke horrible hindoos (arjun-m) ki similies bahut fit hoti hai.

Regards

re:#311 by tahmed32
I was trying to convince u and others from Pak that nuclear weapons have not necessarily benefitted Pakistan. You are welcome to hold a different view on this.
You say:
``you display the common view of too many Indians that Pakistan is merely some kind of a client state of the US and is incapable of existence as a free and independent nation on its own.``
I never said Pak is incapable of existing as a free, independent nation. Now, u are putting words into my mouth.
I think u should read the following article by Ayaz Amir, one of saner voices from your country:
Url: http://www.dawn.com/weekly/ayaz/ayaz.htm
Excerpts:
``Besides, while no closer to liberating Kashmir or forcing India to the negotiating table, our Kashmir policy (in tandem with our love for the Taliban) was earning Pakistan a reputation as one of the cockpits of international jihad. But it is salutary to remember that while peace with India was a long overdue policy, the push for it came not from home grown wisdom but American tutelage, one of the positive aspects of our American connection.``

``So it is relevant to ask whether in the Khan Research Laboratories the centrifuges still spin. The Americans are all over Pakistan now. Would they permit this?

If enriched uranium, the stuff that goes into a nuclear bomb, is no longer being produced, and Pakistan`s nuclear community is in a state bordering on panic, then it obviously means that our nuclear programme, for all practical purposes, is frozen, the labs quiet and the centrifuges out of business.``
After the tit-for-tat nuclear explosions, Pak finds itself being closely scrutinized by the world community on its nuclear issue, to the extent that the author of the article i posted even questions (as have many others) the very existence of nuclear capability now. The question to ask is: was it all worth it? I need some honest answers here from my Pak friends on Chowk.
Sridhar

Oh god, shiva, allah,
I come back after a week and people are still discussing Karachi Stock exchange.. Arjun and Harish -pl get over it. Karachi exchange going up won`t hurt us in India.

Though, I such hope that some Pakistani Harshad Metha is not pushing that exchange up... Lot of people will get burnt if that happens

from the peanut gallery :

manto zindabad !
horrible hindoos murdabad !

........... it breaks my heart to see hanuman`s progeny calling manto a chimpanzee, but there is nothing i can do about it except offer my moral support ..........

Re: # 325

Again... you are missing the bigger picture. I have already told you that the article I put up was not to prove any superiority over India. But ... you continue to make a fool out of yourself... as is your wont.

Re: # 324

yawn... lame come back.

The document at following link gives per capita energy consumption figures. It shows figures of Pakistan comparable to India. Somebody here mentioned that they are not.

http://64.224.32.197/Publications/wijayatunga.pdf

#323 by Mantolives on March 17, 2005 3:46am PT


So you agree...The fact that a chimapnzee can use google to come up with these answers and YOU can`t puts you lower than the chimpanzee in the evolutionary scale....

#322 by Mantolives

[So not only are you intellectually inferior..]

I may be all that and more, but you have just a couple of posts ago been proved to be lower down.

[.. but you can`t come up with an original insult?]

Yup, I could not. I couldn’t bring myself to a level lower than a chimp, which is where you are. That is an exclusive YLH specialty. Try looking for someone your level.

Re: # 317

``Even a chimpanzee can use google to come up with the answers``

Yes sir! Evidently... you are the perfect example of this new phenomenon.

Re: # 319

Wow... man talk about firing off other peoples` shoulders.

So not only are you intellectually inferior, but you can`t come up with an original insult?

-YLH

Re: # 320

The fact that you need to prove all of this to me is indicative of your insecurity.

Manto is just a pompous nitwit full of sh1t. His ignorance and stupidity, which has always been obvious to the discerning , can be witnessed in this very thread....

He began by mocking India`s supposed superiority in software..and claimed how a tiny country like Israel exports twice as much as India.(`way ahead of the game` , Manto smirked)..when pointed out that ain`t the case , Manto stuck to his guns , claiming somebody on chowk said so , and that was good enough for him.... a simple google search would confirm that India`s software exports are worth $17.4 billion (5 times as much as Israel`s) , annual software revenue is around $25 billion....but Manto wouldn`t do that....google search is not for `intellectuals` like Manto...

#317 by arjun_m

[People unable to do even that are below chimps in the evolutionary scale....]

Ha! Ha! Ha! ROTFL!!!!

Exactly what I was saying. Even a Chimp is smarter than Manto. Let`s not stoop to Manto`s level...I mean lower than even a Chimp.

Re: # 314

So desperate ... to get tahmed into an argument ... so obsessed?

A gentleman like tahmed is known not to engage those like you who resort to gutter language simply because they are unable to argue with logic.

#315 by Mantolives on March 16, 2005 6:43am PT


Now you are behaving like Chimpanzee


Even a chimpanzee can use google to come up with the answers for the questions I asked...or click on the link I provided...

People unable to do even that are below chimps in the evolutionary scale....

Re: # 307

You withdrew quietly from the other board because you were tied up in knots with your arguments ... or lack there of. Not only did you make the biggest errors i.e. confusing Maulana Mohammed Ali with M.A. Jinnah, and calling Mir Qasim the conqueror of Sindh, but you also made a fool out of yourself by declaring people like Ainslee Embree to be ``Jinnah worshippers, ... and your selective quoting from Ambedkar was blasted from Ambedkar`s own books. At the end of the day you came out as an ignorant fanatic jumping from argument to argument... resorting to the same old name calling, as is your wont.

I have made an honest appraisal of your state of mind. You suffer from the inequities of your primitive brain, which has hindered the development of a newer more sophisticated brain process.

Hence... you are almost pre-human.

Re: # 313

Now you are behaving like Chimpanzee, like the illustrious Harish Hyd. Ofcourse KSE doesn`t compare to BSE... thats not even the dispute. However KSE has done exceptionally well... and only a fool will deny that.

The problem here is the knee jerk that it elicits from people like you. What was there that made you so insecure?

This underlying basic mental anguish that you face every time something positive comes out about Pakistan indicates that something is amiss.

#312 by tahmed32

[I referred to your thick hide because you refused to take a polite hint to ``have a good day`` and came back to be told more bluntly that I had no interest in having political ``discussions`` with you. That was describing your behavior, not abusing you.]

Nope. If that were true, you have a thicker hide than I have, since you keep writing post after post after announcing that this would be your last post.

[And when I referred to abuse on your part, I referred to your use of the word ``chut!ya`` (your word, not mine) in your parting post in the other board a few days ago where I had similarly refused to persistent efforts to start a ``dialogue`` with me.]

Please do not delude yourself into believing that you are so important that I would persist in trying to have a dialog with you. I was merely exposing your lies in post after post, which offended you, and typically, you refused to answer the points I raised.

[So when I imply you are a coward, I say this because (unless you are 10 feet tall) you know very well that you would not dare to call another man this word in his face. Only from the safety of the internet.]

I would, if it is you.

#295 by Mantolives on March 15, 2005 10:02pm PT


.... because it is all a grand ISI conspiracy... I am trying to expose it. We are merely duping the world.


Nope.......the world isn`t being duped..If it was, you`d see a lot more than the piddly 200 milion $ from foreign funds...

you`re only duping yourself..


I can`t believe a simple article on KSE has had such a profoundly upsetting effect on the Indians... Goes to show that they are obsessed and bigoted


I asked you a simple question, the answer to which can be found reading the newspaper you claim to work for...

I see you`ve chosen not to answer the questions...

harish: I referred to your thick hide because you refused to take a polite hint to ``have a good day`` and came back to be told more bluntly that I had no interest in having political ``discussions`` with you. That was describing your behavior, not abusing you.

As for your calling me an ``ahmak``, that is a brilliant play on my name and I commend you on this cleverness - but rest assured that I am being anything but an ``ahmek`` when I refuse your repeated attempts to have ``discussions`` with you. And when I referred to abuse on your part, I referred to your use of the word ``chutiya`` (your word, not mine) in your parting post in the other board a few days ago where I had similarly refused to persistent efforts to start a ``dialogue`` with me. So when I imply you are a coward, I say this because (unless you are 10 feet tall) you know very well that you would not dare to call another man this word in his face. Only from the safety of the internet.

rsridhar: I will agree that we have discussed this topic ad nauseum (and indeed noted the same in my earlier post to netizen when i referred to beating this poor dead horse). It is for this reason that I had tried to summarize in 4 points the basis on which I think that Pakistani leaders (despite their faults) have essentially secured Pakistan`s defense.

If you had stuck to those four points, it would have been easier to discuss further. Or better yet, stopped with what I note in my first sentence above. However, you go on to make a number of points on different issues and which dont cover the four basic points mentioned above - thus, you refer to Khan and that the pakistani military knew of his actions, and that is something I have already agreed seems to be the case; you refer to ``what after the war on terrorism is over? How long can Pak continue to depend on USA`s largesse based on its services? How long is this client-paymaster relation to continue? `` and again this has nothing to do with what I wrote - and btw, while in your above quoted remarks you display the common view of too many Indians that Pakistan is merely some kind of a client state of the US and is incapable of existence as a free and independent nation on its own. As I wrote to bbabu also, this self-serving and belittling view of Pakistan has been held from day 1 by Indian leaders and has no bearing on reality.

Anyway, nice to hear from you.

#309 by the-ahmak-32

[All you have shown is that any coward can write abuse on the internet.]

I agree with you, any coward can write abuse, which is what you are when you called me “thick-hide”.

[Although I realize your frustration at my repeated refusal to have a ``discussion`` with you.]

I am devastated at your refusal. How can you so cruel as to deny me the opportunity to expose your lies, because that is what you do every time you post something?

harish hyd: All you have shown is that any coward can write abuse on the internet. Although I realize your frustration at my repeated refusal to have a ``discussion`` with you.

bbabu #284 Your response is just as full of factually wrong as your original one, AND now you are arguing the opposite!!

On my point 1., in your original post you had incorrectly claimed that Pakistan was a ``pariah`` in the 1990`s - I had asked you to look up the dictionary meaning of the word and then talk to me. You ignore that, and are now arguing the opposite!! (i.e. when you say ``It was not like Pakistan or Pakistanis was subject to diplomatic isolation, sporting boycotts or mass deportations before Sep-11 or May 1998.``. You are factually wrong here as well!! But never mind, I am not going to ask you to now do your homework on the ``diplomatic isolation, sporting boycotts or mass deportations`` that you talk about after 1998 and 2001.

On 2., in your original post you had said that no sanctions were lifted until after 2001, rather than 1998. I had told you to get your current history right (easily done using google) and even told you to look up the Brownback Amendments I and II of 1998/99. You ignore that and come back with ``What sanctions are we talking about ? Pressler amendment ??``. If you were serious about getting your facts right, you would not ask me this dumb question - you can look up the answer just as easily as I can.


On 3., the same story. in your original post you wrote ``Why should India attack Pakistan if Pakistan stop its low intensity war in Kashmir ?`` . This clearly implies that Pakistan should assume that India would never attack Pakistan as long as Pakistan accepts the Indian position on Kashmir - in other words that Pakistan should entrust its defense to the good will of India. When I had asked you to used your common sense on this point, and now you come back denying the clear implication of what you said by writing `` I never asked Pakistani state to entrust their security to others. `` !!

On my point 4., once again you now change your story!! That is, in your original post you wrote ``I do not think Europeans, Japanese or others are wasting any energy on Pakistan. ``. When challenged on this obvious point, you shift this from the present to the future!! (i.e. you write ``Pakistani nuclear deterrent is irelevant in the long run. Missile defense, nuclear proliferation and economic issues will drown out the relevance of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.``). And btw, Indian governments have been making these dire predictions about Pakistan since day 1 - and they havent come true.

I do appreciate your civilized manner even though I know you dont like to see your obviously deeply-held views being challenged. However, I wont be continuing this argument further - since your two posts that contradict not just easily checked facts but also one another, and that is enough.

#306 by Mantolives

[Given the lop sided development of your brain matter, I have been forced to bring myself down to your level. One cannot declaim intellectually with the chimpanzees.]

Which is why I quietly withdrew from the other board. It is simply useless to argue with someone who thinks a great smile is an indication of intellect, and I couldn`t bring myself down to your level.

You have shown to what level you can stoop by commenting on someone`s pic, and I will not do the same, because as you said, one cannot declaim intellectually with a Chimpanzee. That pretty much says it all.

Re: # 305

Given the lop sided development of your brain matter, I have been forced to bring myself down to your level. One cannot declaim intellectually with the chimpanzees. Is it any wonder you agree with Malik99`s assessment ... both of you are two sides of the same coin, or same side of two different coins what have you.

PS: I don`t have to look at your pic to understand your pathetic intellect. It is quite obvious you see.

#302 by Mantolives

[A mere cop out on your part to take responsibility for your own ignorance and biases... indicative of a lop sided development of your intellectual potential, manifest in the goofy smile you have up in your profile picture.]

Ha! Ha! Now that you have no more arguments left, you have sunk to a level where you have nothing else to do but comment on my picture?! If this is the state of a supposedly educated Paki, Allah help Pakistan! As much as I disagree with malik99’s extreme views, I must compliment him on his spot-on assessment of you.

#234 by the-ahmak-32

[Why is it so hard for you to recognize that the reason I dont want to waste time with you is not that I am shaking with fear at your chowk posts??]

If you had even an iota of common sense, you would realize that no one fears anyone on Chowk. But I have noticed that you are sh!t-scared of facts, and when they are presented, you just fold up and vanish into the thin air.

[I have seen you contribute nothing but hot air and bluster and abusive language - and ``paki-bashers`` (from the safety of the internet) like you are a dime a dozen on chowk. Second and last post to you. I have no interest in your views or in wasting more time with you.]

A cowardly excuse if there ever was one. Why don’t you admit that you have been caught with your pants down, and I’ll make it easier for you to withdraw?

Re: # 301

A mere cop out on your part to take responsibility for your own ignorance and biases... indicative of a lop sided development of your intellectual potential, manifest in the goofy smile you have up in your profile picture.

#299 by Mantolives

[Is that why you resorted to personal insults and then ran when confronted with logical arguments?]

No, but because I realized the futility of arguing with you. Your subsequent harangue has only served to validate my opinion. Thanks for confirming my beliefs.

For all the time Hacked Penis and other Pakis spend on their obsession with India and India raleated stuff , they shows remarkable ignorance and lack of understanding of India and Indians.


On major policy issues like Kashmir and Nuclear Bombs , all political parties - Congress/BJP- in India think alike. Trying to drive a wedge between Indians on these vital issues is a futile exercise. Public opinion is overwhelmingly in favor of holding on to Kashmir and those much damed nukes.

1.``Indian nuke explosion was a blunder of the highest order. We know that the current congress sakar also holds this view as expressed by Natwar Singh recently.``

It doesn`t matter what Nattu Singh thinks...most Indians are damn happy about them nukes. The current Congress sarkar`s official viewpoint is that nuclear weapons are a prerequisite for India`s safety. And that it doesn`t matter what Nattu Singh thinks. Thats what the Prime Minister said in the parliament.

India`s nuclear weapons do not belong to any political party , but to the whole country and its people. Its not about Congress or BJP - its about the people of India and what they want. People of India (apart from a few disgruntled leftists) love those beauties...


2.`` It would be sheer stupidity on India’s part to turn the whole region into a nuke confrontation region just to prove that Pakistan had nukes. Made it whole lot easier for Pakistan to sort of come out of the closet``


India exploded em` nukes not because it wanted to prove to the world that Pakistan had nukes , but BECAUSE Pakistan had nukes and so it was imperative for India to have nukes of its own. The argument about India giving up its conventional superiority by exploding em` nukes is hogwash because in the even of a conventional war breaking out , Pakistan would certainly have used its secret nuclear power on India rather than risk getting annihilated by India`s far superior conventional military strength.


Fact is - Pakistan had nukes imported from China long before 1998. Because common sense dictates that it is not possible for a country to develop nuclear weapons in a matter of 3 weeks. It takes painstaking research , investment ,decades of expertise and a degree of stealth (smugglign raw materials to and fro) to develop nukes. India`s nuclear program began way back in 1956 , by Nehru`s orders , under the leadership of Dr. Homi Jehangir Bhabha.

If then Pakistan did have nukes and kept them in secrecy , then obviously it was not for ornamental purpose , but because Pakistan intended to reply to a conventional military strike by what it then believed to be a non-nuclear India with nuclear bombs. To stun the big enemy into submission.


3.``The reality is the BJP/RSS govt. was the worst thing that happened to India in the last 57 years and slowly people would begin to realize that. Zia destroyed the Pakistani society by inserting religion into the society. Similarly, RSS/BJP successfully divided the Indian society on communal lines and it would take a long time to recover from that.``


Before the BJP came to power , Pakistan ranked higher than India on the human development index , had a higher per capita and a lower concentration of poverty. By the time BJP lost power , India ranked higher than Pakistan on the human development index , had a higher per capita and a lower concentration of poverty.


Whether the Indian society is divided on communal lines or not , is debatable , and varies from case to case , region to region , person to person....but certainly not for a Paki to judge. Most countries are divided in one way or another. Even US is divided along the lines of race/religion/ethnicity. Every society is polarised one way or another. That cannot be avoided. But what is important is to ensure that there is no discrimination by the state or by law on basis of religion , race or ethnicity.

But is must be said that the root of all communal polarisation is Islam. In any secular country , as soon as muslims cross a certain threshold of population , they create problems. This is visible in Europe in countries like Holland , France and UK . In US , we all know what the Americans think of em` rag heads.


4.``The RSS/BJP govt also communalize the Kashmir issue.``

BJP came to power in 1998... the violence in Kashmir began in 1989. Over 95% of Kashmiri hindus were forced into leaving the valley by 1991 by the Kashmiri muslims who threatened them with murder and rape. Leave Kashmir or we will take your women , they were told.The idea was to cleanse Kashmir of any kufr elements.

By 1995-96 , most local Kashmiri militants were killed by the Indian Army. The Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front - which was an organisation of local Kashmiri militants , was practically finished by the Indian Army.By now the movement was fully under the hands of Pakistani/Afghani terrorists of Pakistan based terrorist organisations like Lashkar-e-Toiba and Hizbul-e-Muzahiddin.

The locals had by then realised the futility of their movement and were pinned into submission by the Indian Army. Although they still supported the seccession of Kashmir from India , they had by now been castrated and lacked the ability to fight the Indians.


So by the time BJP came to power in 1998 , Kashmir had already cooled down significantly.So BJP`s influence over Kashmir is MINIMAL. Influence of RSS over the events in Kashmir is unclear and has to be investigated at length. RSS` involvement in the Bhopal Gas Tragedy of 1984 and the recent Tsunami also needs to be investigated.

BJP`s mandate was to continue with the status quo - which it did. Congress`s mandate is to continue with the status quo , which it is doing. India`s stand is clear - regardless of who is in power. Whats presently ours will remain ours, Whats currently yours , we dont want. Convert LOC into IB and lets move on.

Re: # 298

Is that why you resorted to personal insults and then ran when confronted with logical arguments? People like you are the quintessential Indians... obsessed with Pakistan, bigoted, narcissistic ... Just stand back and realize your knee jerks. How you chaps describe anything or anyone that challenges your biases as ``tabloid`` or ``biased`` etc.

For all your apparent ``superiority`` over us... you seem to act like chimpanzees...

#278 arjun_m

I`m surprised you`re even trying to have a sane discussion with Mr. Manto. For all his sophistication, he is still the quintessential Paki, incapable of making anything out of a simple and logical argument.

#291 by Netizen

India nuke explosions were a masterstroke, however differently our Paki friends would like to imagine it. With that explosion, India announced to the world (and specially China) that it was a nuclear power and no one could mess around with it. It also forced Pakistan to come out of the closet. The result is there for everyone to see. Crippling sanctions weakened an already faltering Paki economy, while the Indian economy was hardly affected. The West realized its mistake and quickly lifted the sanctions on India, and were it not for 9/11, the sanctions would have taken Pakistan down the drain now.

Today, there is a new found respect for India, both due to its impressive economic growth and its military might. The USAF held joint air exercises with the IAF. Singapore and Israel have expressed their keenness on one. France too wants similar exercises.

Pakistan, on the other hand, has compounded its problems by indulging in the worst proliferation of nuke technology in history, by selling nuke technology to North Korea, Iran, Libya, and god knows how many more countries. For all the bonhomie on the surface, its strongest military ally, the US is loathe to sell it advanced equipment, knowing fully that Pakistan cannot be trusted.

So in a way, 1998 marks a turning point in the history of the subcontinent, India emerging stronger and respected, and Pakistan, weaker and reviled.

#291 by Netizen

India nuke explosions were a masterstroke, however differently our Paki friends would like to imagine it. With that explosion, India announced to the world (and specially China) that it was a nuclear power and no one could mess around with it. It also forced Pakistan to come out of the closet. The result is there for everyone to see. Crippling sanctions weakened an already faltering Paki economy, while the Indian economy was hardly affected. The West realized its mistake and quickly lifted the sanctions on India, and were it not for 9/11, the sanctions would have taken Pakistan down the drain now.

Today, there is a new found respect for India, both due to its impressive economic growth and its military might. The USAF held joint air exercises with the IAF. Singapore and Israel have expressed their keenness on one. France too wants similar exercises.

Pakistan, on the other hand, has compounded its problems by indulging in the worst proliferation of nuke technology in history, by selling nuke technology to North Korea, Iran, Libya, and god knows how many more countries. For all the bonhomie on the surface, its strongest military ally, the US is loathe to sell it advanced equipment, knowing fully that Pakistan cannot be trusted.

So in a way, 1998 marks a turning point in the history of the subcontinent, India emerging stronger and respected, and Pakistan, weaker and reviled.

Re: # 278

.... because it is all a grand ISI conspiracy... I am trying to expose it. We are merely duping the world.

I can`t believe a simple article on KSE has had such a profoundly upsetting effect on the Indians... Goes to show that they are obsessed and bigoted... have you seen any Pakistani respond like this to any news of Indian success?

So .... inevitably if I say something good, your insecure li`l a$$ has to get insecure about India and its BSE ?

Re: # 241

Thanks for admitting the truth, even if you think you are being sarcastic.

Re: # 260

But wait till I start quoting M J Akbar..... he too will become ``obscure`` for you... just like frontline, Asianage, The Hindu are all ``obscure`` papers when they say something good about Pakistan... and the gospel of the truth when the they say something bad.

Re: # 290 HP

``Indian nuke explosion was a blunder of the highest order.``

I don`t blame the indian govt. (congress or BJP) for conducting the tests, if required for gather data. But conducting the tests and proclaiming itself to be a super-power was really a stupid idea. BJP must have have done that so as to show some tangible ``results`` of its governance till that point of time. As i don`t recollect there were any other progress made, they fumbled a lot initially. But you have to keep in mind that the previous PV Narsinhma Raos govt was also going to conduct the tests but was pressured by the americans to back off. Hence, there was so much of secrecy involved in the Pokharan tests.

``If we attempt to use the “who benefits” theory here, I am afraid by ass-plodding nuke, India lost its convention superiority and its defensive depth. Pakistan and India both had to follow thru on the next step of the nuke race and that was acquiring delivery capabilities. Now for all practical purposes, Pakistan can target any part of India and that is not something that benefits India at all. ``

Pakistan didn`t start acquiring Ghauri, Ghaznavi, Abdali ( korean and Chinese) misillies after chagai tests. They had acquired them well before that, hence their is no credence to the fact that they did not have a delivery platform. Same with india, it had prithvi, agni well before that. Also bith countries keep on buying fighter planes which could deliver n-bombs.

``With one stroke of insanity, India lost both conventional weapon advantage and it now has no defensive depth. It means that India lost the capability to confine the conflict into mere border areas and to a few Indian cities within Pakistan air force range.``

I would not agree with that. Imagine, if india had immediately attacked pakistan after conducting its tests, do you think pakistan would not have retaliated with nukes had there been a chance that it was going to be completely routed. Do you think that simply becuase pak had not conducted its ``tests`` it cannot deliver nukes? I don`t think so. Pak had that deterrent since 86. During 90 also we came close to nuke war.

``The RSS/BJP govt also communalize the Kashmir issue. ``
can you please elaborate.

``Before they went out of business, they tried to use better relations-with-Pakistan card to gain Muslim votes in elections thus implying that Muslims in India still are pro Pakistan. ``

they are not out of business. They were just 3-4 seats behind congress. infact the business of politics has changed in the country. its an era of coaliation politics. parties keep on joining groups and within each group they fight among themselves. Regarding relations with Pak, they wanted to show that they can bring peace and credit should be given to Vaj. who even after kargil war still believed that things can change. The present bonhomie between the two countries are because of his preseverence. Regarding indian muslims and pro-pak comment that you have made, even his/BJP`s bitterest critic wouldn`t make such a baseless argument.

``I can go on and on but I will try to contrast the RSS/BJP childish and stupid policies to the maturity in all aspects of diplomacy that is being shown by the current congress sarkar.``

what maturity are you talking about. I hope its not about the Sri-Muza bus service, as it was BJP that came up with this proposal with Sharif.

``The RSS/BJP pushed kashmiris into Pakistani hands whereas the current sarkar is working to pacify the kashmiris first because they realize that it is first and the foremost an Indian problem.``

Can you please elaborate citing facts. I hope you know that BJP has formed 5 year govt only since 98. infact it was during their rule that j&k got a free and fair election (even though boycotted by most kashmiris). Farooq abdullah, who was part of the central govt lost to Mufti mohd sayeed.

``In the last three or four months, I have become an ardent admirer of PM Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi as I think they are both handling the relations with Pakistan part admirably and with a maturity that was lacking in the previous India government. ``

as i said the present bonhomie is just a continuation of the Lahore/Agra Yatra, cricket diplomacy that the previous govt started. dont you think so? what major decisions has the present govt. taken other then waiving the passport condition in order to travel in the bus?
Is the continuation of the Baglihar dam a mature decision wrt Pakistan?

#286 by rsridhar

As you said this topic has been beaten to death on this forum and time has proved the Tahmed and if may add my argument right that Indian nuke explosion was a blunder of the highest order. We know that the current congress sakar also holds this view as expressed by Natwar Singh recently.

“By being an overt nuclear power (from a covert one which India was in the past) and forcing Pak to follow suit, India ensured that Pak exposed its nuclear fallacies to the world”

I afraid you are not thinking thru this argument. It would be sheer stupidity on India’s part to turn the whole region into a nuke confrontation region just to prove that Pakistan had nukes. In fact, by nuke ass-plosion(just a play on explosion) India made it whole lot easier for Pakistan to sort of come out of the closet. But it was actually India that came out of the closet first. This was common knowledge that both countries were nuke ass-plosion-ready but neither Pakistan nor India needed to change that by making that so explicit.
If we attempt to use the “who benefits” theory here, I am afraid by ass-plodding nuke, India lost its convention superiority and its defensive depth. Pakistan and India both had to follow thru on the next step of the nuke race and that was acquiring delivery capabilities. Now for all practical purposes, Pakistan can target any part of India and that is not something that benefits India at all.
With one stroke of insanity, India lost both conventional weapon advantage and it now has no defensive depth. It means that India lost the capability to confine the conflict into mere border areas and to a few Indian cities within Pakistan air force range.

The reality is the BJP/RSS govt. was the worst thing that happened to India in the last 57 years and slowly people would begin to realize that. Zia destroyed the Pakistani society by inserting religion into the society. Similarly, RSS/BJP successfully divided the Indian society on communal lines and it would take a long time to recover from that.
The nuke ass-plosion was just one mistake. The RSS/BJP govt also communalize the Kashmir issue. Before they went out of business, they tried to use better relations-with-Pakistan card to gain Muslim votes in elections thus implying that Muslims in India still are pro Pakistan.

I can go on and on but I will try to contrast the RSS/BJP childish and stupid policies to the maturity in all aspects of diplomacy that is being shown by the current congress sarkar.
Kashmir is an Indian problem whether Indians like to hear that or not. They have to resolve this issue with kashmirs and the correct policy for India should be to work with Kashmiris first to neutralize any outside influence. The RSS/BJP pushed kashmiris into Pakistani hands whereas the current sarkar is working to pacify the kashmiris first because they realize that it is first and the foremost an Indian problem.
In the last three or four months, I have become an ardent admirer of PM Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi as I think they are both handling the relations with Pakistan part admirably and with a maturity that was lacking in the previous India government.



Ha! always-facing-the-floor-boy (Gujju) has a new nic.
Prashant???

Further...another popular misconception goes that RSS/VHP are `upper caste` organisations. And that the Hindutwa movement is upper caste dominated. But thats not true. Brahmins do not send their kids to RSS shakhas. Brahmins send their kids to convent schools. Brahmins do not indulge in communal violence. Brahmins never do any fighting. So who are the people who dominate RSS/VHP/Hindutwa philosophy ? Who are the people who fight for the hindu cause ?

#Narendra Modi - low caste hindu.
#Advani - casteless sindhi.
#Uma Bharthi - low caste hindu.
#Bal Thackrey - middle caste hindu.
#most of the sadhus in India , the sort you see in the Kumbh Mela- lower caste/middle castes
#The Kar Sevaks who broke that Babri Masjid - lower caste hindus.
#The Gujarathis who raped muslim women and killed muslim men in Gujarat - lower caste hindus. Mostly dalits.

Sridar , Netizen...

Caste discrimination no longer exists in the cities and towns of India...Here being a dalit is advantageous as it means access to 50% of the seats in colleges and 50% of government jobs.

I have never spent a great deal of time in rural India...but I am assuming on heresay that caste system exists there. But its not upper castes who discriminate against dalits , because most of the upper castes - the brahmins - have sold all their holdings and left the villages of India long time back. So it is actually the `Other Backward Castes` -OBCs -the Yadavs , Bhumihars , Gowdas - folks in the villages who have now filled up the void left behind by the upper castes. Not being as educated or enlightened as the brahmins...it is the OBCs who still carry on discriminating against those belonging to castes lower than theirs...and funnily enough the OBCs are also given reservation in jobs and colleges. OBCs on strength of their numbers , dominate the ruling political class.

My point is....contrary to popular perception , if caste discrimoination exists in India , its not perpetrated by the upper castes on the lower castes....it is infact perpetrated by the lower castes on the even lower castes....

The upper castes have moved on. As I said before , the brahmins are an endangered species in India. Within a decade from now , I am willing to bet that we will have more brahmins in US than in India...

re:#285 by Netizen
This topic has been discussed in the past. I said the same thing u are saying now but few Paksitanis here will believe u. They would just like to think that going nuclear was the best thing that happened to Pak in many many years.
Sridhar

re:#275 by tahmed32
Tahmed Sahib,
You are not going to change your stance on this. We have discussed this ad nauseum in the past. In a way, Pak`s tit-for-tat reply was inevitable, given the geopolitical situation. I also know that there is a lot of pride involved and most Pakistanis would like to say that their`s is the only Islamic nuclear power in the world. I think, a better way to approach this issue is to see who benefitted from being a nuclear power, India or Pak?
By being an overt nuclear power (from a covert one which India was in the past) and forcing Pak to follow suit, India ensured that Pak exposed its nuclear fallacies to the world. Pak was all along maintaining that it did not have any nuclear technology. Then it came out with nuclear explosions in 2 weeks. Everyone knew a covert operation has been going on and Pak gave final proof of that. Then came the expose about A.Q. Khan and his proliferation to North Korea and Iran. None other than former PM of Pak (Benazir Bhutto) has recently revealed how Mr Xeorx Khan passed on the nuclear tech to Iran. Nobody, i mean nobody believes that the Army was not in the know of things.
But Pak today has become a necessary ally for USA. Pak is doing USA`s dirty job of mopping up the terrorists. Mushy seems to be doing a good job of it and has earned his goodwill in US. Goodwill and another 2 years of term as President. And, he has been doing a good job of getting the most out of US while Pak is still needed. But the question most Pakis should be asking is: what after the war on terrorism is over? How long can Pak continue to depend on USA`s largesse based on its services? How long is this client-paymaster relation to continue?

India`s relationship with USA post-nuclear explosion has also seen ups and downs.

In the beginning, there were a lot of criticisms. One US Senator even said that India has not just shot itself in the foot but in the head as well. I remember only Henry Kissinger coming on T.V (with Lou Dobbs) to say that the world has nothing to fear from India being a nuclear state.
Slowly, India and US started talking. Talks between Jaswant Singh and Strobb Talbot have been one of the most wide ranging ever between 2 Foreign secretaries. As the dust settled down, i think US started seein India more as an ally in the area, even as a counterweight to China. There is now talk of sale of F16 and even transfer of technology. There is talk about sale of Patriot missile system. This is all incredible.
There is a clear shift in policies when dealing with the 2 countires.
The following is from an Editorial in the Daily Times:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_15-3-2005_pg3_1

(With India, the US is developing strategic ties; with Pakistan, it requires turning the country around and keeping it secure. Its relations with India cover a much-broader ambit — political, economic and military; with Pakistan, the primary aim is to monitor the country and keep it on the track where General Pervez Musharraf guided and put it since September 13, 2001. Pakistan also, in this policy thrust, becomes a very important state in the “war against terrorism”. This necessitates give-and-take within a framework in which Indo-US relations do not undergo any unnecessary and avoidable friction. In any case, the idea is to improve US ties with the two while also nudging them to improve their own ties and become less suspicious of each other’s motives.)
Given the change in the situation now, it becomes necessary for Pakistanis to reflect back and question the logic of nuclear explosion in the first place.
Sridhar

Re: # 281

``It just doesnt add up when you say that India wanted to provoke Pakistan to retaliate and thus get the sanctions lifted for both countries.``

I said pakistan was provoked to go for nuclear testing so that it would also end up getting stick rather than a carrot. Indian leadership must have realised the stupidity and hence the moratorium on the tests. I think Sharif went on for the explosions amid intense pressure from the public.

``His services to ensuring that India could never threaten Pakistan have gone totally unappreciated. :-) ``
As long as pak stays away from fomenting trouble india won`t threaten it. If pak continues then I am sorry the sub-continent couls still witness nuke war.
Also, i remember paks promise to denuclearise if india does so. What if india does that, may be then india will threaten it using its massive military buildup.
Once again, Pak had nuclear deterrent way back during Rajivs time. Why would Advani conduct the test and wait for pakistan to build and test the bomb in 2-3 weeks after indian tests. wouldn`t he rather attack pak when they did not have the bomb?

``While we Pakistanis are quick to criticise our leaders (and for good reason), our leadership has been strong enough to silence Advani 1998 and bring Vajpayee to Lahore. And to give India a clear cut response in 2002.``

It does not bode well if pakis think that they forced Vajpayee to come to Lahore. As long as pak doesn`t push in militants no one thinks much of Pakistan. Vajpayee just wanted to give peace a try. Not once but twice/thrice. He even invited Mushy to Agra, that too after kargil and when he (Mushy) was not even considered an legitimate head of the country. He was the one to purpose Srinagar-Mushaffarabad bus service. Indian leadership thinks to carry on other bussiness while keeping the issue of kashmir at bay, whereas pak leadership clings to it.
Leadership? Who was the leader during kargil? Sharif to the best of my knowledge didn`t even now what was happening there. It also doesn`t look good when the leader of the country (sharif) is deposed off unceremoniously and made to run for his life and brave soldiers who laid their lives for the country were left to rot in the enemy land?

What was the response in 2002 you are referring to?

tahmed32 #279

`` On 1., please look up the definition of ``pariah`` and then come talk to me. ``

What is a pariah ? It was not like Pakistan or Pakistanis was subject to diplomatic isolation, sporting boycotts or mass deportations before Sep-11 or May 1998. USA and Europe were importing billions of dollars of textiles per year from Pakistan throughout the 1990s.
Pakistan economic problems were a result of mismanagement, poor human resource development and poor economic infrastrucuture. What you got after Sep-11 was a breather from paying interest on your debt for 5-10 years. I do not think the West waived any debt you owed them. This waiver on interest payments and crack down on hawla schemes has led to a big boost in FOREX reserves.

`` On 2., please google ``Pakistan sanctions timeline`` and educate yourself on the timeline when sanctions were lifted (see the Brownback Amendments I and II of 1998/1999 in particular), and then come tell me I am ``wrong`` on the sanctions. ``

What sanctions are we talking about ? Pressler amendment ?? Pakistan did not obtain any weapons from USA because of Pressler amendment. That was true until Sep-11 2001. Even after lifting of ``sanctions`` Pakistan has not obtained anything of significant offensive value.
Pakistan has not obtained Blackhawk helicopters, F-16 fighter jets, AWACS aircraft or Patriot missiles. All of the mentioned items have been high on the wishlist of Pakistani defense ministry officials. Pakistan has gotten C-130 transport aircraft, a few Apache helicopters, communication equipment and light transport helicopters.

A better question to ask why did USA impose such a sweeping sanction regime like the Pressler amendment. I do not see the security of USA being degraded by selling Pakistan C-130 aircraft and a few F-16 spare parts. For that matter I do not see any drawbacks to US security in selling those aircraft to China.

`` On 3, please use common sense - do you seriously think any responsible government would trust its security to the goodwill of India? Why would any responsible government even chose not to have military parity and thus be able to deal with the other party from a position of equal strength?? ``

I never asked Pakistani state to entrust their security to others. Do not infer too much from nukes. They raise the bar for potential adversaries to attack Pakistan. They do not prevent war completely. If 9-11 hijackers decided to take out four nuclear power facilities in USA instead of their original targets I doubt Pakistani nukes would matter much.

To the degree they have been no conflicts between nuclear powers it is because nuclear powers were status quo powers and responsible states. Pakistan`s support for irredentist movements like the Taliban, tolerance of Al Qaida, nuclear proliferation does not make it a responsible state irrespective of what Bush/Powell/Rice say.

`` On 4, while I am sure it gives you emotional satisfaction to talk about the developed nations not wasting their energy on Pakistan vs the ``bigger fish``, the fact is that economic progress is not an either/or proposition. Nor is your point even relevant to what I am saying. ``

You get the impression from some Pakistanis that what they do is the center of attraction in the universe. Western Europe, USA and Japan have always provided assistance to lesser developed states throughout the world. The interest and amounts have varied time to time. The assistance has been from governments and also from private agents (individuals, NGOs etc.) I do not think there has been any sudden interest from anyone except USA. I would guess that USA is interested in Pakistan to finish off Osama, to control Afghanistan, to prevent Iran from getting nukes and maybe to build a gas pipeline to Central Asia. I still have not figured out USA rationale for Iraq invasion.

#282

I`m sorry, a few hours of reading will do no good in your case.

#280

Has it ever occurred to you that you beat even AlephNull in posting stupidity here?

Shallow end of the gene pool fool! Crap on a stick.

Netizen #276 It just doesnt add up when you say that India wanted to provoke Pakistan to retaliate and thus get the sanctions lifted for both countries. I dont think Advani was bluffing with his bluster. Anyway, water under the bridge.

The fact is, as I have said before on chowk, with enemies like Advani, Pakistan never needed any friends. His services to ensuring that India could never threaten Pakistan have gone totally unappreciated. :-)

On your concluding remarks:

``Hence, pak developing nukes was good for them but just ``testing`` them as a tit-for-tat reaction to indian tests didn`t make sense to me.``

I have already presented my case in the four points, and I cant imagine Pakistan getting a better deal if it had not responded tit-for-tat. So, let us agree to disagree.

`` If there would been a strong leadership in pak then the results may have been different.``

While we Pakistanis are quick to criticise our leaders (and for good reason), our leadership has been strong enough to silence Advani 1998 and bring Vajpayee to Lahore. And to give India a clear cut response in 2002. So, as far as I am concerned, Pakistani leadership has been as strong as needed when it comes to standing up to India when threatened by brute force. And that is good enough on this one important issue.

#279
``please google ``Pakistan sanctions timeline`` and educate yourself on the timeline when sanctions were lifted (see the Brownback Amendments I and II of 1998/1999 in particular), and then come tell me I am ``wrong`` on the sanctions.``

I would encourage you to do the same. believe me, a few hours of reading will be more enlightening to you than spewing thousands of inane posts here.

bbabu #277 you are merely wasting time now by claiming what i wrote is wrong when common sense and/or a quick google check would help you overcome your ignorance. Since you havent done this simple homework, let me help you.

On 1., please look up the definition of ``pariah`` and then come talk to me.

On 2., please google ``Pakistan sanctions timeline`` and educate yourself on the timeline when sanctions were lifted (see the Brownback Amendments I and II of 1998/1999 in particular), and then come tell me I am ``wrong`` on the sanctions.

On 3, please use common sense - do you seriously think any responsible government would trust its security to the goodwill of India? Why would any responsible government even chose not to have military parity and thus be able to deal with the other party from a position of equal strength??

On 4, while I am sure it gives you emotional satisfaction to talk about the developed nations not wasting their energy on Pakistan vs the ``bigger fish``, the fact is that economic progress is not an either/or proposition. Nor is your point even relevant to what I am saying.

While you are welcome to beat this dead horse (which has nothing to do with the topic of this article), but if you are to do so at least use some common sense instead of doing ``hawaii fire``. :-)

yo manto....

tell us how many stocks have accounted for the rise in the KSE

tell us which one stock has contributed a 68% rise in the KSE

tell us why foreign funds only have 200 million$ invested in the KSE...

inquiring minds want to know...

tahmed32 #275

`` 1. BJP changed its tune 180 degrees, from that of a bully to that of an enlightened neighbor. Vajpayee came to Lahore to pronounce that Pakistan was here to stay. This after a decade of failed attempts by Indian leaders to get Pakistan declared a pariah state, and perhaps just one year after Advanis bullying statements. ``

Pakistan has been a pariah state for most of the 1990s. Ignoring China nobody has sold Pakistan any sophisticated weapons. It is true still. The F-16s are still pending. They might not matter when they get delivered eventually.

`` 2. International sanctions (which, it was universally agreed, hit Pakistan far more than India) were lifted through a series of congressional amendments almost immediately after Pakistan became a nuclear power. ``

Wrong. Sanctions were removed only after Sep-11.

`` 3. The effectiveness of Pakistan`s nuclear defense strategy was proved in 2002, when a million man Indian army marched up to our borders and Pakistan reacted in no uncertain terms by announcing its policy of first use of nuclear weapons if necessary for national security followed up with a couple of perfectly timed missile tests. ``

Why should India attack Pakistan if Pakistan stop its low intensity war in Kashmir ? by all indications Pakistan has ended support temporarily for militants. I do not see Pakistan resuming low intensity war. I think pakistani establishment is tired of fighting India. They are trying to extract something out of nothing or trying to save face.

`` 4. Most significant, as i was writing to YLH (mantolives) earlier, I cant recall a more favorable climate for Pakistan internationally and regionally than nowadays - the world now has a stake in a stable Pakistan as much as we Pakistanis have always had a stake. ``

Replace world with USA. I do not think Europeans, Japanese or others are wasting any energy on Pakistan. They have bigger fish to fry.

`` What would have been the alternative if Pakistan had not demonstrated its capacity?? Your guess is as good as mine. While much is made of Indian posters of this favorable international climate being the result of 9/11, a careful review of the above obvious facts would indicate that 9/11 had nothing to do with it. If anything, Pakistan may well have been overrun by India even before 9/11 (i.e. in 1999) or after 9/11 (by claiming it was doing this as part of the war on terror). ``

Pakistani nuclear deterrent is irelevant in the long run. Missile defense, nuclear proliferation and economic issues will drown out the relevance of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.

Re: # 275

``and perhaps just one year after Advanis bullying statements``
as i said earlier it was to provoke pakistan to salvage indias situation. I guess it worked well for india

``This after a decade of failed attempts by Indian leaders to get Pakistan declared a pariah state, and perhaps just one year after Advanis bullying statements. ``

India would try to get pak labelled as a terrorist state even now, if there is more bloodshed. It was not successful and won`t be successful because u.s. has its own axe to grind. India didn`t want pak to be labelled a terrorist state because it was nuke capable but because it had training camps which now every one (even Paks) admit and rue.

``after Pakistan became a nuclear power. ``

Pakistan was already a nuclear power just as israel is. Thats what my point was, by just concluding a few nuclear tests several days after india, didn`t make it nuclear overnight .

`The effectiveness of Pakistan`s nuclear defense strategy was proved in 2002, when a million man Indian army marched up to our borders and Pakistan reacted in no uncertain terms by announcing its policy of first use of nuclear weapons if necessary for national security followed up with a couple of perfectly timed missile tests. ``

It worked well before too, in 1986-87, during ``Exercise Brasstacks``, hence the capability was there well before the Chagai tests.

`` the world now has a stake in a stable Pakistan as much as we Pakistanis have always had a stake. ``
I will take that with a pinch of salt. Even u.s. used to say that it wants a stable soviet union so that its nukes won`t go to the black markets but it did everything to bring it down. Pakistan will remain united not because the world wants it, but because pakistanis want it. Even China won`t care if pak disintegrates into 3-4 provinces. As they didn`t care during 71. They will prop punjab against india and buy cheap gas from baluchistan.

``If anything, Pakistan may well have been overrun by India even before 9/11 (i.e. in 1999) or after 9/11 (by claiming it was doing this as part of the war on terror). ``

Pak had taken care of it since Benazirs time. India would have run over pak in 86-87 itself. Wouldn`t have waited till 97.

``instead done its testing in secret - all I can say is that India already tried that after its original nuclear test under indira gandhi (as i recall) which it claimed was a ``peaceful explosion`` - that fooled no one, and certainly not Pakistan which simply boosted its efforts at attaining nuclear parity with India. ``

By secretly I meant like the Israelis, do the required without boasting. Whereas the celebration after indian tests were self defeating. As paks nuclear effort was to neutralise indias conventional army, indias nuclear force was to neutralise chinese. Anyway india has maintained that it is paks right to develop nukes and we don`t have problem with that.

Hence, pak developing nukes was good for them but just ``testing`` them as a tit-for-tat reaction to indian tests didn`t make sense to me. If there would been a strong leadership in pak then the results may have been different.

Netizen #273 I have been around this bush a few times before with posters from India. To put it in persepctive, we are of course discussing a hypothetical here (what might have been), and so it is an academic point anyway - but this is chowk where our motto is ``Beating Dead Horses Is Our Specialty``. But lets go over this one last time anyway :-)

The facts are quite obvious: AFTER Pakistan refused to bend to intense pressure from Clinton and the rest of the world to ``take the high road`` and not respond to India`s provocative actions, and instead chose to give ``a fitting reply``:

1. BJP changed its tune 180 degrees, from that of a bully to that of an enlightened neighbor. Vajpayee came to Lahore to pronounce that Pakistan was here to stay. This after a decade of failed attempts by Indian leaders to get Pakistan declared a pariah state, and perhaps just one year after Advanis bullying statements.

2. International sanctions (which, it was universally agreed, hit Pakistan far more than India) were lifted through a series of congressional amendments almost immediately after Pakistan became a nuclear power.

3. The effectiveness of Pakistan`s nuclear defense strategy was proved in 2002, when a million man Indian army marched up to our borders and Pakistan reacted in no uncertain terms by announcing its policy of first use of nuclear weapons if necessary for national security followed up with a couple of perfectly timed missile tests.

4. Most significant, as i was writing to YLH (mantolives) earlier, I cant recall a more favorable climate for Pakistan internationally and regionally than nowadays - the world now has a stake in a stable Pakistan as much as we Pakistanis have always had a stake.

What would have been the alternative if Pakistan had not demonstrated its capacity?? Your guess is as good as mine. While much is made of Indian posters of this favorable international climate being the result of 9/11, a careful review of the above obvious facts would indicate that 9/11 had nothing to do with it. If anything, Pakistan may well have been overrun by India even before 9/11 (i.e. in 1999) or after 9/11 (by claiming it was doing this as part of the war on terror).

As for your suggestion for India to have made the mistake of chest thumping after 1998 and instead done its testing in secret - all I can say is that India already tried that after its original nuclear test under indira gandhi (as i recall) which it claimed was a ``peaceful explosion`` - that fooled no one, and certainly not Pakistan which simply boosted its efforts at attaining nuclear parity with India.

You are welcome to agree or disagree on these facts and logical conclusions - as I said, the entire point is moot.

Re: # 272

``That solution may not be to either party`s liking. It is better to sort out the problem now than to wait for someone else to do it for u. ``

I am not quite sure of that. Pakistan has always clamored for a multi-party dialogue for a long time, they would even be happy if Cameron would take part in such talks. Its, India who always maintained it to be a bilateral issue. India has resisted/declined any kind of pressure and requests from all quarters for a long time now. Especially now, when things are looking rosy economically/diplomatically I don`t think india will waver. All indians irrespective of the issues they have with each other vehemently support the countrys policy towards kashmir which was seen during Kargil war. Hence it won`t be that easy to make india accept a not-so-favorable solution, just as China won`t be bogged down in its pursuits of Taiwan.

Re: # 263 tahmed

I have noticed that you have always maintained that Pak thwarted BJPs bravado by its own nuclear explosion and thus gave a befitting reply to Advani. My understanding is very different. I am of the view that Pakistan would have benefitted immensely if Nawaz would not have ordered the nuke tests. It was indias (BJPs) big blunder by self-proclaimimg itself to be a nuclear power. Infact, just a few years before that PM PVN Rao (Congress) himself had ordered the tests but the preparations were detected by CIA and under american pressure it was shelved. India under BJP should have conducted the tests (if needed) amid secrecy and should not have run to the town proclaiming to be a ``superpower``. But it seems there was nothing going for the BJP govern on various fronts hence this stupidity.
Once the sanctions were slapped on India and the country was in the international dog house, it became imperative to make Islamabad also commit the same mistake. Hence Advani dangling a sword. Pakistan had nukes since Benazirs time (80`s?), it would have received a lot of economic/military help from all quarters. Internationally, it would be praised for being a mature and responsible country. In the end it would still have nukes.
Just imagine how different the situation would been. Hence in order to prevent this and to make Pakistan commit the same blunder that india did, there were provocative statements.

re:#253 by Netizen
The other side of the Kashmir tangle is that if the 2 countries do not sort out the problem, a solution may be imposed upon them by an outside power (i don` have to tell u who that power is). That solution may not be to either party`s liking. It is better to sort out the problem now than to wait for someone else to do it for u.
Ever heard the story of the Arab and the camel and how the Arab got ousted from his tent?
Sridhar

re:#254 by HP
I did not dispute the genuine hospitality shown by Pakistanis (and now being reciprocated by Indians) during the visit of Indians on various occasions. I had not heard of Midday and had not read any article by this guy Aakar Patel, so naturally i was curious...
Also, the pitch i am making is: friendship is based on a number of factors including convergence of interests, ideologies, strong economic relationships etc and not just based on emotions, which seems to be the case right now.
sridhar