正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Najam Sethi has little credibility left, having long blurred the line between political commentary and power brokering within Pakistan’s ruling ecosystem. It was telling that he was among the first to brand the Pahalgam massacre of 24 Hindus a false flag. He is now overreading S. Jaishankar shaking hands...

AsYouNotWish's profile picture

Sonam Mahajan

521,399 subscribers

77,625 次观看 • 8 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

新闻政治
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

🚨 The ground that Pakistan is gaining in information warfare is so damaging for India that now people like Najam Sethi, who are long-time Indian assets, are trying their best to undo the damage that Pakistanis have done to India. Just look at the poisonous statement he has just made and the timing of it. The entire world, including India, knows that the Mumbai attacks were a false flag operation, yet look at this man stabbing Pakistan right in the back. Najam Sethi with Karan Thappar 28 th April 2025.
0:31

🚨 The ground that Pakistan is gaining in information warfare is so damaging for India that now people like Najam Sethi, who are long-time Indian assets, are trying their best to undo the damage that Pakistanis have done to India. Just look at the poisonous statement he has just made and the timing of it. The entire world, including India, knows that the Mumbai attacks were a false flag operation, yet look at this man stabbing Pakistan right in the back. Najam Sethi with Karan Thappar 28 th April 2025.

Ahmad Hassan Al-Arbi

72,657 次观看 • 1 年前

🚨 Let this sink in. Just days before the Pahalgam terror attack that left 26 Indian civilians dead, Pakistani YouTuber Shehzad Ghias quoted Najam Sethi on his podcast, saying jihadist groups were likely to be activated in Kashmir by Pakistan’s military. He cited Sethi’s deep links within the establishment to lend weight to this prediction. Sethi’s forecast? That Pakistan would respond to the Jaffar Express hijacking in Balochistan by stepping up Islamist terrorism in Kashmir. Pakistan has not presented a shred of evidence implicating India in the Jaffar Express incident, not to India, and not to the international community. That’s because the attack was carried out by Baloch insurgents resisting decades of Pakistani occupation, genocide, resource theft, and enforced disappearances. Pakistan’s own Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances says there were at least 2,752 active cases in Balochistan as of January 2024. Baloch groups say the real number is much higher, somewhere between 7,000 and 21,000. Yet, instead of addressing its own internal crises, Pakistan chose to activate its jihadist networks to unleash intensified attacks on Hindu tourists in Kashmir. The pressing question remains: how did Najam Sethi know about this escalation in advance? You do not need more proof. You just need to stop pretending.
1:40

🚨 Let this sink in. Just days before the Pahalgam terror attack that left 26 Indian civilians dead, Pakistani YouTuber Shehzad Ghias quoted Najam Sethi on his podcast, saying jihadist groups were likely to be activated in Kashmir by Pakistan’s military. He cited Sethi’s deep links within the establishment to lend weight to this prediction. Sethi’s forecast? That Pakistan would respond to the Jaffar Express hijacking in Balochistan by stepping up Islamist terrorism in Kashmir. Pakistan has not presented a shred of evidence implicating India in the Jaffar Express incident, not to India, and not to the international community. That’s because the attack was carried out by Baloch insurgents resisting decades of Pakistani occupation, genocide, resource theft, and enforced disappearances. Pakistan’s own Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances says there were at least 2,752 active cases in Balochistan as of January 2024. Baloch groups say the real number is much higher, somewhere between 7,000 and 21,000. Yet, instead of addressing its own internal crises, Pakistan chose to activate its jihadist networks to unleash intensified attacks on Hindu tourists in Kashmir. The pressing question remains: how did Najam Sethi know about this escalation in advance? You do not need more proof. You just need to stop pretending.

Sonam Mahajan

506,672 次观看 • 1 年前

The objection by the representative of India to Pakistan's mention of Jammu and Kashmir in the Arria Formula meeting was not surprising to us. India, as a party to the Jammu and Kashmir dispute, has actually refused to implement the Security Council resolutions on this dispute, and has even refused to cooperate with the United Nations, including the good offices of the Secretary-General, and with all those mechanisms that form part of Chapter VI. As I stated in my statement, Kashmir is an international dispute. It is on the agenda of the Security Council. It was never a part of India, and it is not, and cannot be, part of India — because this was the core question at the heart of these Security Council resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir. The purpose was to determine the status of this territory: whether it wishes to be part of India or Pakistan. That status has not yet been determined, because the resolutions have not been implemented. To assert that Kashmir is a part of India is, in fact, itself a violation of the relevant Security Council resolutions. Please watch my response below to the misleading remarks of the Indian representative
2:14

The objection by the representative of India to Pakistan's mention of Jammu and Kashmir in the Arria Formula meeting was not surprising to us. India, as a party to the Jammu and Kashmir dispute, has actually refused to implement the Security Council resolutions on this dispute, and has even refused to cooperate with the United Nations, including the good offices of the Secretary-General, and with all those mechanisms that form part of Chapter VI. As I stated in my statement, Kashmir is an international dispute. It is on the agenda of the Security Council. It was never a part of India, and it is not, and cannot be, part of India — because this was the core question at the heart of these Security Council resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir. The purpose was to determine the status of this territory: whether it wishes to be part of India or Pakistan. That status has not yet been determined, because the resolutions have not been implemented. To assert that Kashmir is a part of India is, in fact, itself a violation of the relevant Security Council resolutions. Please watch my response below to the misleading remarks of the Indian representative

Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, PR of Pakistan to the UN

62,808 次观看 • 2 个月前

Meet senior Pakistani columnist and anchorperson Mubasher Lucman. He says if there is a war with India, he would want to take Indian actresses as sex slaves, referring to them as maal-e-ghanimah or spoils of war as dictated by Islamic theology. He then goes on to proudly admit that he aspires to be a Ghazi who fights against infidels (Hindus). When this is the mindset of someone at the top of Pakistan’s media ecosystem, imagine the level of indoctrination an average Pakistani child is exposed to. What then of those who actually join terror ranks? And Lucman’s highly problematic remarks pass for pretty acceptable speech in Pakistan, revealing how everything is wrong about Pakistan at the very fundamental level. The international community must stop viewing terrorism emanating from Pakistan as isolated madness. It is systemic. A nation that glorifies sex slavery, concubine culture, and seventh-century-style religious wars in the twenty-first century is a danger not just to India, but to the global security.
0:42

Meet senior Pakistani columnist and anchorperson Mubasher Lucman. He says if there is a war with India, he would want to take Indian actresses as sex slaves, referring to them as maal-e-ghanimah or spoils of war as dictated by Islamic theology. He then goes on to proudly admit that he aspires to be a Ghazi who fights against infidels (Hindus). When this is the mindset of someone at the top of Pakistan’s media ecosystem, imagine the level of indoctrination an average Pakistani child is exposed to. What then of those who actually join terror ranks? And Lucman’s highly problematic remarks pass for pretty acceptable speech in Pakistan, revealing how everything is wrong about Pakistan at the very fundamental level. The international community must stop viewing terrorism emanating from Pakistan as isolated madness. It is systemic. A nation that glorifies sex slavery, concubine culture, and seventh-century-style religious wars in the twenty-first century is a danger not just to India, but to the global security.

Sonam Mahajan

278,295 次观看 • 1 年前

"Indian PM Modi is a terrorist," said Kharge (Congress President). It was not a slip of the tongue; it was a well-calculated, deliberate statement made on April 21st (one day before the Pahalgam anniversary). Kharge knew that on April 22nd, the word "terrorism" would be in focus and the Indian government would target Pakistan for terrorism. This statement was made to save Pakistan from international criticism and support Pakistan's theory that Pahalgam was a false flag attack, and that it is actually India that is a terrorist country. Pakistani media will pick up this statement and circulate it on global forums. Congress is the biggest adversary of India. I hope one day the people of India will realize it.
0:20

"Indian PM Modi is a terrorist," said Kharge (Congress President). It was not a slip of the tongue; it was a well-calculated, deliberate statement made on April 21st (one day before the Pahalgam anniversary). Kharge knew that on April 22nd, the word "terrorism" would be in focus and the Indian government would target Pakistan for terrorism. This statement was made to save Pakistan from international criticism and support Pakistan's theory that Pahalgam was a false flag attack, and that it is actually India that is a terrorist country. Pakistani media will pick up this statement and circulate it on global forums. Congress is the biggest adversary of India. I hope one day the people of India will realize it.

STAR Boy TARUN

32,086 次观看 • 4 个月前

"The flow of water in the Chenab River is significantly lower than it should be, suggesting deliberate actions by India to restrict Pakistan’s water rights. “India was defeated in a conventional war, and now we will defeat it in the water war as well & he is not aware of any back channel talk with India regarding this : Pak Def Min Khawaja Asif to Samaa tv Then who wrote the 4 letters to India to reconsider the decision of Indus Water Treaty abeyance? ...
0:42

"The flow of water in the Chenab River is significantly lower than it should be, suggesting deliberate actions by India to restrict Pakistan’s water rights. “India was defeated in a conventional war, and now we will defeat it in the water war as well & he is not aware of any back channel talk with India regarding this : Pak Def Min Khawaja Asif to Samaa tv Then who wrote the 4 letters to India to reconsider the decision of Indus Water Treaty abeyance? ...

OsintTV 📺

99,147 次观看 • 1 年前

A very harsh threat, made by Netanyahu toward Iran. What is behind the heightened tone? It is not only harsh, it is also unusual. The event that took place in recent months was a paralyzing fear of what is called miscalculation. They will think that we will attack first, even though that was not the intention, and then they will attack, and the entire region will be dragged into another round of confrontation. In a region where there is fear of miscalculation, you are not supposed to announce this kind of thing in the Knesset. I just want to make that clear. Yesterday, Naftali Bennett promoted his press conference on the conditions of soldiers, okay? He gets six million views because the timing looks like a countdown and he is a former prime minister, so the Iranians are in hysterics that he is actually announcing that they are going to attack. That’s the atmosphere. So when Netanyahu attacks like this and makes an unprecedented threat—not only harsh but also unusual—one can’t help but think that for Netanyahu there is a message, or something more problematic than miscalculation. And he wants to warn the Iranians. Now, what’s the issue? The issue is that if the Iranians come to the conclusion that their regime is on the verge of collapse, there is one thing that might save them. And that is an attack on Israel. Because we saw during the war what is called “rally around the flag.” Even those who were in the opposition rallied around the flag when their country was attacked. It is not only the Islamic Republic that is under attack, but also the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is essentially the issue, and that is what Netanyahu, in my opinion, is trying to stop with the threat he issued after the security discussion.
1:27

A very harsh threat, made by Netanyahu toward Iran. What is behind the heightened tone? It is not only harsh, it is also unusual. The event that took place in recent months was a paralyzing fear of what is called miscalculation. They will think that we will attack first, even though that was not the intention, and then they will attack, and the entire region will be dragged into another round of confrontation. In a region where there is fear of miscalculation, you are not supposed to announce this kind of thing in the Knesset. I just want to make that clear. Yesterday, Naftali Bennett promoted his press conference on the conditions of soldiers, okay? He gets six million views because the timing looks like a countdown and he is a former prime minister, so the Iranians are in hysterics that he is actually announcing that they are going to attack. That’s the atmosphere. So when Netanyahu attacks like this and makes an unprecedented threat—not only harsh but also unusual—one can’t help but think that for Netanyahu there is a message, or something more problematic than miscalculation. And he wants to warn the Iranians. Now, what’s the issue? The issue is that if the Iranians come to the conclusion that their regime is on the verge of collapse, there is one thing that might save them. And that is an attack on Israel. Because we saw during the war what is called “rally around the flag.” Even those who were in the opposition rallied around the flag when their country was attacked. It is not only the Islamic Republic that is under attack, but also the Islamic Republic of Iran. That is essentially the issue, and that is what Netanyahu, in my opinion, is trying to stop with the threat he issued after the security discussion.

Amit Segal

41,392 次观看 • 8 个月前

#WATCH | Washington DC: BJP MP Tejasvi Surya says, "We had a fantastic meeting with the Vice President of the United States of America. Vice President Vance was unequivocal and categorical in his support for India's stance against terrorism. He was very clear that India exercised its right to deter further terrorist attacks from Pakistan and sympathised with the victims of the terror attack in Pahalgam. He mentioned that he himself was in India when the attack took place, and he was also a witness to the outrage and anger amongst the Indian people to this brutal and cruel terrorist attack. He also expressed complete support to the Government of India in its fight against terror. He was also greatly appreciative of the responsible restraint that India showed even after repeated provocations by Pakistan...he also expressed the enthusiasm that he and the Government of United States share insof far as trade with India is concerned, partnership with India is concerned and how he saw first hand the great vitality and strength in India and how India and the United States are natural partners in this journey in the coming years..."
2:19

#WATCH | Washington DC: BJP MP Tejasvi Surya says, "We had a fantastic meeting with the Vice President of the United States of America. Vice President Vance was unequivocal and categorical in his support for India's stance against terrorism. He was very clear that India exercised its right to deter further terrorist attacks from Pakistan and sympathised with the victims of the terror attack in Pahalgam. He mentioned that he himself was in India when the attack took place, and he was also a witness to the outrage and anger amongst the Indian people to this brutal and cruel terrorist attack. He also expressed complete support to the Government of India in its fight against terror. He was also greatly appreciative of the responsible restraint that India showed even after repeated provocations by Pakistan...he also expressed the enthusiasm that he and the Government of United States share insof far as trade with India is concerned, partnership with India is concerned and how he saw first hand the great vitality and strength in India and how India and the United States are natural partners in this journey in the coming years..."

ANI

15,944 次观看 • 1 年前

#WATCH | Srinagar | On the "This is an important part of India" statement by US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor, Jammu and Kashmir BJP Spokesperson Altaf Thakur says, “…Yesterday, the US Ambassador came here and saw how the situation in Jammu and Kashmir, especially Kashmir, has changed... He said that there is peace, progress and mutual development to a great extent in Kashmir. After that, the way he praised India and said that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India is a big victory for our country… The second biggest thing is the way the advisory was issued after the Pahalgam attack. He also hinted at the idea of taking back the advisory, which would be extremely beneficial for the people here, because tourism is the backbone of the region; the economy depends on it…”
2:45

#WATCH | Srinagar | On the "This is an important part of India" statement by US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor, Jammu and Kashmir BJP Spokesperson Altaf Thakur says, “…Yesterday, the US Ambassador came here and saw how the situation in Jammu and Kashmir, especially Kashmir, has changed... He said that there is peace, progress and mutual development to a great extent in Kashmir. After that, the way he praised India and said that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of India is a big victory for our country… The second biggest thing is the way the advisory was issued after the Pahalgam attack. He also hinted at the idea of taking back the advisory, which would be extremely beneficial for the people here, because tourism is the backbone of the region; the economy depends on it…”

ANI

25,300 次观看 • 23 天前

Meet Sohrab Barkat. For years, he built a reputation by amplifying narratives against India, especially on Jammu & Kashmir, repeatedly portraying India in the worst possible light. This is the same man who used abusive language against Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister simply for visiting India. Now, as civilians in PoJK face unrest, brutality, and broad-daylight killings at the hands of the Pakistan Army, he has suddenly discovered the language of democracy, civil liberties, and accountability. Yet even today, his criticism is aimed at Maryam Nawaz, while he continues to avoid directly confronting Pakistan’s military leadership and Asim Munir. That tells you everything you need to know. If this episode has really taught him anything, I hope he stops serving his masters in the Pakistani military and stops peddling false narratives, spreading hatred, or justifying jihadist terrorism in India.
1:39

Meet Sohrab Barkat. For years, he built a reputation by amplifying narratives against India, especially on Jammu & Kashmir, repeatedly portraying India in the worst possible light. This is the same man who used abusive language against Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister simply for visiting India. Now, as civilians in PoJK face unrest, brutality, and broad-daylight killings at the hands of the Pakistan Army, he has suddenly discovered the language of democracy, civil liberties, and accountability. Yet even today, his criticism is aimed at Maryam Nawaz, while he continues to avoid directly confronting Pakistan’s military leadership and Asim Munir. That tells you everything you need to know. If this episode has really taught him anything, I hope he stops serving his masters in the Pakistani military and stops peddling false narratives, spreading hatred, or justifying jihadist terrorism in India.

Sonam Mahajan

40,635 次观看 • 1 个月前

What is China's Secret and Dangerous Game? China, Pakistan, Qatar, and Turkey are collaborating to bleed India and trap America.. The Pahalgam terror attack was not just an assault on innocent civilians. It was the opening move in a larger global war. Desh Kapoor comes out with yet another powerful video, he talks about an angle that nobody is discussing and his analysis of the situation is not wrong at all. If India falls, the world order as we know it will collapse, and America will have no way to contain China’s imperial ambitions. When one initially looked at the massacre in Pahalgam, one thought it was just a terror attack. As one went deeper into the investigation and the evidence came out, it became clear that it was more than just bigotry and religious madness. When one woke up to that, the changes in the geostrategic landscape became self-evident. The Pahalgam terror attack has exposed a dangerous new dimension of asymmetric warfare facing India — the silent infiltration of Chinese-origin communication and navigation technologies into terrorist operations. Intelligence sources confirm that Pakistani-backed terrorists, particularly from Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and its proxy, The Resistance Front (TRF), are now using sophisticated Chinese equipment like Ultra communication devices, Huawei satellite phones, and BeiDou satellite navigation systems. This is not just about Kashmir anymore. It’s about the future of freedom itself. Credit : Drishtikone/Desh Kapoor.
10:53

What is China's Secret and Dangerous Game? China, Pakistan, Qatar, and Turkey are collaborating to bleed India and trap America.. The Pahalgam terror attack was not just an assault on innocent civilians. It was the opening move in a larger global war. Desh Kapoor comes out with yet another powerful video, he talks about an angle that nobody is discussing and his analysis of the situation is not wrong at all. If India falls, the world order as we know it will collapse, and America will have no way to contain China’s imperial ambitions. When one initially looked at the massacre in Pahalgam, one thought it was just a terror attack. As one went deeper into the investigation and the evidence came out, it became clear that it was more than just bigotry and religious madness. When one woke up to that, the changes in the geostrategic landscape became self-evident. The Pahalgam terror attack has exposed a dangerous new dimension of asymmetric warfare facing India — the silent infiltration of Chinese-origin communication and navigation technologies into terrorist operations. Intelligence sources confirm that Pakistani-backed terrorists, particularly from Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and its proxy, The Resistance Front (TRF), are now using sophisticated Chinese equipment like Ultra communication devices, Huawei satellite phones, and BeiDou satellite navigation systems. This is not just about Kashmir anymore. It’s about the future of freedom itself. Credit : Drishtikone/Desh Kapoor.

Augadh

375,491 次观看 • 1 年前

For decades, Chaudhry Tariq Mahmood, who is associated with the Pakistan Patriotic Front UK, has been a familiar face at sponsored protests outside Indian diplomatic missions in Britain. He has taken pride in participating in and helping to organise agitations attended by hundreds, often marketed as pro-Kashmir demonstrations but frequently featuring Islamists and Khalistani militants, some of whom are wanted in India over acts of terror and violence. Now, in an interview with ex-Pakistan Army Major Adil Raja, he says he regrets siding with the Pakistani military and organising events at its behest because ‘they use and then abuse people’. Adil Raja, who now lives in the United Kingdom and has become a vocal critic of Pakistan’s military, has himself faced legal and political controversies in Pakistan and abroad. According to Tariq’s account in the interview, he believes he was used by the very establishment he supported until days ago. The irony is difficult to miss. A man who spent years protesting outside the Indian High Commission in London and advancing causes aligned with Pakistan’s strategic interests now finds himself abandoned and vilified by the very same system. This is especially revealing because, in an earlier appearance on Adil Raja’s YouTube channel, Tariq repeatedly referred to Indian security forces in Jammu and Kashmir as ‘kafir forces’, language that reflects a deeply sectarian worldview and suggests that, for some activists, hostility towards India is not political but merely rooted in religious antagonism. Such rhetoric has long raised questions about whether these overseas protests, marketed as human rights or pro-Kashmir demonstrations, are, in reality, vehicles for a more divisive ideological agenda. And this is where the story becomes larger than one man. History is full of people who believed they were serving a cause, only to discover they were being used as instruments. Hatred can be a powerful mobilising force, but it is rarely a stable foundation for a life or a movement. Tariq has also been designated a terrorist by the Pakistani authorities. In the interview, he appears amused that India never did the same and takes credit for it, saying it was because he was innocent. Maybe, Tariq, you were not so innocent. India simply chose not to be as harsh on you as the people you served, even though you spent years protesting against it and vilifying its institutions. And perhaps that is the final irony of all: the people you hated so much as ‘kafirs’ were not, after all, the villains of your story.
1:15

For decades, Chaudhry Tariq Mahmood, who is associated with the Pakistan Patriotic Front UK, has been a familiar face at sponsored protests outside Indian diplomatic missions in Britain. He has taken pride in participating in and helping to organise agitations attended by hundreds, often marketed as pro-Kashmir demonstrations but frequently featuring Islamists and Khalistani militants, some of whom are wanted in India over acts of terror and violence. Now, in an interview with ex-Pakistan Army Major Adil Raja, he says he regrets siding with the Pakistani military and organising events at its behest because ‘they use and then abuse people’. Adil Raja, who now lives in the United Kingdom and has become a vocal critic of Pakistan’s military, has himself faced legal and political controversies in Pakistan and abroad. According to Tariq’s account in the interview, he believes he was used by the very establishment he supported until days ago. The irony is difficult to miss. A man who spent years protesting outside the Indian High Commission in London and advancing causes aligned with Pakistan’s strategic interests now finds himself abandoned and vilified by the very same system. This is especially revealing because, in an earlier appearance on Adil Raja’s YouTube channel, Tariq repeatedly referred to Indian security forces in Jammu and Kashmir as ‘kafir forces’, language that reflects a deeply sectarian worldview and suggests that, for some activists, hostility towards India is not political but merely rooted in religious antagonism. Such rhetoric has long raised questions about whether these overseas protests, marketed as human rights or pro-Kashmir demonstrations, are, in reality, vehicles for a more divisive ideological agenda. And this is where the story becomes larger than one man. History is full of people who believed they were serving a cause, only to discover they were being used as instruments. Hatred can be a powerful mobilising force, but it is rarely a stable foundation for a life or a movement. Tariq has also been designated a terrorist by the Pakistani authorities. In the interview, he appears amused that India never did the same and takes credit for it, saying it was because he was innocent. Maybe, Tariq, you were not so innocent. India simply chose not to be as harsh on you as the people you served, even though you spent years protesting against it and vilifying its institutions. And perhaps that is the final irony of all: the people you hated so much as ‘kafirs’ were not, after all, the villains of your story.

Sonam Mahajan

21,704 次观看 • 2 个月前

Siddhant Nagrath’s core line in that Oxford Union “India vs Pakistan” debate is that Pakistan’s structure and incentives make sustained hostility and even war with India politically and economically attractive for those who hold power there, and that this is stabilised not restrained by its nuclear posture. ​ Nagrath argues that for 77 years Pakistan’s ruling establishment has had strong incentives to maintain confrontation with India, including the possibility of military action. ​ He contends that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons do not create responsible restraint but instead enable aggressive behaviour under a protective umbrella. ​ He claims it is “politically infeasible” and “economically infeasible” for those who hold the money, power, and politics in Pakistan to avoid war, because conflict sustains their position. ​ According to him, when there is Indo‑Pak conflict, it is not Indian leaders like Narendra Modi whose electoral prospects improve most, but Pakistan’s power brokers, who gain legitimacy and resources from crisis. ​ Terrorism and security argument Nagrath asserts that Pakistan has systematically given terrorists a home, weapons, training, military aid, intelligence support, and guidance on where and how to strike India. ​ On this basis, he argues India faces a security environment in which Pakistan-backed terrorism and the threat of escalation are entrenched tools of state policy rather than aberrations. ​ Rebuttal to “nuclear stabiliser” claim Responding to the proposition’s portrayal of Pakistan as a “great nuclear” stabilising power, he suggests nuclear capability has not translated into responsible de‑escalation. ​ Instead, he frames Pakistan’s nuclear status as part of a bargaining strategy that allows it to internationalise crises and shield itself while continuing support to terror networks. Debate Context The event occurred amid prior Oxford Union controversies, including a collapsed India-Pakistan debate where Nagrath and peers like Viraansh Bhanushali participated after Indian leaders withdrew. Nagrath has debated Kashmir issues before, opposing independence motions. The video has garnered views on the Oxford Union channel, reflecting interest in India-Pakistan geopolitical discourse. Credit : Oxford Union.
10:35

Siddhant Nagrath’s core line in that Oxford Union “India vs Pakistan” debate is that Pakistan’s structure and incentives make sustained hostility and even war with India politically and economically attractive for those who hold power there, and that this is stabilised not restrained by its nuclear posture. ​ Nagrath argues that for 77 years Pakistan’s ruling establishment has had strong incentives to maintain confrontation with India, including the possibility of military action. ​ He contends that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons do not create responsible restraint but instead enable aggressive behaviour under a protective umbrella. ​ He claims it is “politically infeasible” and “economically infeasible” for those who hold the money, power, and politics in Pakistan to avoid war, because conflict sustains their position. ​ According to him, when there is Indo‑Pak conflict, it is not Indian leaders like Narendra Modi whose electoral prospects improve most, but Pakistan’s power brokers, who gain legitimacy and resources from crisis. ​ Terrorism and security argument Nagrath asserts that Pakistan has systematically given terrorists a home, weapons, training, military aid, intelligence support, and guidance on where and how to strike India. ​ On this basis, he argues India faces a security environment in which Pakistan-backed terrorism and the threat of escalation are entrenched tools of state policy rather than aberrations. ​ Rebuttal to “nuclear stabiliser” claim Responding to the proposition’s portrayal of Pakistan as a “great nuclear” stabilising power, he suggests nuclear capability has not translated into responsible de‑escalation. ​ Instead, he frames Pakistan’s nuclear status as part of a bargaining strategy that allows it to internationalise crises and shield itself while continuing support to terror networks. Debate Context The event occurred amid prior Oxford Union controversies, including a collapsed India-Pakistan debate where Nagrath and peers like Viraansh Bhanushali participated after Indian leaders withdrew. Nagrath has debated Kashmir issues before, opposing independence motions. The video has garnered views on the Oxford Union channel, reflecting interest in India-Pakistan geopolitical discourse. Credit : Oxford Union.

Augadh

23,925 次观看 • 8 个月前

This morning, Modi government issued a statement in Hindi, which said that Narendra Modi clearly told Donald Trump that ‘he has no role in the ceasefire, and we do not accept any mediation. The ceasefire was not done because of trade.’ But within a few hours, Trump has now said "I stopped the war between India and Pakistan. I love Pakistan. Modi is a wonderful man. I talked to him last night. Now we will also sign a trade deal with him. Asim Munir was influential in stopping the war from Pakistan's side and Modi among others did so from India. But I stopped the war between India and Pakistan." This is indeed very puzzling. The Modi government is saying something else and Trump continues to be adamant on his own claim - which he has now made for the 15th time in the last 38 days. The reality is that the information about the ceasefire was first shared by Trump on X and not the Indian Government. Why is Narendra Modi not able to state openly all that he allegedly told Trump over the phone? India awaits answers. This is a matter of our national security and sovereignty and cannot be treated so recklessly.
0:35

This morning, Modi government issued a statement in Hindi, which said that Narendra Modi clearly told Donald Trump that ‘he has no role in the ceasefire, and we do not accept any mediation. The ceasefire was not done because of trade.’ But within a few hours, Trump has now said "I stopped the war between India and Pakistan. I love Pakistan. Modi is a wonderful man. I talked to him last night. Now we will also sign a trade deal with him. Asim Munir was influential in stopping the war from Pakistan's side and Modi among others did so from India. But I stopped the war between India and Pakistan." This is indeed very puzzling. The Modi government is saying something else and Trump continues to be adamant on his own claim - which he has now made for the 15th time in the last 38 days. The reality is that the information about the ceasefire was first shared by Trump on X and not the Indian Government. Why is Narendra Modi not able to state openly all that he allegedly told Trump over the phone? India awaits answers. This is a matter of our national security and sovereignty and cannot be treated so recklessly.

Congress

264,299 次观看 • 1 年前