Our India headache - and how to cure it

[peacemaker99]

This thread is you just repeating every Pakistani talking point and claiming it as your own. It reads like you are debating yourself.

If India is powerful and partition is incomplete then WTF is stopping you!?

we think the desire for peace will make one country want to join ajother. Why choose violence when peace will lead the way?

 

[Corax]

we think the desire for peace will make one country want to join ajother. Why choose violence when peace will lead the way?

No thanks, don't think Pakistan wants india to join it, even after you begged for ceasefire.

 

[Yasser76]

we think the desire for peace will make one country want to join ajother. Why choose violence when peace will lead the way?

OK, great, keep thinking that.

 

[PakistanLVR]

India is not willing to recognize treaty/law what's the next option of Pakistan ? bombing dams ? Nuking Kolkata to Madras ? India will reciprocate it with same way.

I know for me, I’ll gladly see Lahore and Islamabad and Karachi wiped out in return for 90% of you vermin’s turning into radioactive dust that hopefully takes out Bangalis and Nepalis too.

Actually we also believe partition is incomplete.

we think the desire for peace will make one country want to join ajother. Why choose violence when peace will lead the way?

Schizophrenic paj33t

 

[Vikramaditya1]

What the hydrology and contract law experts @lightoftruth and @Vikramaditya1 fail to acknowledge is that the IWT had its own specific dispute resolution process, a 3 step procedure.

See it's like I said before. "Proper mechanism" argument. The treaty in itself is ineffective now, what purpose does a treaty clause serve? That aside India is not having a dispute with IWT, we are not demanding new share of water sources, not new dam construction, no, it's none of these. This is an entirely new (or old) issue that makes India withdraw from the treaty and from what our government said, temporarily on hold until PK sort things out.

 

[Yasser76]

See it's like I said before. "Proper mechanism" argument. The treaty in itself is ineffective now, what purpose does a treaty clause serve? That aside India is not having a dispute with IWT, we are not demanding new share of water sources, not new dam construction, no, it's none of these. This is an entirely new (or old) issue that makes India withdraw from the treaty and from what our government said, temporarily on hold until PK sort things out.

Cool, so lets make the International Border "ineffective" right?

F**king clowns......

 

[Vikramaditya1]

Cool, so lets make the International Border "ineffective" right?

F**king clowns......

You can there is no rule that prevents it. You can claim all lands in India as much as you can, but in reality however

 

[Master Chief]

but if you nuke indian dam all water will be irradiated and unuszble, so how does that help?

Just because you are military, strategic, political , diplomatic superpower doesnt meann you should use it indiscrimately. With great power comes great responsibklity and electricity.

@Master Chief for you too

I'm honoured that you tagged me! Thank you for your attention to this matter.

 

[Master Chief]

You can there is no rule that prevents it. You can claim all lands in India as much as you can, but in reality however

Acha so now rules matter?

By the way, there very much IS a "rule" that prevents India from unilaterally suspending or "placing in abeyance" or withdrawing from the IWT.

Basics of contractual law for self-styled hydrology experts here:

"The PCA observed that Article XII of the IWT states unambiguously that the Treaty shall remain in
force until terminated by mutual agreement. No clause permits unilateral suspension. Invoking
established precedent, the Court held that once proceedings are validly seized, no party may
withdraw jurisdiction through subsequent acts. Allowing one side to press pause on arbitration
would, the supplemental award reasoned, vitiate the Treaty’s compulsory third-party settlement
machinery. The PCA,therefore, declared a continuing responsibility to advance these proceedings in
a timely, efficient and fair manner.
India had argued that ‘fundamental change’ of circumstances and a ‘material breach’ justified
putting the Treaty in ‘abeyance.’ The PCA rejected that stance. The ruling clarified that its logic also
binds the Neutral Expert proceedings that India initiated in parallel. This closes a loophole by which
either party might engage in forum-shopping to delay final adjudication of dam-design disputes."

The people of the Netherlands must have known you lot very well in some previous historical incarnation somewhere.

 

[Yasser76]

You can there is no rule that prevents it. You can claim all lands in India as much as you can, but in reality however

As usual your posts are just becoming meaningless rants now.

Why not share your opinion on Chinese Jet engines again? That was a funny one....