What the Baloch Need To Do

[pankaj nema]

Baluch people are unfortunately too few in number

The Taliban insurgency which has forced the deployment of 130,000 of Pakistani troops
on the Pakistan's western frontier has really helped Baluch people in intensifying their freedom struggle

 

[pankaj nema]

When Pakistan is able to re install the Taliban in Afghanistan after say 5 years
they will turn their attention to Baluch people and finish them off for good

So it is necessary that the taliban and other Afghans ie Pashtuns keep on attacking Pak army
FOREVER so that Baluch people can keep fighting

 

[Yusuf]

surely the idea is right but will the US take the bait and agree to fight with all three - pak china and Iran because on the issue of baluchistan all three will collaborate. i think in current scenario US will use baluchistan to put pressure on pakistan. same is the case wid India. besides that dont expect anything more.

If the US sits back and reflects on its shortcomings in AfPak, it will realize that supporting Balochistan would have got it the best as quickest results. Direct access to Astan.

Second, it makes it's "investment" in Astan worthwhile as it gets to access Baloch oil and gas.

International relations are all about serving ones owns interests. Baloch interests are served while they give access it's oil and gas which serves US interests.

The best part is, they don't even need boots on the ground. They just need to do what they did in the 80s in Astan.

 

[Yusuf]

@ Yusuf

Your ABIDING passion about dismembering Pakistan is really commendable

National Interests (according to my thinking) is in India having 4 nations on its western borders.

Nothing like a land locked PakJab gasping for air.

 

[thakur_ritesh]

The first and foremost, and definitely the most important, the Baloch fighting the Pakistani occupation need to get united and fight occupation as one, not as different groups, as is the case today.

Second, they need a very strong voice in the international fora, backed by the likes of the US, the EU, various important HR groups. In the US, get the bipartisan support, and amongst larger section of senators.

Create a very strong media campaign, which is very well funded, well represented, and well documented. A campaign which gets coverage pretty much every week ranging from opinions on atrocities happening there to Balochs holding regular street rallies overseas on genocide happening.

Package Balochistan as a lucrative proposition to the US and Israel, sell it as the base for the Iran invasion, get Israel involved, they will be very interested.

The PA needs to be distracted, and big time into something more urgent and more threatening. Will India take a chance here, unlikely. What would be the other means of doing it, not sure, A'stan doesn't seem to be as productive an option anymore but if there remain willing partners, join hands.

Internally make Pakistan more unstable and unsustainable both economically and politically. Let the fear of disintegration completely blow their minds off backed by a concerted psyops.

With the above two happening, the international community will pretty much get interested in the mess created with the fear of loose nukes up for grabs, but by then all things do need to be in place for the final blow.

What is one going to do about the Pashtuns who have been pushed big time into Balochistan, which has changed the demography of this place? A question to ponder up on, a deliberate ploy by the Pakistanis taken from what Chinese have done in Tibet.

On the question what can India do or better put, what all does India do? Well, not everything needs to be said and done and go hammer and tong about it.

I see a change happening in the way Balochistan will be represented from 2013/14 and there abouts. My sense is, there will be a pretty aggressive posturing around this place by the international community. This time Pakistan wont just be sanctioned, the heat will be lot more.

 

[Sunder singh]

all is but my question will help u to get back pok and gilgit baltistan. which will help us to acess to afganistan and central asia

 

[Yusuf]

all is but my question will help u to get back pok and gilgit baltistan. which will help us to acess to afganistan and central asia

Yes, of Balochistan falls, it will be a matter of time till we get OUR land back.

 

[Sunder singh]

Yes, of Balochistan falls, it will be a matter of time till we get OUR land back.

kash ye satya wachan ho

 

[sukhish]

US has made huge investment in pak during the last 30 years, why would they support balouch. also russia tactical support si also required. on top of that
manmohan . as I see it till 2015 we will not be in a position to even start.

 

[Yusuf]

US has made huge investment in pak during the last 30 years, why would they support balouch. also russia tactical support si also required. on top of that
manmohan . as I see it till 2015 we will not be in a position to even start.

On the contrary, the US has over the years made grave errors in judgement and rather than invest, it has lost a lot of money. An independent Balochistan will allow the US something back.

 

[Bachchu Yadav]

The Baloch have to organize themselves and "sell" the idea of a free Balochistan to the US.

1) Oil and Gas. (USP)
2) Gold and Copper deposits.
3) Direct access to Astan and CAR
4) Cut off the Chinis from Arabian sea.
5) Counter to Iran. Part of Balochistan is held by Iran.

Yes Theoretically USA is well predisposed to benefit from free Baluchistan.



but USA is already involved in Afghanistan.If USA choose to help Baloch then Pak Army can play card of Haqqani network and Afghanistan Taliban.

So Balochistan's future rest in Afghanistan if later can be stabilized then USA (may be India too) can interfere using Afghanistan as Headquarters of movement.

 

[nrupatunga]

Without any backers if the baloch are still fighting against a much superior and committed oppersor (paki state), kudos to them. But as many posters felt that w/o any power backing, an independent baloachistan is not going to happen. Also demographically they may be outnumbered by punjabis/pathans and (atleast in areas where they are running their projects even chinese???).

But a Q to the guru's any idea how are they getting arms and how are they financing it. I suppose the baloch diaspora is not big and certainly not rich enough.

 

[DivineHeretic]

why do you Indians pretend to care. You do not sincerely support the image of Baluchistan. You are doing these things for your own political gain.The balochis, Punjabis, Shindis and Pushtans were the only people of the indian subcontinent to bravely stand up to British and foreighn occupation , while the xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx fell to their knees in submission to western powers the first chance they got. This seems to be a repeat of things. If Indians accept US help in liberation of Balochistan , it will in the long term harm India

r

We never claimed to support baluch out of brotherly love, and we most certainly wont do not wish to support them out of the religious affiliations. These ideals are best left to our neighbor to our west.

We have our interests which coincidentally coincides with that of the Baluch. That's good enough reason for us to do what we need to do. The fact that your ruthless military actions have alienated them is your loss, your fault.

Oh, Isn't that right? The great mard-e-Moins always stood up to foreign occupation, foreign aggression. Their courage is indomitable, their ghairat uncompromising. That's the indisputable truth, isn't it?

Surely, it was the Nehru Led Congress who exhorted all hindus to be loyal to the British empire in his speeches. Surely, it was the baniya Hindus who supported the British war efforts in WW2.

Reality Check: M Jinnah, the father of Pakistan, went about praising The British as the saviors of Muslims, advising, nah, pleading the muslims all over undivided India to support the British empire in its subjugation of India.

When the whole of India, the dark skinned, ill fed, malnourished, cowardly hindus went into civil disobedience movement in 1942, guess the only major Indian party to oppose the movement.

Yup, that's right. Muslim League ring any bells yet??

So much for your ghairat and courage. Courage is not just taking a gun and shooting infidels. It takes a whole different level of courage to face armed men with nothing in your hands. And guess which cowardly people did that?

So far so good. Isnt it? Pakistani and their courage.

But wait a bit. Come 1950, and Pakistan already was signing the SEATO agreement with US & NATO. Less than four years into your birth, you already bowed down to the US and the Brits, and here you have the gall to call us cowards.

Is this humiliation enough or should I enlighten more of your glorious ghairat to your eyes?

Next time you choose to humiliate the dark skinned, brown Indians using History as the shipping stick, please do ensure history is on your side. If you really have infinite courage, then use it to read the history of your country.

 

[PunjabiStylin]

We never claimed to support baluch out of brotherly love, and we most certainly wont do not wish to support them out of the religious affiliations. These ideals are best left to our neighbor to our west.

We have our interests which coincidentally coincides with that of the Baluch. That's good enough reason for us to do what we need to do. The fact that your ruthless military actions have alienated them is your loss, your fault.

Oh, Isn't that right? The great mard-e-Moins always stood up to foreign occupation, foreign aggression. Their courage is indomitable, their ghairat uncompromising. That's the indisputable truth, isn't it?

Surely, it was the Nehru Led Congress who exhorted all hindus to be loyal to the British empire in his speeches. Surely, it was the baniya Hindus who supported the British war efforts in WW2.

Reality Check: M Jinnah, the father of Pakistan, went about praising The British as the saviors of Muslims, advising, nah, pleading the muslims all over undivided India to support the British empire in its subjugation of India.

When the whole of India, the dark skinned, ill fed, malnourished, cowardly hindus went into civil disobedience movement in 1942, guess the only major Indian party to oppose the movement.

Yup, that's right. Muslim League ring any bells yet??

So much for your ghairat and courage. Courage is not just taking a gun and shooting infidels. It takes a whole different level of courage to face armed men with nothing in your hands. And guess which cowardly people did that?

So far so good. Isnt it? Pakistani and their courage.

But wait a bit. Come 1950, and Pakistan already was signing the SEATO agreement with US & NATO. Less than four years into your birth, you already bowed down to the US and the Brits, and here you have the gall to call us cowards.

Is this humiliation enough or should I enlighten more of your glorious ghairat to your eyes?

Next time you choose to humiliate the dark skinned, brown Indians using History as the shipping stick, please do ensure history is on your side. If you really have infinite courage, then use it to read the history of your country.

do not mistaken me as your average paki , i care none for M Jinnah or the Muslim league i agree with your statements .My view is that the indian subcontinent should have been split on the basis of cultural ethnicity , but this was already out the question because of crazy muslim fanatics in the Muslim league .
Pakistan had signed SEATO because of the growing threat of communism . Pakistan had already pleaded it support to Russia but Russia had decline so pakistan had no other shoulder but Americas to lean on , , yes i agree Pakistanis are no better in that light , but its because are government is run by muhajirs and urdu imperialists.The boluch problem is because of urdu imperialists in first place who don't have any respect for the indigenous ethnicities of Pakistan

 

[Blackwater]

]why do you Indians pretend to care. You do not sincerely support the image of Baluchistan. You are doing these things for your own political gain.[/B]The balochis, Punjabis, Shindis and Pushtans were the only people of the indian subcontinent to bravely stand up to British and foreighn occupation , while the xxxx xxxx xxxx fell to their knees in submission to western powers the first chance they got. This seems to be a repeat of things. If Indians accept US help in liberation of Balochistan , it will in the long term harm India

same can be said for pakis in context of kashmir

 

[Blackwater]

why do you Indians pretend to care. You do not sincerely support the image of Baluchistan. You are doing these things for your own political gain.The balochis, Punjabis, Shindis and Pushtans were the only people of the indian subcontinent to bravely stand up to British and foreighn occupation , while the xxxx xxxxx xxxx fell to their knees in submission to western powers the first chance they got. This seems to be a repeat of things. If Indians accept US help in liberation of Balochistan , it will in the long term harm India

interestingly u r the one who convert out of fear when foreigner invade India.

what about tipu sultan and sivaji maharaj who bravely stand against British

were they balouch???

 

[Blackwater]

why do you Indians pretend to care. You do not sincerely support the image of Baluchistan. You are doing these things for your own political gain.The balochis, Punjabis, Shindis and Pushtans were the only people of the indian subcontinent to bravely stand up to British and foreighn occupation , while the xxxx xxxxx xxxx fell to their knees in submission to western powers the first chance they got. This seems to be a repeat of things. If Indians accept US help in liberation of Balochistan , it will in the long term harm India

true, your forefathers were dark skinned indians who convert first to these foreign rulers

 

[SPIEZ]

same can be said for pakis in context of kashmir

interestingly u r the one who convert out of fear when foreigner invade India.

what about tipu sultan and sivaji maharaj who bravely stand against British

were they balouch???

true, your forefathers were dark skinned indians who convert first to these foreign rulers

Best of "On your Face BAki" @Blackwater.

Keep it up.

 

[Shirman]

do not mistaken me as your average paki , i care none for M Jinnah or the Muslim league i agree with your statements .My view is that the indian subcontinent should have been split on the basis of cultural ethnicity , but this was already out the question because of crazy muslim fanatics in the Muslim league .
Pakistan had signed SEATO because of the growing threat of communism . Pakistan had already pleaded it support to Russia but Russia had decline so pakistan had no other shoulder but Americas to lean on , , yes i agree Pakistanis are no better in that light , but its because are government is run by muhajirs and urdu imperialists.The boluch problem is because of urdu imperialists in first place who don't have any respect for the indigenous ethnicities of Pakistan

@PunjabiStylin either you do not know history or my history is weak but as the story of Indo-Pak in cold war it was Nehru (after partition-independence) which drifted towards Soviet Union mainly because of its centralise, non-capitalist and pro socialism ideology......It was you guys who wanted to play an equal balancing field (that same Paki mentality that if India does anything Pakis will follow the similar or equal suit )and joined the Americans ,Though i am not a fan of Nehru's this particular approach as you can see it died in 1993 India's liberalization policy......But the main question is what Pakistan achieved by Joining the U.S. camp apart from Military dictatorships, f-104 Star fighters, F-16s fighter jets, Stalemate and defeats in wars with India and your infamous war on terror since 2001......I used to think that if Pakistan remotely applied true liberal and capitalist based economic ideals and mindset since 1950 it would be much ahead of not only India but also par with most south-east Asian, AustralAsia countries.........

 

[ladder]

do not mistaken me as your average paki , i care none for M Jinnah or the Muslim league i agree with your statements .My view is that the indian subcontinent should have been split on the basis of cultural ethnicity , but this was already out the question because of crazy muslim fanatics in the Muslim league .
Pakistan had signed SEATO because of the growing threat of communism . Pakistan had already pleaded it support to Russia but Russia had decline so pakistan had no other shoulder but Americas to lean on , , yes i agree Pakistanis are no better in that light , but its because are government is run by muhajirs and urdu imperialists.The boluch problem is because of urdu imperialists in first place who don't have any respect for the indigenous ethnicities of Pakistan

Every high school pass Paki says so. U any different?


New theory by newly enlightened Paki, What was the no. of princely states in India during Independence?
In India every two village which are located two kilometer apart does not share all cultural identity, but can they be called culturally different?
Can two different religious entity living in a village be called to have every culture trait to be similar?

BTW What is Cultural ethnicity?
When shared culture is a part of the definition of a ethnic group.

And for rest,

Mr. Champion of Indigenous ethnicities of Pakistan,

There is no ethnicity which owes it's allegiance to Pakistan as Pakistan is a nation born is somebody's mind. It has no distinction of ethnicity to it which says it's not India.

In short Pakistan after Independence approached every one with a begging bowl and it was for the other party to give alms or not.

yes i agree Pakistanis are no better in that light

Better than whom?

PS. I thought Pakistan is run by Punjabi ( PaKjabi to be precise) and every other ethnicity complains about their dominance and Mohajirs are their's favorite punching bag.

You one of them???