PDA

View Full Version : so like, why are india and pakistan such crappy countries?


maharaja
March 19th, 2004, 01:40 AM
i have my own thoughts about the shittiness of the two countries, shitty leadership as well as corruption. is there anything that makes one country worse than the other? is there anything else that makes them shitty countries compared to the rest of the world? dont give me any bullshit about how india/pakistan is the greatest, i want comments and suggestions regarding improvement of said shitty countries or other reasons as to why they are shitty 3rd world countries.

methodman535
March 19th, 2004, 03:08 AM
i have my own thoughts about the shittiness of the two countries, shitty leadership as well as corruption. is there anything that makes one country worse than the other? is there anything else that makes them shitty countries compared to the rest of the world? dont give me any bullshit about how india/pakistan is the greatest, i want comments and suggestions regarding improvement of said shitty countries or other reasons as to why they are shitty 3rd world countries.


One isnt really all that worse than the other. They are both majorly fucked up. Pakistan used to have a slightly higher income per capita than India about 10 to 15 years ago but now India has caught up mainly due to its IT boom. Whats fucked about both countries is the ancient cultures. Everyone is stuck in a 2000 year old rut. No sense of community, everyone out for themselves. Both countries sucked dry by great britain like a vampire sucks its victims. The only way they could have done something with themseleves in the last 50 years was with a revolution and rebuilding like China did. But the leadership was such a bunch of retarded whores and sellout pieces of shit that they just fucked both countries dry worse than britain did and pretty much continue to run it in a feudal fashion internally and have the export/import sector set up like a slave economic colony.


Uhmm....I guess I cant say who to blame except everyone in both countries who can make changes.

Oh yeah...pakis think they are the hot shit cuz they got islam. Hhahahaah....what a crock. And indians think they are the shit cuz they think hinduism is a really modern sexy religion. Well....both countries are the scumhole of the earth....maybe desis need to get their heads out of their asses and think more realistically. I dunno....living an illusion isnt always good.

NumbaOneStunna
March 19th, 2004, 09:41 AM
They gained independence barely 50 years ago. With major religious, ethnic, terriotorial etc etc issues.

I would say they were bound to fail thanks in large part to the Brits.

Corruption doesnt help either.

But in another 50 years i do believe they would be a lot better off then they are today.

methodman535
March 19th, 2004, 01:23 PM
They gained independence barely 50 years ago. With major religious, ethnic, terriotorial etc etc issues.

I would say they were bound to fail thanks in large part to the Brits.

Corruption doesnt help either.

But in another 50 years i do believe they would be a lot better off then they are today.


I wouldnt say they were bound to fail in large part by the brits but I would say they started off in the gutter in large part thanks to the brits. However, they were bound to fail in large part because nobody came up with a radical yet sound plan to rebuild everything. And when you seriously think about it, nobody in power really has even today that I know of. So 50 years from now, in relation to the rest of the "first world" they will both most likely still be in the gutter. There will however be pockets of prosperity thanks to the globalization of communication/information/education. But there will be a humungousssss proportion of people in both countries, more so in india, who will be living decades behind the times economically speaking.

Gongha
March 20th, 2004, 01:07 AM
India lagged behind because of Nehrus obsession with socialism, and Pakistan, because of corrupt politician, and the fact that it spends to much resources focused on kashmir....which keeps the military in power.


The british essentially sucked out the wealth from the subcontinent by stopping all manufacturing, forcing the locals to buy stuff made in britain, forcing the farmers to grow cashcrops, when food grains were the priority (and not paying for cashcrops). The viceroy main function was the transfer of wealth, which it did very efficiently.


Further, the excessive heat makes people lazy....

methodman535
March 20th, 2004, 02:00 AM
Its true the british sucked India dry like vampires but at the same time, in the last 60 years there was ample time to rebuild. I mean we are talking a half century here, look how quickly Germany and Japan rebuilt from rubble and dust. The problem is simply that the govt still keeps the trade economy of both countries running as if it were still a slave colony. The exception is Indias new IT sector. And domestically they just havent done enough to stimulate mechanization in manufacturing and agriculture. So 50% of the population is bogged down trying to feed itself. Countries like the UK and US etc have less than 3% of their population devoted to agriculture, the rest of the labor pool can be used for creating other types of wealth and capital....the magic formulas are out there but nobody seems to have a clue how to apply them

ShivaChrist
March 20th, 2004, 03:51 AM
Nothing is going to get better until they look within themselves to stop the corruption and also to clean the country up... so much dirt and disease that it just isn't right. That is imho the #1 priority... clean the country so everyone can live healthy lives.

NumbaOneStunna
March 20th, 2004, 11:54 AM
Its true the british sucked India dry like vampires but at the same time, in the last 60 years there was ample time to rebuild. I mean we are talking a half century here, look how quickly Germany and Japan rebuilt from rubble and dust. The problem is simply that the govt still keeps the trade economy of both countries running as if it were still a slave colony. The exception is Indias new IT sector. And domestically they just havent done enough to stimulate mechanization in manufacturing and agriculture. So 50% of the population is bogged down trying to feed itself. Countries like the UK and US etc have less than 3% of their population devoted to agriculture, the rest of the labor pool can be used for creating other types of wealth and capital....the magic formulas are out there but nobody seems to have a clue how to apply them
Germany and Japan rebuilt so quickly because of vast US aid after the second world war. The fear of communism spreading through the world had more to do with it than german or japanese ingenuity.

I think India and Pakistan were bound to fail as independent countries from the get go. For starters the two countries were sworn enemies with major terriotorial issues with each other which ensured that both would be spending the lion's share of their GDP on the armed forces instead of resetting the infrastructure etc etc.

Secondly, Pakistan at the time was divided into two different land masses seperated by 3000 miles of hostile enemy territory. The religious disputes spewing through the countries which were in large part abetted by the British policy of "divide and rule" didnt help matters either.

If you notice, all major flash points across the globe today are a direct consequence of Britian or its allies altering or tampering the borders of said countries, be it Palestine, Kashmir, Somalia, Bosnia etc etc.

This ensured that India and Pakistan wouldnt function normally even when they were independent. The misadventures of the Britishers keep haunting them to this day.

India and Pakistan werent starting from zero in 1947, they were starting from the negative side of the scale. We are probably around zero today. Another 60 years and we might be on the positive side.

ZzoO
March 20th, 2004, 02:05 PM
tme time... its always a question about time... it took america 250 years to get to where it is today... its been only 50 years for india and pakistan... India's economy is booming which is a good sign... it is expected to be one of the fastest growing economic country in asia for the next 10 years to come...

pakistan is doing it own part.. they have become non nato allies.. if that makes a big difference.. mushraf is doing his part to help the country... he is getting rid of the corruption...(i have personal experience with this one)....... but it takes time as well... and alot still has to be done...

the indian cricket tour of pakistan is having a good outcome.. as far as the relations between the countries... indians are getting visas to pakistan.. even if its only for 4 days.. :lol:

kashmir kashmir.. cant say much about that... besides the fact that the arms race between the countries is advancing their military... rather than putting money where it is needed... this can be a positive or a negative depending on how you look at it.....

t-tac
March 31st, 2004, 04:19 PM
You people just dont get it. As long as India and Pakistan are at war with each other we are screwed. Explain why in Pakistan 60 percent of the income of a poor people is directed towards the military? Why is the dictator a general? And on the real why the hell arent we (the American educated Pakistanis) doing a damn thing? Do away with the guns and bombs, FREE KASHMIR TO WHERE IT TRULY BELONGS (ITS OWN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY) From there we can talk about solving the corruption and everything that stems from that.

Progressive
March 31st, 2004, 04:28 PM
Simple:

If they stop spending so much money on weapons and spend more on health and education, they wouldn't be so backwards.

But Pakistan is only interested in destroying the world and supporting asshole like Usama bin Laden. When's the last time a Pakistani wanted to help the fight against terrorism? They all fled to Afghanistan to fight for the Taliban, especially the British Pakistanis.

Hindu_Nutcase
March 31st, 2004, 06:26 PM
You people just dont get it. As long as India and Pakistan are at war with each other we are screwed. Explain why in Pakistan 60 percent of the income of a poor people is directed towards the military? Why is the dictator a general? And on the real why the hell arent we (the American educated Pakistanis) doing a damn thing? Do away with the guns and bombs, FREE KASHMIR TO WHERE IT TRULY BELONGS (ITS OWN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY) From there we can talk about solving the corruption and everything that stems from that.

If India is to allow a part of its land to become separated over the fact that it is majority Muslim, AGAIN - then obviously the people of India have a right to be concerned about the Muslims in remainder India (who have babies very vert fast). What are they meant to do? Some limitation on the rights of the other 140million muslims in India is not unreasonable, or even fulfilling the two nation theory and resettling the Muslims in Pakistan, Bangladesh and the new independent state of Kashmir. Bear in mind that Hindus have been decimated in parts of the sub-continent that became separate muslim majority countries.

If Kashmir becomes separate it will open up a pandoras box for remainder India's dozens of million muslims.

indian-boy
April 1st, 2004, 07:36 AM
If India is to allow a part of its land to become separated over the fact that it is majority Muslim, AGAIN - then obviously the people of India have a right to be concerned about the Muslims in remainder India (who have babies very vert fast).


Agreed! simple question. Why should the indigenous people of india lose their land again to muslims who lets not forget, invaded the subcontinent?

hell we suffered invasions thus resulting in a lot of muslim people in india. Couldn't co exist very well. Muslims got a whole country and part of kashmir. Now lets give them even more, let them have Kashmir just because it is majority muslim :roll: Now I am not aware of muslim birth rates in india but if they are as high as people say they are, we might as well give up the whole of india huh?

Giving up land just because it is majority muslim does not make sense. Co-existing is one thing but getting your own state/country is another.

ThreeFiddy
April 1st, 2004, 12:58 PM
How did a thread dedicated to the fucked-upness of both India and Pakistan degenerate itself to a "fuck pakistan, India ownz" thread yet again? God damn kids...

angrynacho
April 1st, 2004, 03:28 PM
How did a thread dedicated to the fucked-upness of both India and Pakistan degenerate itself to a "fuck pakistan, India ownz" thread yet again? God damn kids...

:bows:

Storms
April 1st, 2004, 04:52 PM
Yes, India's a shitty country.
A picture paints a thousand words... here's two thousand words:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1105000/images/_1106050_holymen1_300.jpg
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040319/t/ra3162455872.jpg

Yes, Pakistan's also fucked up.
And I agree, that it's due to corruption.

One Love.

Storms

Hindu_Nutcase
April 1st, 2004, 08:06 PM
How did a thread dedicated to the fucked-upness of both India and Pakistan degenerate itself to a "fuck pakistan, India ownz" thread yet again? God damn kids...

Um...how many posts have been "India ownz" ?? (about 2?) Get over it.

methodman535
April 5th, 2004, 05:13 PM
If India is to allow a part of its land to become separated over the fact that it is majority Muslim, AGAIN - then obviously the people of India have a right to be concerned about the Muslims in remainder India (who have babies very vert fast).


Agreed! simple question. Why should the indigenous people of india lose their land again to muslims who lets not forget, invaded the subcontinent?



Thats a really simple question and it deserves a really simple answer. Because the muslims in kashmir and gujrat, UP etc are 99% or more indigenous people as well. They converted from one form of insanity to another. If an indian switches over from talking to a statue of an elephent man, trying to get closer to god to shoving his ass in the air 5 times a day and whispering to saudis in a language he doesnt understand...that doesnt make him non-indegenous does it?

paulie walnuts
April 5th, 2004, 10:09 PM
If India is to allow a part of its land to become separated over the fact that it is majority Muslim, AGAIN - then obviously the people of India have a right to be concerned about the Muslims in remainder India (who have babies very vert fast).


Agreed! simple question. Why should the indigenous people of india lose their land again to muslims who lets not forget, invaded the subcontinent?



Thats a really simple question and it deserves a really simple answer. Because the muslims in kashmir and gujrat, UP etc are 99% or more indigenous people as well. They converted from one form of insanity to another. If an indian switches over from talking to a statue of an elephent man, trying to get closer to god to shoving his ass in the air 5 times a day and whispering to saudis in a language he doesnt understand...that doesnt make him non-indegenous does it?

lol, go ask any indian muslim about their lineage. every last one of them will claim to be direct descendants of the Mughals and Persians.

NumbaOneStunna
April 5th, 2004, 10:20 PM
Not all of them would claim direct descent from Mughals and persians but a lot of them have intermarried with the descendants of Mughals and persians and pathans since they dont practice the caste system etc etc.

mr neo
April 5th, 2004, 10:28 PM
The only way the country will survive is by killing off the corrupt politicians and um.. then killing the corrupt politicians who survived. :P

methodman535
April 5th, 2004, 10:31 PM
If India is to allow a part of its land to become separated over the fact that it is majority Muslim, AGAIN - then obviously the people of India have a right to be concerned about the Muslims in remainder India (who have babies very vert fast).


Agreed! simple question. Why should the indigenous people of india lose their land again to muslims who lets not forget, invaded the subcontinent?



Thats a really simple question and it deserves a really simple answer. Because the muslims in kashmir and gujrat, UP etc are 99% or more indigenous people as well. They converted from one form of insanity to another. If an indian switches over from talking to a statue of an elephent man, trying to get closer to god to shoving his ass in the air 5 times a day and whispering to saudis in a language he doesnt understand...that doesnt make him non-indegenous does it?

lol, go ask any indian muslim about their lineage. every last one of them will claim to be direct descendants of the Mughals and Persians.

If you ask any brahmin in India they will tell you they are the direct descendents of The Aryan invader/settlers that displaced the dravidians. If you ask the Kshatriya jutts they will tell you they are the pure descendents of the scythians from mesepotemia, or a second wave of aryan invaders depending on who you talk to. If you ask a dalit he will tell you he is the only true indian and all north indians are foreign. Doesnt mean jack. Look at the faces of the muslims anyway...95% of indian muslims either look like regular indians or a mix of persian and indian. And they werent the first "invaders" of the subcontinent either, I mentioned two others and theres many many more so people should quit playing the invasion-victim game its really lame.

Hindu_Nutcase
April 6th, 2004, 12:56 PM
Method Man you chat soooooooooooo much shit WHEN you say that Brahmins call themselves descendents of Aryan invaders, That is ridiculous. Have you really ever been to India and talked to Brahmins. Have you been to India and talked to Kshatriyas. You're just chatting a load of crap.

I DO AGREE THAT WE SHOULD NOT CONSIDER INDIAN MUSLIMS AS NON INDIGENOUS. But why chat absolute crap to support your point?

Oh yeah...have you heard of Dr Ambedkar ? I will post some of his stuff to disprove your silly race comments, if you've heard of him that is.