China Says, Attack On Pak Will Be Considered An Attack On China

[Ray]

BTW Mr YAN what prevents BOTH Pakistan and China to TODAY attack India and take Arunachal and Kashmir respectively

You Chinese simply LOVE to see Pakistanis begging and grovelling before you ;like your other rouge allies North korea and Iran

China will intervene in favour of pakistan ONLY if it is assured of an easy and cheap victory

India knows that when we are fully prepared to fight China ,China will step aside and let pakistanis be kicked

How much of its own blood can China spill for these useless pakistanis

Because China is a peace-loving country!

 

[anujtripathi2007]

Seems like a distracting political tactic to make US threaten for the "possible" joint nation treaty.

 

[sandeepdg]

Pakistan is really in bad situation now and the country is facing the risk of collapsing. An exploded Pakistan may make many Indian happy but when dust settles, India may face an even tougher challenge: A destabilized South Asia

Pakistan is no friend to India. But a broken up Pakistan without a ruling government may pose more dangers to India. Since Mumbai attack, Pakistan government has showed some restraint. But a fast growing and much stronger India make Pakistan feels increasingly insecure. Recently an India general just claimed that India has ability to do another American style operation to Pakistan, which is pretty provoking to Pakistan

Given the worsening relationship Pakistan has with America and threat from India, Pakistan has no choice but to seek outside help. Indian people should feel no surprise on Pakistan's desperate actions recently. It's time for India to show some restraint.

Did you say Restraint ????? My dear friend, we have been doing that for the last 64 years !!! How would China react to an attack on its Politburo members by Pakistani terrorists like the attack on the Indian parliament, or the local train blasts in Mumbai that claimed 300 lives, the attack on BSE in 1993 that claimed nearly 500 lives, and finally an incident like 26/11 on say Shanghai in a hypothetical situation ?? We are poster boy of "restraint" in this world, my friend !!

 

[Yan Luo Wang]

BTW Mr YAN what prevents BOTH Pakistan and China to TODAY attack India and take Arunachal and Kashmir respectively

China isn't going to do anything to put our economic growth at risk.

As for Pakistan, I can't say what they might do.

The manner in which China is slowly taking over Pakistan, Kashmir, Balochistan etc there will be no Pakistan soon. It will become the autonomous republic of Pakistan within China.

Even IF that is true (I don't think it is)... wouldn't that be a better situation for India?

 

[Yan Luo Wang]

Did you say Restraint ????? My dear friend, we have been doing that for the last 64 years !!! How would China react to an attack on its Politburo members by Pakistani terrorists like the attack on the Indian parliament, or the local train blasts in Mumbai that claimed 300 lives, the attack on BSE in 1993 that claimed nearly 500 lives, and finally an incident like 26/11 on say Shanghai in a hypothetical situation ?? We are poster boy of "restraint" in this world, my friend !!

I am sorry for your losses, and I admire your restraint.

I must say though, that no government has yet held the Pakistani state responsible for any particular terrorist attack.

So in my personal opinion, punishing the innocent civilians of Pakistan, for the mistakes of a handful of non-state actors... is an unfair thing to do.

Again, just my opinion.

 

[LurkerBaba]

I must say though, that no government has yet held the Pakistani state responsible for any particular terrorist attack.

So in my personal opinion, punishing the innocent civilians of Pakistan, for the mistakes of a handful of non-state actors... is an unfair thing to do.

Can you define the Pakistani 'state'? Once you do that, then we can discuss what are non-state (and state sponsored) actors.

 

[Yan Luo Wang]

Can you define the Pakistani 'state'? Once you do that, then we can discuss what are non-state (and state sponsored) actors.

Well, just that no government has yet held the "Pakistani government" responsible for any terrorist attacks.

In fact, the Pakistani government seems pretty vital in terms of the Global War on Terrorism, since they are on the front lines.

So... waging a war on Pakistan due to the crimes commited by a few non-state actors, would in my view, be quite unfair.

 

[LurkerBaba]

Well, just that no government has yet held the "Pakistani government" responsible for any terrorist attacks.

That's what I mean.

So by Pakistani state, you mean the 'democratically elected' government. Heck everyone in the subcontinent (actually most of the world) knows that the 'government' is just a facade.

The real 'state' is the Pak Army+ISI. And ISI has been declared a terrorist org

In fact, the Pakistani government seems pretty vital in terms of the Global War on Terrorism, since they are on the front lines.

So... waging a war on Pakistan due to the crimes commited by a few non-state actors, would in my view, be quite unfair.

Here we go again, I asked for the definition of the Pakistani 'state' and the reply was an ambiguous 'Well, just that no government has yet held the "Pakistani government" responsible for any terrorist attacks.'

Even the Pakistanis themselves don't believe this 'non-state' actor garbage anymore.

The 'state' is the Army/ISI, so definitely the actors are state sponsored

 

[Yan Luo Wang]

Here we go again, I asked for the definition of the Pakistani 'state' and the reply was an ambiguous 'Well, just that no government has yet held the "Pakistani government" responsible for any terrorist attacks.'

Definition of "state": The Civil Government of a country.

What other definition were you looking for?

Even the Pakistanis themselves don't believe this 'non-state' actor garbage anymore.

But what does the UN say, and what do national governments say?

Do the words of some Pakistani civilians overrule that?

 

[Singh]

@YLW

You are using disingenuous statements. It is the Pak states duty to ensure no terror activity emanates from its sovereign territory. If the Pakistani state cannot guarantee cessation of terrorism means it has no writ or its complicit, either way it deserves to be punished.

What is further clear is that the Pakistani state is divided into a democratic sham setup to hoodwink the world and a deep state that comprises of Army, intelligence, jehadis etc. The Pakistani state can never be held complicit in a court of law because its de jure head and even its de fact head can always claim plausible deniability.

Also, It has been unequivocally established via wikileaks, academic sources, diplomatic sources etc that terrorism has,is and will continue to be an instrument of policy of the Pakistani establishment.

 

[LurkerBaba]

Definition of "state": The Civil Government of a country.

What other definition were you looking for?

Nope, the definition of state does not have Civil in it

Definition:

'In the social sciences, a state is the compulsory political institution of a centralized government that maintains a monopoly of the legitimate use of force within a certain territory.'

But what does the UN say, and what do national governments say?

A few examples:

Afghanistan

Afghan report stirs Pakistan debate - Central & South Asia - Al Jazeera English

In an interview to Al Jazeera's Zeina Khodr, Daoud Muradian, a senior adviser at the Afghan foreign ministry, said the main factor in the Taliban's resurgence is the support it enjoys from Pakistan's intelligence services.

"What we face in Afghanistan is a triangle of terror - it comprises Taliban, al-Qaeda and the ISI of Pakistan," he said.

"Pakistan uses the Taliban as a leverage against us, against India and also as a leverage against the international community - to blackmail them. What we are facing in Afghanistan is state-sponsored terrorism."

UK
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...stan-must-not-promote-the-export-of-terror.do

"We should be very, very clear with Pakistan that we want to see a strong, stable and democratic Pakistan," he said in Bangalore. "But we cannot tolerate in any sense the idea that this country is allowed to look both ways and is able, in any way, to promote the export of terror whether to India, whether to Afghanistan or to anywhere else in the world.
-David Cameron

United States
Overview of State Sponsored Terrorism

(it's from 2001 btw , before 9/11)

Patterns of Global Terrorism
Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism
2000
April 30, 2001
...........
In South Asia, the United States has been increasingly concerned about reports of Pakistani support to terrorist groups and elements active in Kashmir, as well as Pakistani support, especially military support, to the Taliban, which continues to harbor terrorist groups, including al-Qaida, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.

In South Asia, the United States has been increasingly concerned about reports of Pakistani support to terrorist groups and elements active in Kashmir, as well as Pakistani support, especially military support, to the Taliban, which continues to harbor terrorist groups, including al-Qaida, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan.

India
http://www.thestatesman.net/index.p...&catid=35&year=2010&month=03&day=12&Itemid=66

"If it is the state policy to sponsor terrorism, if the state policy is to export terrorism to India, how will we deal with that state?" he said at the India Today conclave here. The home minister said: "It is no secret that every militant organisation that is based in Pakistan, is supported by ISI. Lashkar, Hizbul Mujahideen, JuD, Al Badr ~ every one of them is supported by ISI."

Notice, in all these statements, the word 'state' is used. Not 'democratically elected government'

 

[Patriot]

so this was for real............

WOW!! SAYA Sir! what a love affair. sometime back there was a news that PLA soldiers are transforming as GAY. Please understand, it is cozy emotional bond now btw PLA & Pak Army. All gay galore

 

[nrj]

Pakistan is really in bad situation now and the country is facing the risk of collapsing. An exploded Pakistan may make many Indian happy but when dust settles, India may face an even tougher challenge: A destabilized South Asia

And what is the exact state of South Asia right now?? Its unstable than ever due to Pak's nasty relations with AQ/Talibs & dishonest promises to US. Bringing China is this equation is completely senseless.

India not believing in Ready-Fire-Arm business is the only reason SA is somewhat peaceful whatsoever.

SA & world should be thanking India for showing this much restraint in first place. And I believe it has started to follow - World lucky to have Manmohan Singh as Indian PM: former US NSA

Its time China & Pak must realize it too.

Pakistan is no friend to India. But a broken up Pakistan without a ruling government may pose more dangers to India. Since Mumbai attack, Pakistan government has showed some restraint.

GOI has appreciated that time to time (rather frequently than required). But Pak has acted nothing or very little in that direction. Everyone knows it.

But a fast growing and much stronger India make Pakistan feels increasingly insecure. Recently an India general just claimed that India has ability to do another American style operation to Pakistan, which is pretty provoking to Pakistan

No. What's provoking is India taking back PoK.

India has no interest in provoking Pak, but has to deal with immense internal pressure to assure its military capabilities.

India's exponential development is not subject to Pakistan's feeling.

Given the worsening relationship Pakistan has with America and threat from India, Pakistan has no choice but to seek outside help. Indian people should feel no surprise on Pakistan's desperate actions recently. It's time for India to show some restraint.

Pak has lost its rounds of favors in demanding restraint from Indian establishment. And World community is aware of this exact fact.

 

[sandeepdg]

I am sorry for your losses, and I admire your restraint.

I must say though, that no government has yet held the Pakistani state responsible for any particular terrorist attack.

So in my personal opinion, punishing the innocent civilians of Pakistan, for the mistakes of a handful of non-state actors... is an unfair thing to do.

Again, just my opinion.

The whole world admires our restraint and acknowledges the fact that the main scourge of terrorism is in Pakistan, Yan ! And they bloody should ! UN, EU, NATO, Russia and many other nations and international organizations have repeatedly quoted that Pakistan should act against those responsible for terrorism in India, Afghanistan and all other countries, since it emanates from its backyards!

"Its easy to comment on others problems but you actually feel the pain you when you bear them yourselves" - As goes an old Indian saying.

Its easy for you to say that India should show restraint, and India is doing just that for the last six decades, otherwise the roots of terrorism in Pakistan would have been cut down long back, and I and every one among the 1.2 billion people of this country regret it to this day that we didn't do that when we had the chance, just to make sure that South Asia remains peaceful, and we are paying the price for that with hundreds of innocent lives year after year !

If Israel would have been in India's place, then most people today would have heard about a country called "Pakistan" only in folk tales, since Pakistan would have been wiped out long back !

Unfortunately, your opinion is in stark contrast with the majority of world view ! And it shows that you are either misinformed or ignorant or totally oblivious to the facts or even after knowing everything you choose to look the other way, as it doesn't bothers you and it serves your interests.

Anyway, what would have China done had it been in India's place ???

 

[Iamanidiot]

And what country would be willing to nuke China, on behalf of India?

In the last Sino-Indian war, what did Russia do? They didn't want to get involved, and that was even back when China was extremely weak.

In 1962 it was a border skirmish.What Iam speaking is war full scale war where everyone are legitimate targets.when Beijing and Shanghai get nuked other will have to do other things (Taiwan will declare independence for example)

 

[Yatharth Singh]

You guys are over excited or maybe over reacted to such no source news. I never heard such announcement in any Chinese or English media. I think some India journalists are really good at fabricating story to stir the pot, and people will follow and get all the excitement and angers.



The only two countries China had ever backed up with such language are North Korea and Vietnam. But one was in 1950's and the other 1960's to early 1970's. It was time when Chairman Mao was alive and it meant to against US. Today's China has no interest to back any other country because compare to China's own interest, it is insignificant. Chinese leaders and Chinese people are very aware of it



Indian people can continue acting like the sky is falling; China is attacking and treating China as its deadest enemy. GOI can spend more money to counter China and promote so called "unti-China alliance". But the end of the day the only one benefited from this might be weapon manufacturers in foreign countries and corrupted officials. The relationship between normal Indian and Chinese people will continue decline and suffer.

After all of what relation are you talking about. Your Government started acting weird towards Indians by giving staple visa to N.E and J&K people. Your Gov. refused to give visas to the servicemen or ex servicemen of the Indian Armed Forces and trying to gain more territory over Indian soil and much much more.

And still you stand up here to give lectures on Indo-Sino relationship. huh Now what should I call this i dont.

And yes, dont blame any media if you are yourself are unaware of the current affairs or what is spoken by your leaders.

 

[roma]

Pakistan is really in bad situation now and the country is facing the risk of collapsing. An exploded Pakistan may make many Indian happy but when dust settles, India may face an even tougher challenge: A destabilized South Asia

Pakistan is no friend to India. But a broken up Pakistan without a ruling government may pose more dangers to India.

that's what they said prior to the formation of b'desh in 1971 !!

an independent belouchistan is a threat to india ? hehehehehehehe

no question about pak imploding - just slow a nd sweet one at a time ...

india to exercise restraint ? who says india has to DO anything - just like b'desh , the paks will do it all on their own !!

 

[tony4562]

Fake news! No chinese politician or media outlet would use languages like this. This news is either fabricated or its the interpretation of indian media (couldn't find it anywhere outisde indian forums). This place, just like indian media in genenral, is fast becoming gossip central.

 

[Yan Luo Wang]

@YLW

You are using disingenuous statements. It is the Pak states duty to ensure no terror activity emanates from its sovereign territory. If the Pakistani state cannot guarantee cessation of terrorism means it has no writ or its complicit, either way it deserves to be punished.

What is further clear is that the Pakistani state is divided into a democratic sham setup to hoodwink the world and a deep state that comprises of Army, intelligence, jehadis etc. The Pakistani state can never be held complicit in a court of law because its de jure head and even its de fact head can always claim plausible deniability.

Also, It has been unequivocally established via wikileaks, academic sources, diplomatic sources etc that terrorism has,is and will continue to be an instrument of policy of the Pakistani establishment.

Interesting perspective, and one that I do not share.

To me, Pakistan is one of the greatest "victims" of terrorism. In terms of death toll, they rank amongst the highest.

You are arguing an Indian point of view. Sorry, but I'm not going to just switch over to your way of thinking, just because you guys insist it must be true. I do empathize with your viewpoint though.

Notice, in all these statements, the word 'state' is used. Not 'democratically elected government'

I also noticed the very ambiguous usage of the word "if".

 

[civfanatic]

To me, Pakistan is one of the greatest "victims" of terrorism. In terms of death toll, they rank amongst the highest.

They can blame themselves for that. I don't sympathize with them, I pity them.

You are arguing an Indian point of view. Sorry, but I'm not going to just switch over to your way of thinking, just because you guys insist it must be true. I do empathize with your viewpoint though.

You won't change your viewpoint even if Chinese are killed in Pakistan. Oh wait, that's already happened...

I also noticed the very ambiguous usage of the word "if".

The home minister was asking a rhetorical question. I hope you know what that is.

Lurker Baba has already posted viewpoints of various countries condemning the Pakistani state for supporting terrorism. There are numerous other reports out there that I can post. What do you have to say about them?

Everyone in the whole world knows that the Pakistani state = Pakistan Army, and, by extension, the ISI. Everyone in the whole world knows that the Pakistani state is directly responsible for the export of terrorism, primarily to India. Whether or not you want to acknowledge the truth is up to you, one cannot force a blind man to see.