Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What happens if Pakistan collapses

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Oracle
    replied
    Originally posted by Sheeunnlorida View Post
    No power can collapse until and unless Allah almighty is with Pakistan
    You mean, Allah in Pakistan = American dollars + Saudi oil + Chinese veto/Pak's back?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sheeunnlorida
    replied
    Originally posted by ambidex View Post
    India has heavily fenced the border. If Pakistan disintegrates I want an RW government in India that can effectively stop refugees pouring into our borders.

    Coming back to so-called disintegration.

    1. Pakistanis are not a kind of Race that can execute a revolution. They have never done in their history.

    2. Islam is quite a strong binding force. Their experience of East Pakistan does not negate this binding force. Anyone who ignores this force because of the creation of Bangladesh is either naive or Indian Congress-I apologist.

    3. Mainly an agrarian society they can live off the land quite well.

    4. Without overt external military intervention (Deterred by Nukes), no insurgency will survive to leave alone gaining a momentum that can lead to the disintegration.
    No power can collapse until and unless Allah almighty is with Pakistan

    Leave a comment:


  • Double Edge
    replied
    Originally posted by Oracle View Post
    Baby steps huh. Where is the China factor in all these?
    This is the bit that i wanted to see if Rishabh spoke about. He is entirely silent on what role China would play. I don't know if that is an oversight or does he believe China would just watch and let the Paks sink.

    He says we need agreements in place with the Saudis, UAE & the Americans

    China does not come up

    Leave a comment:


  • Oracle
    replied
    Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    We did not talk about Nalapat wanting a military alliance with the US. Here he is talking about it explicitly.

    He's been against the S400 purchase for this reason
    I was saying that that we (I) talked about US having our back and we getting PoK back.

    Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    Some would say baby steps first.

    Also I find more discussion in the media on this point.

    Ever since govt passed a resolution people are under the impression it will happen or we should make it happen.

    Sub Suwamy's idea is we can handle Afghanistan if the Americans let us get PO J&K back.
    Is there an American alternative for the S-400? If yes, and if US is willing to sell us, go ahead. How do we then pacify the Russians? Maybe buy some frigates, tanks. Okay done then. I agree with Nalapat for the time being.

    Baby steps huh. Where is the China factor in all these?

    Right now the world is in flux. US vs China. US vs Iran. US got bigger fish to fry now. And if US backs India now, the Dems would put Trump at the stakes and burn him, oh, and burn India too. Pramila Jaypal? Illan Omar? And the big question is what can the US not do in Afghanistan, that they would want us to do there, for a return gift of PoK. It doesn't make sense. Nor does Swamy's logic.

    There are 3 scenarios that I can think of where disintegration of Pak is possible:

    #1. Internal unrest inside Pak so much so that the world takes notice of that, refugees entering India in the Lacs, and we say enough, we're going in. Others join us.
    #2. China finally accept and is contend with the number 2 position, and US-China relations are on an upswing.
    #3. Kaboom happens inside major cities in China, which is then traced back to Pakistan, it's Army and the notorious ISI.

    #1 is where we will have the support of all major powers minus China. Good to go. But for that, unrest should be created.
    #2 & #3 depends on our diplomatic skills to paint Pakistan as the instigator of all terrorist evils that befalls on every neighbouring country as well as US and the West in general, aiming at China in general. We have done that since the 90s, but not a single major power is talking about breaking Pak up, and is rather casual about Pak sponsored terrorism. And this, breaking up of Pakistan, this plan, should come from China.

    Every major power tells India to manage the Pak sponsored terrorism issue, and not do anything more. Which is why we got our pilot back within 2 days. Can India get back PoK by itself. I think it can, but this victory will be pyrrhic.

    Pakistan has nukes, half a million strong army, 1000s of mercenaries, mad mullahs, jihad and islam. It's a very combustible mix.

    2 questions now:

    #1. Illhan Omar had an affair with a married dude?
    #2. Why does no country want another Islamic country to have nukes?

    Leave a comment:


  • Double Edge
    replied
    Originally posted by Oracle View Post
    Yes. We have talked it much earlier than Nalapat thought about it, yes?
    We did not talk about Nalapat wanting a military alliance with the US. Here he is talking about it explicitly.

    He's been against the S400 purchase for this reason

    But I was not talking about taking PoK back. I was talking about the thread title.
    Some would say baby steps first.

    Also I find more discussion in the media on this point.

    Ever since govt passed a resolution people are under the impression it will happen or we should make it happen.

    Sub Suwamy's idea is we can handle Afghanistan if the Americans let us get PO J&K back.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 12 Jan 20,, 11:49.

    Leave a comment:


  • Oracle
    replied
    Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    Nalapat has another idea.

    One that is likely to lead to resistance and abuse for him.

    He figures Bangladesh was created because we had the Soviets on side.

    Therefore to get back PoK means the same with the Americans.

    We already have access to ally level hardware with STA2

    Only the wedding ring is missing. Yes ?
    Yes. We have talked it much earlier than Nalapat thought about it, yes?

    But I was not talking about taking PoK back. I was talking about the thread title.

    Leave a comment:


  • Double Edge
    replied
    Originally posted by Oracle View Post
    To disintegrate Pakistan into many pieces, US+Russia+China must be on the same side. Else, it's not possible.
    Nalapat has another idea.

    One that is likely to lead to resistance and abuse for him.

    He figures Bangladesh was created because we had the Soviets on side.

    Therefore to get back PoK means the same with the Americans.

    We already have access to ally level hardware with STA2

    Only the wedding ring is missing. Yes ?
    Last edited by Double Edge; 11 Jan 20,, 20:52.

    Leave a comment:


  • Oracle
    replied
    To disintegrate Pakistan into many pieces, US+Russia+China must be on the same side. Else, it's not possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • Oracle
    replied
    So the troll flotilla of Amibidex, a.k.a. Hit n Run in Defenceforumindia, sank here at WAB. Good riddance to pathetic extremist right-wing bullshit.

    Leave a comment:


  • Oracle
    replied
    ambidex, aka Hit n Run, is there a source for your signature? The one below:

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot 2020-01-05 at 22.14.44.png
Views:	1
Size:	43.6 KB
ID:	1478577

    Thanks. I'm curious.

    Leave a comment:


  • Double Edge
    replied
    Originally posted by ambidex View Post
    Islam is a dynamic political phenomenon, therefore, it does not override politics when it itself is a political tool. Any Indian who is contemplating to disintegrate Pakistan has to find a way to tackle this political ideology (One factor out of many others).

    I hope I am clearer this time.
    ok, so what i understood is islam is the binding force that will keep Pakistan together ?

    How can Islam be used to override power politics here. How will it be used as a political tool.

    Keep in mind we're not talking about re-integration of Pakistan with India.

    Just a bunch of smaller entities with a degree of autonomy in most matters other than defense, communications & foreign policy.

    How do we keep the peace ? we need a Marshall plan of sorts.

    Something that becomes imaginable if we are much larger an economy than today.

    Failing that another Bangladesh like country without a military that considers us a primary threat.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 05 Jan 20,, 16:46.

    Leave a comment:


  • ambidex
    replied
    Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
    Then what is your basis for this statement that islam is a binding force that must not be ignored?
    I do not understand your question? When I gave univariate reason for the creation of Bangladesh? If you are talking about the disintegration of Pakistan then I gave multiple reasons against the motion, not just one.

    I asked you to clarify before responding because i was not sure where you were going.
    My limited point was that Two nation Theory is still alive and kicking even after the creation of Bangladesh oppose to the popular conclusion among Indian left and Congress-I apologists that it got negated after when East Pakistanis parted their ways from the West Pakistanis.

    When partition was about to happen guess which group opposed it? the Mullahs because their flock would be divided.
    Though it is factually incorrect I will answer it on its face value. The fact was 'All India Muslim league' won all Muslim constituencies in the central assembly as well as most of the Muslim constituencies in the provincial legislatures. The vote opened the path to Pakistan.

    So coming back to your anecdotal statement. I do not need to guess some ragtag romantic notion that they opposed it. The only reality is the outcome that Pakistan got created. It is the same moronic (Leftist) slogan we see these days at CAA protests that we opposed the Islamic state in 1947 and will oppose Hindu state now. If you opposed it then how come you voted for it and how come the Islamic state got created? Another romantic propaganda which is quite prevalent that Muslim stayed back or left Pakistan for their love for the secularism and India.

    In '69 Congress was split into Congress(O)rganisation & Congress(R)equisition.

    Indira contested under Congress(R) and won by a landslide in '71.

    In '77 Indira ran under Congress(I) and lost.

    I don't believe in two nation theory but have to live with its consequences.

    I'm curious why you construe that position as subduing Hindu nationalism because i don't see any connection with it whatsoever.

    This is about being secular. Simple as...

    I don't know what 'Hindu Pakistan' means either?
    If you do not believe in something how can you suffer its consequences? Nitpicking apart quoting each of your disjointed assertions will make it more confusing and I am already blaming myself for not being clearer with my opening post here.

    I will reassert my point again.

    Two Nation Theory = Islam

    This theory was first given by Savarkar or Jinnah? No by Karl Marx.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DViBDR7XcAEStrp.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	81.1 KB
ID:	1478576

    https://twitter.com/ARanganathan72/s...61237170982912

    Creation of Bangladesh does not kill or make Two Nation Theory defunct not even the so-called disintegration of Pakistan will. Islam is a dynamic political phenomenon, therefore, it does not override politics when it itself is a political tool. Any Indian who is contemplating to disintegrate Pakistan has to find a way to tackle this political ideology (One factor out of many others).

    I hope I am clearer this time.
    Last edited by ambidex; 05 Jan 20,, 15:11.

    Leave a comment:


  • Double Edge
    replied
    Originally posted by ambidex View Post
    Any analyst worth his salt will never explain a problem or a phenomenon or a conclusion based on univariate cause or data.
    Then what is your basis for this statement that islam is a binding force that must not be ignored ?

    i asked you to clarify before responding because i was not sure where you were going.

    When partition was about to happen guess which group opposed it ? the Mullahs because their flock would be divided.

    Same thing happened in '71

    Were they able to stop it ? no hence politics overriding religion

    Two Nation theory was negated or defeated with the creation of Bangladesh is a Congress-I's hogwash to sell its brand and subdue Hindu nationalism. The phrase 'Hindu Pakistan' is an articulation out of this bigger bluff.
    In '69 Congress was split into Congress(O)rganisation & Congress(R)equisition.

    Indira contested under Congress(R) and won by a landslide in '71. 352 seats won by Congress(R)

    In '77 Indira ran under Congress(I) and lost. Morarji won 298 seats. That record fell last year.

    I don't believe in two nation theory but have to live with its consequences.

    I'm curious why you construe that position as subduing Hindu nationalism because i don't see any connection with it whatsoever.

    This is about being secular. Simple as...

    I don't know what 'Hindu Pakistan' means either ?
    Last edited by Double Edge; 05 Jan 20,, 15:18.

    Leave a comment:


  • ambidex
    replied
    Moving on Ignoring Obnoxious troll.

    Reupping my points:

    1. Islam
    2. Nukes
    3. Geography and strategic location
    4. Alliance with China
    5. Agri land, abundant water resources and consistent good rainy season.
    6. Good established political, executive, judicial institutes backed by Constitution and democracy.
    7. Proactive diplomacy, OIC, SCO and many more memberships and participant in UN peacekeeping etc.

    Any serious poster who is interested in this debate please add your points against or for this scenario so that more defined debate can be done.

    I am not sure what is the forum policy on discussing disintegration of a nation but I can add some thoughts on how all these strong points can be weakened and how Pakistan will react especially to the interventions made by India.

    Leave a comment:


  • ambidex
    replied
    Moving on ignoring obnoxious troll.
    .................................................. ................

    Rather deliberating on disintegration more plausible discussion can be on destabilization. Since the thread is mentored by 'what if' scenarios the Disintegration to me seems very difficult and no recent examples are available where a nation that is the size and shape of Pakistan has disintegrated.

    Therefore after adding two prime factors of Islam and Nuclear deterrence, I am inclined to add manageable landmass, geographic (strategic) location and China factors to oppose this motion.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X