Indian Army used artillery & heavy mortars on LOC targeting Civilian Population

[M. Sarmad]

I beg to differ. You are too knowledgeable not to know that the Pakistani refusal to withdraw has been recorded in the proceedings of the committee.

Elaborate please. Not sure what exactly are you talking about here

 

[alee92nawaz]

Standard procedure on the Indian side is to launch a low grade attack....an exaggerate it in the media to no end. I say we should "head hunt" these bofors guns but local commanders now better how to retaliate. I expect another tit for tat exchange......that's life on the LOC.

5 commandos got killed in hand to hand combat with mujahideen. This headline is gonna hurt

 

[IMARV]

Elaborate please. Not sure what exactly are you talking about here

Simple, if you can disagree to original draft and reason not to follow it in word, we have the right as well to discard further amendments or asks. After all it was voluntary.

 

[M. Sarmad]

You need me to quote UNSC resolutions?

The facts are established and you trying to shut posters because of them not buying your narrative is quite understanding. Is this the norm here? I am pretty respectful in my discourse I believe.

Now prove me how onus is on India as per original UNSC resolution or leave your line of argument.

Ever heard about 'Truce Agreement'?
Go read about it and then come back here to discuss

 

[Hellfire]

Not again @Joe Shearer & @M. Sarmad

 

[M. Sarmad]

Simple, if you can disagree to original draft and reason not to follow it in word, we have the right as well to discard further amendments or asks. After all it was voluntary.

It was not voluntary. You had consented to be bound by UNCIP resolutions. Read UN documents for details

 

[IMARV]

Ever heard about 'Truce Agreement'?
Go read about it and then come back here to discuss

Which year it came into existence? We signed it after your refusal to step back. Truce is temporary.

It was not voluntary. You had consented to be bound by UNCIP resolutions. Read UN documents for details

bound and that UN article doesn't go well together in one line. Did you bound to first UNSC draft of removing all your forces from Kashmir?

 

[M. Sarmad]

Which year it came into existence? We signed it after your refusal to step back. Truce is temporary.

See, you don't even know what Truce Agreement is and you are trying to 'tell' us about UN Resolutions!!

Truce Agreement is a part of UN Resolutions. The obligation of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from the state of Jammu and Kashmir does not devolve until both sides conclude a truce agreement to govern the withdrawal of not only Pakistan forces but also the bulk of the Indian armed forces from the state

bound and that UN article doesn't go well together in one line. Did you bound to first UNSC draft of removing all your forces from Kashmir?

Alright. If I post UN declassified documents here saying what I have said, then would you reconsider your position?

 

[IMARV]

See, you don't even know what Truce Agreement is and you are trying to 'tell' us about UN Resolutions!!

Truce Agreement is a part of UN Resolutions. The obligation of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from the state of Jammu and Kashmir does not devolve until both sides conclude a truce agreement to govern the withdrawal of not only Pakistan forces but also the bulk of the Indian armed forces from the state



Alright. If I post UN declassified documents here saying what I have said, then would you reconsider your position?

Really, so now truce agreement is your new arsenal? Truce agreement was just to bring peace till a final solution comes into existence. What bearing it has on original resolution?

Infact it was called for very reason that you didn't followed withdrawal of your forces as needed by UN resolution to do so and resisted for various reasons. What could UN do in that case apart from asking for a truce till it lasts?

A waste of effort to justify your non committal to force withdrawal to this truce agreement.

Alright. If I post UN declassified documents here saying what I have said, then would you reconsider your position?

If you can post that you didn't resisted and was ready to withdraw all your forces as per the very first resolution, without any condition, I will.

Not again @Joe Shearer & @M. Sarmad

Quarantined and locked down. Wont mind again.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Really, so now truce agreement is your new arsenal? Truce agreement was just to being peace till a final solution comes into existence. What bearing it has on original resolution?

Meray bhai, it's a part of the original resolutions accepted by India and Pakistan.
It was meant to govern the withdrawal of troops.
Truce Agreement could never be concluded as India rejected all demilitarization plans proposed by the UN
Pakistan stands ready to conclude a Truce Agreement with India even today

If you can post that you didn't resisted and was ready to withdraw all your forces as per the very first resolution, without any condition, I will.

Why 'ifs' and 'buts'?

 

[IMARV]

Meray bhai, it's a part of the original resolutions accepted by India and Pakistan.
It was meant to govern the withdrawal of troops.
Truce Agreement could never be concluded as India rejected all demilitarization plans proposed by the UN
Pakistan stands ready to conclude a Truce Agreement of India even today

My bad, I hastily confused it with Karachi agreement for ceasefire and come up with a truce. Anyways, if you meant by Part 2 of the original resolution, yes it was never concluded as you never withdrawn your forces which was termed as a material change by UN itself.

Why 'ifs' and 'buts'?

To put things in right perspective.

If you can deny first draft in words, we can deny the supplements.

 

[M. Sarmad]

My bad, I hastily confused it with Karachi agreement for ceasefire and come up with a truce. Anyways, if you meant by Part 2 of the original resolution, yes it was never concluded as you never withdrawn your forces which was termed as a material change by UN itself.

Duh!
Truce Agreement was meant to govern withdrawal of troops.
It was not to be concluded 'after' the withdrawal of troops

To put things in right perspective.

If you can deny first draft in words, we can deny the supplements.

Truce Agreement is not supplementary, it's a part of the original draft

 

[Inception-06]

@Signalian why Pakistan Media is not Highlighting our response or didn't we give any?

 

[IMARV]

Duh!
Truce Agreement was meant to govern withdrawal of troops.
It was not to be concluded 'after' the withdrawal of troops

All agreement get concluded post their completion. What are you trying to say here? Did it ever get to its conclusion? I hope just writing it down and getting signed by people is not conclusion for you.

Truce Agreement is not supplementary, it's a part of the original draft

Losing the plot here you. I never said that. My reference to supplement is not for truce agreement which is part 2 of original resolution but further solutions proposed by UN appointed arbitrator for forces withdrawal after Pak refusal to withdraw unilaterally and thats where @Joe Shearer hinted toward bias, if I am not wrong.

 

[Tumba]

Pakistan army has fired top down attack ATGMs ... most probably of chinese made as American tow exported to Pakistan can not do top down attacks on bunkers ..

Spike ERs will be the likely weapon of choice now from India as its available in plenty at LOC ... intense artillery duel is in progress... India honours her Paras today ...Jai Hind