Goenitz
Elite Member
time-consuming also..
however, what kind of damage, like silt accumulation or structural damage due to micro deformation or vibrations or displacement?
Last edited:
Indian false flag and current Indo-Pak stand-off updates
- Thread starter CombatCorner
- Start date
- Status
however, what kind of damage, like silt accumulation or structural damage due to micro deformation or vibrations or displacement?
PakAl
Elite Member
If India wants to starve and kill millions of Pakistanis by using water as a weapon, this is exactly the same as India bombing Pakistan and killing millions or the same as Pakistan somehow releasing biological weapons in to Indians dams and killing millions. Everything is possible but it will lead to all out war. Normally nations fight with soldiers and not use other means as a weapon as its regarded as crime against humanity. India is without a doubt making threats on crime against humanity, if it goes through India will face consequences beyond our imagination.
Oscar
Moderator
They were expecting more support - the world is just too busy to have another headache like this - but India is pivoting to accommodate the west’s “We don’t care” message.
Oscar
Moderator
I mean life sustains even after asteroids took out the dinosaurs
- so I suppose their analogy exists in modern times tooTamerlane
Trusted Member
I've been trying to avoid talking about politics but if I don't reply to the above statement my soul will not rest in peace. Ayub Khan and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto are exactly the two characters who laid the foundation for Pakistan's destruction.
Ayub was the guy who overthrew civilian rule in Pakistan and to this day the army is running the country, either directly or indirectly. He's the one who killed off the founding fathers (and mothers) of Pakistan. Fatima Jinnah was so brutally murdered that her burial cloth was soaked with blood. Suhrawardi of Bengal was also murdered. Ayub moved the capital to the military headquarters. He caused the alienation in Bengal that led to independence. Then his henchman, Yahya, surrendered in the most humiliating fashion. He also gifted us with Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.
Bhutto was instrumental in causing the rebellion in East Pakistan. Awami League won 167 seats, a majority, while Bhutto won 86. Bhutto preferred to break Pakistan rather than to sit in the opposition. After that, Bhutto caused the destruction of the economy with his nationalization. He also destroyed the bureaucracy, the education system, the banking system, the airline etc. He in turn left us with Zardari the biggest criminal in Pakistani history.
To say these two were the best leaders of Pakistan after Jinnah is a very odd statement and goes against all logic. We’re in a state of war because the enemy sees Pakistan weak and in tatters thanks to the legacy of destruction gifted to us by the above two gentlemen.
Tamerlane
Trusted Member
This post I agree with. Based on the history of warfare Pakistan and India haven't really fought a war at all. It's been little more than a few small skirmishes for a few days after which one side gives up. In 1971 Pakistan suffered less than 10,000 losses before giving up. None of the 'wars' have had more than a couple of thousand fatalities. If large scale deaths have occurred, it’s been the armies killing civilians in their own countries.
In contrast, history is full of brutal wars in which millions died. During WW2 the Russians lost 24 million people but kept fighting until victory. Germany lost 8-9 million. Recently, Iran lost over a million against Iraq and did not give up. The Afghans lost millions and fought till victory. Ukraine has lost over a million and Russia 100,000 - 200, 000 and they're still fighting. Palestinians have lost up to 200,000 mostly civilians but have not run away.
The South Asian concept of victory is to humiliate the other side. Kill a few people or shoot down a plane and then let the media declare victory. We'll have to see if the coming war is another desi drama or a real war.
Maarkhoor
Snake Eater
Delete your post
guangdongt
Registered Member
Modi represents the ambition of successive Indian prime ministers, but he has shown it more clearly. He also strengthened Hinduism to serve India's greater ambitions. Unify India spiritually. Geographically, due to the partition of India and Pakistan, India has been locked in as a regional power since its inception. India wants to break through the restrictions of strategic space and become a truly world-class power. It should either completely dismember Pakistan and make India the hegemon of South Asia, or annex Xizang and occupy the roof of the world. This is why India has been trying to attack China's western border. If China declines, India will inevitably send troops to occupy it. The third direction is the ocean, with India heading south into the Indian Ocean and fully controlling it as a transit point for East West trade. The three models are all breakthroughs in India's strategic space, and it ultimately leans towards Pakistan. The Americans will not truly tolerate India occupying the Indian Ocean alone, which is consistent with the US policy towards us (treating our three maritime island chains, with Taiwan being the first island chain). The biggest failure of the US on land in East Asia was the Korean War, in which China and the Soviet Union successfully defended Korea. It's just that our oceans are restricted. While India wants to make breakthroughs on the sea and land, Modi plans to cooperate with the Americans first. India can only accept that there are only the United States and India in the Indian Ocean. On land, their breakthrough is in Pakistan, and as long as India does not give up its ambition as a world-class superpower, the danger of war will not stop.
Hakikat ve Hikmet
VIP Member
LHA4210
Registered Member
One of the few celebrities with self-respect: https://images.dawn.com/news/119359...aying-neutral-amid-rising-tensions-with-india
guangdongt
Registered Member
No matter which direction you look at it from, India will definitely focus on developing its navy in the future, which is backed by a huge demand for civilian economic imports and exports. If there is no economic support, the navy is the conventional military branch with the lowest cost to output ratio. On the contrary, it is one of the most profitable and far-reaching military branches. The ocean is India's real interest. It has tacitly shared the Indian Ocean with the Americans, at least for now. Water resources are one of the many ways in which Pakistan's economy continues to weaken on the surface. Even if Pakistan cannot be dismantled, it must continue to compress its economic strategic space and keep it in a semi closed state on land forever. Not to mention guarding the ocean. India is taking a two pronged approach towards Pakistan, with maritime economic ports generating noise and land water resource border issues. The United States will not have a significant attitude towards dealing with these two countries' issues. It only needs to maintain a stable presence in the Indian Ocean.
Amir Mahajane
Registered Member
You're the expert, Bob. Just wanted to point out the fact that India has stopped water supply to Pakistan and pakistanis are rejoicing that India hasn't attacked with military.
MH.Yang
Trusted Member
China drew a 17th parallel in Vietnam, and the U.S. military wouldn't cross the 17th parallel. Why do you Indians think you have better intelligence and judgment than the Americans? Why do you think China is playing a joke on you? You have tried this many times here in China, haven't you learned enough from history?
Prognostications
Registered Member
- Status
Users who are viewing this thread
Country Watch Latest
-
-
The death of US defense autonomy - 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (10 Viewers)- Latest: Ali_Baba
-
-
-
