Comments by "Rita Gameiro" (@puraLusa) on "The most dangerous place on Earth?" video.

  1. If this was so, why is it that china is the main trade partner? It was chinese engeneers who got killed not uk ones.
    34
  2.  @yasa7149  ad-hominem, the go to when u can't handle facts, lmao.
    21
  3. @maquacr7014  did u know appeal to authority is also considered a fallacy in rhetorics.
    8
  4. Not an empirial rhetoric at all 😂
    6
  5. My dude, pak could have solved it and united the pashtoons, but they didn't cause "security" which is exactly the reason Duran draw that line. So, what makes pak right in its concerns but brits wrong when the reasoning is exactly the same.
    5
  6. @kealeradecal6091  in this particular case, the line itself is the basis for conflict, following it is what's making it. Borders isn't 1 size fits all, and this border makes no sense cause it cuts pashtoom into 2 diferent countries, which was done without their input or concent.
    5
  7. @NotSomethingIsNothing  india and pak formed as an agreement of deciding same territory (its territory not land). If u were correct, than decision wouldn't happen, borders would never change etc. This isn't correct. Want an example, saudi and jordan have exchange territories, no war, nothing, just an agreement between ruling class on both sides. Oman and UAE have a bunch of agreements on exclaves, same, no wars, agreements negociated and honored. Very easy to blame the previous administration. Pakistan as a country isn't some old civilization, it's a very recent made up country. They could have been better than the brits, but they were not meanwhile blaming the brits for something they themselves do.
    3
  8. What's the common enemy? And if pak and iran have same goals, what are those?
    2
  9. To a certain degree. If the situation is too unstable, mining and transporting these is chalenge. And that makes it not a very good motivator.
    2
  10. @pirated42131  at this point seems like no one has control of its own borders. Or maybe there was never an actual control but with the internet it's now more discussed and govs can't hide it no more. Watter management and border control seem to be a very good reason for cooperation. Problem is that often separatists etc are actually supported by neighboring govs, or at least somewhat protected. Weren't the taliban taking refuge in pak when nato invaded afghanistan? Well, now same taliban pose a problem to both pak and iran, the irony isn't it.
    1
  11. @maquacr7014  views about a far away 3rd country doesn't make or break relationships, but saudi-iran do have huge influence in muslim majority countries.
    1
  12. @hamedahmadi1382  ur confusing and mixing the scramble for africa with middle east. That is on purpose, to spread propaganda one needs to be seen as victim and never perpetrator. A lot of the borders in central asia were not done by europeans in cahoots, they were agreements between empires of the time, persia, russia, uk, etc. Why? Cause prior to it there was no tech to define specific points of border lines and these were permeable and often exchanged (war, conquests etc). Europeans didn't compete for central asia, cause they all invested key locations for sea trade routes, not land ones, those resources were much more expensive to exploit due to being far away from ports. This is probably why it's exploitation was mostly done in the xx century by soviets, a time where the whole region was no longer at the hands of the brits. Facts, fun stuff, generally supercedes feelings.
    1
  13. War and conflict between people groups are much much older than the 1st empires.
    1