India Foreign Policy Thread

[Master Chief]

We troll you and we're masters of diplomacy. Both are not mutually exclusive.

Being in a state of permanent pathological delusion is also not mutually exclusive from either of the two traits you have described.

 

[Distant_Observer]

I would rather not answer your questions. Today, I came back after months of absence, after getting banned. I didn't even know that my ban was now lifted until I opened the forum today.

All I can say is that Pakistanis trying to be nice with Indians, like sharing condolences on Tejas' incident, is a waste of time. When you know Indians are wishing your complete destruction. In recent times, they have stirred up troubles in Baluchistan. Now they are repeating it in KPK through Afghanistan. And today, Rajnath spoke about taking away Sind. They had been mouthing about GB and Kashmir for months.

Their plans are very clear; they are not mincing words.

Here were Pakistanis on May 25; despite open attacks by the Indians, Pakistani ministers were talking about restraint and only downing the jets which unloaded their arsenals on Pakistani soil.
I was banned for asking these questions. Everything I wrote is becoming true, and in the very near future, Pakistan definitely will face another prospect of war with India.
Whether they will repeat the same mistakes remains to be seen.

They are looking at the gains Russia made in Ukraine and would like to do the same.

But they are not capable. They were not capable in the 1960s and they are certainly not capable now.

 

[Alex]

Jokers ruling India.

Pathetic religious fanatics and PHUTOO..

Have a war full scale and take your lands back....have some balls na-mardo......

To understand Indians' mindsets, one has to look at the map of sub-content before the Brits started to ingress.

There was no country called India. There were smaller states. Mostly, the Muslim states in North, North West, South West, North and North East like Bengal, and then in the south like Deccan and Mysore. In between there were Marhatas smaller states.
The British created what is now India after capturing the areas one by one.
Therefore, the Indian claim that Pakistan is separated from India is fake and false, not supported by the history.
Pakistanis and now what are Bangladeshis were always ruling themselves before the British. They definitely were not part of any country called "India".
If Muslims were ruling over you, how would you become their ruling state? When the Brits took over what is now given the name India, it became part of the "British Empire", not the other way around. So why are the standards different for Muslim rulers?

Indians would never say that Britain was part of India. Thus, with the same logic, Pakistan and Bangladesh were never part of India. India, as a matter of fact, never existed as a country.
The areas were there, these are land they didn't appear all of a sudden from the skies.

That's why the Indians used the term "Akhand Bharat", not India. On the basis that this is God-given Hindu land. For that, they try to go back thousands of years.
Everyone should stop and think: which other people try to claim a land based on thousands-of-years-old claims? Israel.

Therefore, without a shadow of a doubt, the aims of both India and Israel are identical. One wants "Greater Israel" and the other "Akhand Bharat", based on thousands of years old claims. No coincidences that both are working hands in gloves now.
Pakistanis all around the world should be spreading these facts on social media for the world to realise that Indians are playing the same dangerous games as Israel.

 

[Foinikas]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

20 million in Karachi alone. Some 56 million in the whole province. I don't think they want to join India. And it will be hard to conquer them with force. At most,the Sindhis would prefer to be independent,than join India. What's this guy,anyway?

 

[vasanthm]

To understand Indians' mindsets, one has to look at the map of sub-content before the Brits started to ingress.

There was no country called India. There were smaller states. Mostly, the Muslim states in North, North West, South West, North and North East like Bengal, and then in the south like Deccan and Mysore. In between there were Marhatas smaller states.
The British created what is now India after capturing the areas one by one.
Therefore, the Indian claim that Pakistan is separated from India is fake and false, not supported by the history.
Pakistanis and now what are Bangladeshis were always ruling themselves before the British. They definitely were not part of any country called "India".
If Muslims were ruling over you, how would you become their ruling state? When the Brits took over what is now given the name India, it became part of the "British Empire", not the other way around. So why are the standards different for Muslim rulers?

Indians would never say that Britain was part of India. Thus, with the same logic, Pakistan and Bangladesh were never part of India. India, as a matter of fact, never existed as a country.
The areas were there, these are land they didn't appear all of a sudden from the skies.

That's why the Indians used the term "Akhand Bharat", not India. On the basis that this is God-given Hindu land. For that, they try to go back thousands of years.
Everyone should stop and think: which other people try to claim a land based on thousands-of-years-old claims? Israel.

Therefore, without a shadow of a doubt, the aims of both India and Israel are identical. One wants "Greater Israel" and the other "Akhand Bharat", based on thousands of years old claims. No coincidences that both are working hands in gloves now.
Pakistanis all around the world should be spreading these facts on social media for the world to realise that Indians are playing the same dangerous games as Israel.

The British ruled the territory, we ended that rule, and we decide our future now. Medieval conquests or foreign dynasties don’t give anyone modern ownership rights, especially when many of those rulers weren’t even rooted in this land.

India exists because its people built and defended it after independence. What we choose this country to be is our sovereign decision and if we decide it will be shaped by Hindu civilisation, then that’s what it will be.

 

[Alex]

Your angle is wrong. Diplomacy is not everything put together. Your anger towards Jaishankar is misguided and misplaced. He does his part well.

Tell you what diplomacy is, selling Russian gas and oil to Ukraine during war. Cause our diplomacy is supposed to benefit us. Like it does.

Correct. Indians always get the right end of the stick. Even if it is pushed in at an undesirable place by President Trump, not once but repeatedly.
Diplomacy is a shining example when your PM hides himself and doesn't answer and respond to now over 50 insulting comments by President Trump.
Avoid every international meeting where President Trump is attending.

 

[Alex]

The British ruled the territory, we ended that rule, and we decide our future now. Medieval conquests or foreign dynasties don’t give anyone modern ownership rights, especially when many of those rulers weren’t even rooted in this land.

India exists because its people built and defended it after independence. What we choose this country to be is our sovereign decision and if we decide it will be shaped by Hindu civilisation, then that’s what it will be.

My point was very simple. Indians are wrong to say that Pakistan separated from India. Pakistan and what is now Bangladesh were never part of an entity now called India.
The Indians never say that Britain was part of the "Indian Empire". So why different standards? The British ruled for just around 200 years; the Muslim empires were there for 1000 years.
But incredibly hypocritical Indians, like Rajnath, always say that they would take their land back.
No, it has never been your land, not even Kashmir. It was an independent state.

 

[vasanthm]

Correct. Indians always get the right end of the stick. Even if it is pushed in at an undesirable place by President Trump, not once but repeatedly.
Diplomacy is a shining example when your PM hides himself and doesn't answer and respond to now over 50 insulting comments by President Trump.
Avoid every international meeting where President Trump is attending.

Trump tried calling Modi multiple times and got silence, it was in the news. Meanwhile, the moment Washington whistled, your PM was in the White House polishing shoes for a photo op. And just to round it off, Trump himself has already said he plans to visit India in 2026. So clearly, he knows where the real weight is.

---

 

[vasanthm]

My point was very simple. Indians are wrong to say that Pakistan separated from India. Pakistan and what is now Bangladesh were never part of an entity now called India.
The Indians never say that Britain was part of the "Indian Empire". So why different standards? The British ruled for just around 200 years; the Muslim empires were there for 1000 years.
But incredibly hypocritical Indians, like Rajnath, always say that they would take their land back.
No, it has never been your land, not even Kashmir. It was an independent state.

Technically you’re not wrong, even Jinnah objected to the name India because he knew how the perception game works. But perception does matter. The British left behind one administrative unit called India, the world recognised it as India, and the successor state carried the name forward. That’s how international continuity works.

You can debate medieval maps forever, but modern legitimacy comes from who inherited the mantle and that wasn’t Pakistan.

---

 

[Master Chief]

The British created what is now India after capturing the areas one by one.
Therefore, the Indian claim that Pakistan is separated from India is fake and false, not supported by the history.
Pakistanis and now what are Bangladeshis were always ruling themselves before the British. They definitely were not part of any country called "India".

I applaud this solid and rigorous interpretation of historical realities.

The independent Republics of Pakistan and India were birthed at the same time from out of a conglomerated imperial possession owned by Britain.

India's fake tears shed over "a divided nation" or a "partitioned nation" or their "lost lands" are based on fabrications.

Utter fabrications spread by a cult of brahminist revisionists.

There is absolutely no academic, lawful, or historical basis on which to regard the independent entity of the Indian Secular Republic as ever having had any "claim" over lands beyond those defined in 1947. On the contrary - Delhi actually aggressively, unlawfully, and violently annexed territories that were not even a part of this newly birthed Secular Republic (including Jammu, part of Kashmir, Junagadh, Hyderabad, and Goa). The return of Delhi's annexed lands is long overdue.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

no water in indus is yours build it on the three rivers allocated to you , then we wont have any problems

Read the treaty man. 20% of the water belongs to us as per treaty. Also there won't be any problems that we can't solve we have solved a lot of problems in the past.

 

[Vikramaditya1]

The return of Delhi's annexed lands is long overdue.

Yee, we like to see who is going to try.

 

[hasssanali8998]

Read the treaty man. 20% of the water belongs to us as per treaty. Also there won't be any problems that we can't solve we have solved a lot of problems in the past.

u make it sound like you are getting nothing , if you do what the treaty allows we have no problem ofc but if you don't the there will be a war simple as that

 

[hasssanali8998]

Yee, we like to see who is going to try.

keep playing this water game and you might just see it

 

[Master Chief]

Technically you’re not wrong, even Jinnah objected to the name India because he knew how the perception game works. But perception does matter. The British left behind one administrative unit called India, the world recognised it as India, and the successor state carried the name forward. That’s how international continuity works.

You can debate medieval maps forever, but modern legitimacy comes from who inherited the mantle and that wasn’t Pakistan.

---

To call "India" a unified nation prior to the arrival of the British who occupied the subcontinent and defeated and forced numerous warring city states/fiefdoms/kingdoms together is akin to stating mainland Europe was a single nation which the Americans unified in the spring of 1945.

It's utter poppycock revisionism. Western textbooks encouraged this nonsense for generations as it served their interests. There is no objective truth to it whatsoever.

Technically we are right and absolutely we are right and objectively we are right.