Bhutto was very anti-indian and Musharraf is better candidate

i think you need to be rational. Talking to people doesn't show who they are. half the people that talk to you will act diplomatic in your face but do something else. That is reality. Stop being so naive.

Dont be confused and hypocritical in where you say "The government does not reflect all pakistanis" and then also think "the government represents all pakistanis because the majority of people support their decisions"

the bottom line is pakistan as a nation is more different than india than the difference between the US and India. Stop being fooled by indian media and start reading all media and political and historical facts.


why is everyone defensive...especially indians....you do not get anywhere by lying to yourself and trying to be sooo falsely diplomatic. THE TRUTH IS pakistan is a failed state and has proven so in the last 50 years. NO! i am not hating on pakistan, i am speaking the truth. Another failed state is nepal, bangladesh and afghanistan. The point of the matter is you meant to say "they HAD a lot in common with india initially" but the ppl of that nation destroyed it over the years...didnt take care of their resources, socially, economically, physcially!

and the biggest difference between indian and pakistan is islamic fundamentalism! and always remember one thing...the way pakistan has acted in the past by their military and violent operations in comparison to their resources...IF india WAS EVER TO do that kind of violence, military action against pakistan comparitively, india could walk over them in a few weeks but the other truth is that INDIA is too diplomatic and scared and used to colonial,appeasement terms of thinking

 

you should phrase that correctly,

Pakistan would start the first nuclear war with India.

India will not stomp over pakistan , they could of for the last 50 years and didnt and they will never due to their demographic makeup. However Pakistan will instigate it and india will keep sending 1% of their resources time by time to lessen the damage but they are too scared, secular, diplomatic of a nation to actually go on the offensive

India needs to closer relations with China, Nepal, Northern Sri Lanka and Bangladesh

 

I would say it is more because of corruption than anything, on paper them countries would of worked fine but there wasnt/isnt a very good leading system in place.

 

I was reading an article written by Ali Ettefagh, who serves as a director of Highmore Global Corporation, an investment company in emerging markets of Eastern Europe, CIS, and the Middle East.

I'm sure none of the Pakistanis gonna like this article, but it raises some question.
Mind it, it's not from any Indian, but an Iranian.

He asks in the article - "Why Not Dissolve Pakistan, Too?". It's an interesting read. I wanted to make a thread about this article but decided otherwise.

Some text from the article -

Link to the article: http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/...gh/2007/11/why_not_dissolve_pakistan_too.html

 

The question is whether the country can dissolve peacefully or will there be a nuclear civil war.

Do we want an etnic civil war in Pakistan. Look at these two cases"

#1) Spanish Civil War -- 1 million dead.

Spain is composed of Spanish, Catalan, Basque, Galician and smaller ethnic groups. The Catalans and Basque make up 25% of the population each with their own language. In the 1936-1939 Civil War, you will see that there were 1 million dead.

#2) Yugosalvia is another example. The UN and Nato are still involved there 15 years after the civil war started. Imagine what would happen in Pakistan.

 

Wow, such a nice point of view. For a second i thought you are not dumb.
Every one wants to go to heaven but nobody want's to die.