I wonder if OBL
-
Slacker007 wrote:
Whether or not our military went about this operation the right way, means absolutely nothing to me
Actually, it means a lot. The US military tried to kill him several times in the past. Pakistan was purportedly an ally of the US for each such operation that was executed (that cost HUGE amounts of money), and the US shared military intelligence with Pakistan as they "needed" to know what, and how is going to happen too. This time around, it appeared that the US had a little doubt over Pakistan's "support" and they went on with the operation WITHOUT keeping the Pakistani government in loop. The result was obvious, and it gives rise to many questions. As an Indian who has lived for several years next to a country that harbours terrorists, I can tell you that you guys did the correct thing in distrusting Pakistan in this operation.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
As an Indian who has lived for several years next to a country that harbours terrorists, I can tell you that you guys did the correct thing in distrusting Pakistan in this operation.
Yup you are right. Pakistan is harbouring the terrorists. Out of top 10 most wanted person's list issued by USA, none is a Pakistani but there is an indian. But still Pakistan is responsible for that. Why is that so? If I include Osama Bin Laden in the top most wanted list, this will bring the count to 11, only 3 are muslims, but Islam is potrayed as terrorist religion. What are you to say about remaining 8?
modified on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 10:21 AM
-
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
As an Indian who has lived for several years next to a country that harbours terrorists, I can tell you that you guys did the correct thing in distrusting Pakistan in this operation.
Yup you are right. Pakistan is harbouring the terrorists. Out of top 10 most wanted person's list issued by USA, none is a Pakistani but there is an indian. But still Pakistan is responsible for that. Why is that so? If I include Osama Bin Laden in the top most wanted list, this will bring the count to 11, only 3 are muslims, but Islam is potrayed as terrorist religion. What are you to say about remaining 8?
modified on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 10:21 AM
Umair Feroze wrote:
Yup you are right. Pakistan is harbouring the terrorists.
Yes, that is right, even if you don't acknowledge that.
Umair Feroze wrote:
Out of top 10 most wanted person's list issued by USA, none is a Pakistani but there is an indian. But still Pakistan is responsible for that. Why is that so?
I said Pakistan is "responsible" for what? I said that Pakistan helps those terrorists hide in, and operate from there. Are you even TRYING to tell that Pakistan does not have terrorists of their own? Like, by blaming that there's an Indian in the most wanted list, you think you could make Pakistan look any better? What about the arseholes who came in and carried out the Mumbai attack? The bastard who's eating our food in our prison, Kasab... He's a Pakistani, you know? And all the ones who were involved in that operation (and many other terrorist operations) are Pakistanis.
Umair Feroze wrote:
but Islam is potrayed as terrorist religion.
I NEVER said Islam as a terrorist religion. You're making that shit up, because you don't have a point to argue at all. While feel bad for the common men living there, I will be glad if more operations like geronimo gets carried out within Pakistan, by the US and other countries, and all terrorists were killed like pigs. That way, may be the good people there will get a new life.
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
-
I have a feeling if it was nuclear, there would be a Chinese response. They are supplying munitions to anyone they can, but hypocritically, it's a big no-no for the U.S. to sell arms to Taiwan. Pak wants to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, but I don't know if both India and Pak would be allowed.
Craigslist Troll: litaly@comcast.net "I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
wizardzz wrote:
I have a feeling if it was nuclear, there would be a Chinese response.
Oh boy, a nuclear fallout on our neighboring country will effect us and maybe our country will also be dragged into this(US will need our support too). But still I think China won't respond, or else a Third World War will be imminent. About the SCO, I just read about it and think that India which is doing good economically and with its strong military and also having closer ties with Russia and Tajikistan should become a permanent member of SCO. But how come Pakistan being a terrorist sate even got an "Observer" status? Ya I know because of closer ties with China but that should not be the case. Also I see SCO as a counter to NATO, a good thing actually. I am a great fan of Russia(more of Soviet) and there should be an alliance to counter the NATO forces. One good reason for India to join to have a greater balance for SCO.
The more anger towards the past you carry in your heart, the less capable you are of loving in the present. My Blog![^]
-
wizardzz wrote:
I have a feeling if it was nuclear, there would be a Chinese response.
Oh boy, a nuclear fallout on our neighboring country will effect us and maybe our country will also be dragged into this(US will need our support too). But still I think China won't respond, or else a Third World War will be imminent. About the SCO, I just read about it and think that India which is doing good economically and with its strong military and also having closer ties with Russia and Tajikistan should become a permanent member of SCO. But how come Pakistan being a terrorist sate even got an "Observer" status? Ya I know because of closer ties with China but that should not be the case. Also I see SCO as a counter to NATO, a good thing actually. I am a great fan of Russia(more of Soviet) and there should be an alliance to counter the NATO forces. One good reason for India to join to have a greater balance for SCO.
The more anger towards the past you carry in your heart, the less capable you are of loving in the present. My Blog![^]
-
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
As an Indian who has lived for several years next to a country that harbours terrorists, I can tell you that you guys did the correct thing in distrusting Pakistan in this operation.
Yup you are right. Pakistan is harbouring the terrorists. Out of top 10 most wanted person's list issued by USA, none is a Pakistani but there is an indian. But still Pakistan is responsible for that. Why is that so? If I include Osama Bin Laden in the top most wanted list, this will bring the count to 11, only 3 are muslims, but Islam is potrayed as terrorist religion. What are you to say about remaining 8?
modified on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 10:21 AM
Umair Feroze wrote:
Yup you are right. Pakistan is harbouring the terrorists.
Dear neighbor, your country is sheltering terrorist in your western region(near Afghanistan border("safe haven for terrorists) and along the border(LOC) of India. You have committed various crimes in NWFP region which does need international attention. Your country has funded militancy in Kashmir and has 800-900 active militant camps. Time to destroy them using surgical air strikes which should have happened after Mumbai attacks. Dawood is partying in your country which tops the most wanted man in the list. Man your country will be ruined and is in the process of destabilization if you don't stop sheltering and funding them. You have nukes too, if your country gets overrun by the terrorists then the bombs will be with terrorists. Your country is surviving with aid given by US. Your "sovereignty" was put to test by American forces and you couldn't do anything. And the world is not targeting Islam, as I don't think Islam preaches violence. Your country is doing nothing against the terrorists and US has been forced to do so. They got justice, now its our turn. :suss:
The more anger towards the past you carry in your heart, the less capable you are of loving in the present. My Blog![^]
-
I also feel China won't respond - not very much anyway. They'd risk losing a big part of their consuming market. There's no way they'd do that.