Osama bin Laden is dead

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sushubh
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 234
  • Views Views 27,318
^one of the conditions being.........."pak shall not shelter any terrorist on its soil, if proven otherwise , all agreements are either canceled or any strict action can be taken against pak" or something like that.:smiley-fart005:
 
Ok... I dont want to be dragged into a long argument on this one. But from what I understand, the conditions would definitely not include doing what they did & also would not say henceforth Pak is owned by US.I will finally like to conclude saying is that I am putting above in this thread are "Global Official Viewpoints" , and I do understand what you folks are trying to say, but that is NOT the Official standpoint. What I feel disappointed is that people are not understanding what I am trying to say :|
 
and as the news was ...............pak was violating this condition of not sheltering terrorists.
 
@mhsabir Whom r u kidding man??Humanitarian aid is one thing .. Wht US is giving to pakistan can't even if termed as aid .. They r just giving them the money to let US do anything.. and keep their internal elements in check ..So they technical owes pakistan right now .. Pakis gave thousands of visa within a single day to CIA agents .. They were allowed to setup their offices in pakistan .. Blackwater operates in pakistan without any restrictions .. and u still believe US don't owes them ..So all this hue and cry tht pakistan sovereignty is attacked etc is BS .. The truth is tht pakis tried to double cross their master and being a slave they hardly can afford it ..And technical point is just a technical point .. U can't say its official or something in pakistan .. Cos in pakistan even the PM and president don't officially control the country ..When under mushraff the deal was signed with americans tht they have full rights to do anything in pakistan .. So how can tht now be termed as unofficial?
 
^one of the conditions being.........."pak shall not shelter any terrorist on its soil, if proven otherwise , all agreements are either canceled or any strict action can be taken against pak" or something like that.:smiley-fart005:

And again if "proved" that he was hiding there, they would have handed him over - That would be the "Official Standpoint"

See - I am not arguing what their intentions are, what they will actually do, what sort of people they are , etc ... All I am saying are about Official Standpoints :D
Or put it bluntly - "Their Social Face"

- - - Updated - - -

@hitman - Unless, you understand the basic point I am trying to say , anything I say will not be understood by you :|

All I am talking about is "Official Standpoints". But please, do not make me go over this again & again.

- - - Updated - - -

@hitman - My Technically is not equal to your Technically

My usage of that word seems to have confused a lot of you.. Maybe the right word, I should have used is "Official Standpoint"
 
U remember Raymond Davis?? How he got freed?? and wht he did? He killed 2 pakis in broad daylight .. Where were these official viewpoints then? So these r just similar scenarios ... Pakis r slave of US .. So they have to do wht US says .. and I assure u tht this guys who is jailed for 33 years will be freed very soon .. 33 million cut in aid is a big deal :D
 
@mhsabir, if pak accepts official shits as "proof"..........they would have acepted kasab as their citizen ..............whole world knows this that they lie in the face........straight away..........and tell the proofs are forged.that alone is a reason ........india can attack pakistan if it wants to.........because they are not ready to accept proofs and they just lie and well lie..........and supports terrorism against India. but india is a peace loving nation ..........i think when somebody(nation) is that bitchy .........only lesson that can be taught is ..........blow them up.
 
@hitman/@toocool - I am not trying to say Pak does all right things/ they follow the law/or anything for that

- - - Updated - - -

I am flabbergast that for some reason you are thinking that I am saying that they are goodie-goodies.

All I am saying this, they might be twisting the rules all the time, doing all sort of nonsense etc to suit them. But in this scenario they just probably followed the "normal protocol" to "suit" them.
 
Back