# The Future of Kashmir? "Seven" Possible Solutions!



## Beskar

The Future Of Kashmir?

Scenario 1






*
The status quo*

Kashmir has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for more than 60 years. Currently a boundary - the Line of Control - divides the region in two, with one part administered by India and one by Pakistan. India would like to formalise this status quo and make it the accepted international boundary. But Pakistan and Kashmiri activists reject this plan because they both want greater control over the region.


Scenario 2





*
Kashmir joins Pakistan*

Pakistan has consistently favoured this as the best solution to the dispute. In view of the state's majority Muslim population, it believes that it would vote to become part of Pakistan. However a single plebiscite held in a region which comprises peoples that are culturally, religiously and ethnically diverse, would create disaffected minorities. The Hindus of Jammu, and the Buddhists of Ladakh have never shown any desire to join Pakistan and would protest at the outcome. 


Scenario 3






*Kashmir joins India*

Such a solution would be unlikely to bring stability to the region as the Muslim inhabitants of Pakistani-administered Jammu and Kashmir, including the Northern Areas, have never shown any desire to become part of India.

Scenario 4






*Independent Kashmir*

The difficulty of adopting this as a potential solution is that it requires India and Pakistan to give up territory, which they are not willing to do. Any plebiscite or referendum likely to result in a majority vote for independence would therefore probably be opposed by both India and Pakistan. It would also be rejected by the inhabitants of the state who are content with their status as part of the countries to which they already owe allegiance. 


Scenario 5





*
A smaller independent Kashmir*

An independent Kashmir could be created from the Kashmir Valley - currently under Indian administration - and the narrow strip of land which Pakistan calls Azad Jammu and Kashmir. This would leave the strategically important regions of the Northern Areas and Ladakh, bordering China, under the control of Pakistan and India respectively. However both India and Pakistan would be unlikely to enter into discussions which would have this scenario as a possible outcome. 


Scenario 6





*
Independent Kashmir Valley*

An independent Kashmir Valley has been considered by some as the best solution because it would address the grievances of those who have been fighting against the Indian Government since the insurgency began in 1989. But critics say that, without external assistance, the region would not be economically viable.

Scenario 7





*
The Chenab formula*

This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistan's borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

*How do YOU see the future of Kashmir?*

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Omar1984

Scenario 7 is the best solution...Pakistan doesn't want Hindu majority regions of Jammu, that can go to India.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Beskar

This thread should be made a sticky somewhere. All the solutions are addressed in here. Also, we currently don't have a forum section dedicated to the Kashmir Issue. This could be the start. Anyone else agree with that?


----------



## roopesh

hmm.kashmir....All indians want scenario 3. ..lol...does any pakistani agree with this...NO Never...!! Both countries wont be ready to loose land what ever the resolution or ppl say about. So LOC is the international border. Let the violation happen...we are there to fight and we will.....
Now its upto ppl to decide where they want to be.....if they live in the place where they dont want to be better they packup!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beskar

roopesh said:


> hmm.kashmir....All indians want scenario 3. ..lol...does any pakistani agree with this...NO Never...!! Both countries wont be ready to loose land what ever the resolution or ppl say about. So LOC is the international border. Let the violation happen...we are there to fight and we will.....
> Now its upto ppl to decide where they want to be.....if they live in the place where they dont want to be better they packup!



If that's the case, every Pakistani would agree with "Solution 2" Lol.


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> hmm.kashmir....All indians want scenario 3. ..lol...does any pakistani agree with this...NO Never...!! Both countries wont be ready to loose land what ever the resolution or ppl say about. So LOC is the international border. Let the violation happen...we are there to fight and we will.....
> Now its upto ppl to decide where they want to be.....if they live in the place where they dont want to be better they packup!




Yea ONLY Indians would want scenario 3, have you ever thought what Kashmiris would want.

NEWS FLASH FOR YOU: LOC is NOT an international border...and no country in the world recognizes it as an international border.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> Yea ONLY Indians would want scenario 3, have you ever thought what Kashmiris would want. NEWS FLASH FOR YOU: LOC is NOT an international border...and no country in the world recognizes it as an international border.



Omar kashmir is something everyone keep debating man. Every pakistani wants to fight every indian on this. I like your pictures and scenarios..but to me it doenst make any sense...every indian on this forum discuss the same and even pakistani. later thread will become hindu-islam and it never ends..

I want to make a constuctive thread here...lets discuss about whats the benifit and loss by loosing or gaining kashmir by each country. Ultimately it is the thing going to matter...no one wants to be looser.


----------



## Beskar

roopesh said:


> Omar kashmir is something everyone keep debating man. Every pakistani wants to fight every indian on this. I like your pictures and scenarios..but to me it doenst make any sense...*every indian on this forum discuss the same and even pakistani. later thread will become hindu-islam and it never ends..
> *
> *I want to make a constuctive thread here...lets discuss about whats the benifit and loss by loosing or gaining kashmir by each country*. Ultimately it is the thing going to matter...no one wants to be looser.



I have to agree with you on one point. I created this thread for a "Civil" debate. All the solutions are on the table. Let's discuss them in a respectable manner.


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> Omar kashmir is something everyone keep debating man. Every pakistani wants to fight every indian on this. I like your pictures and scenarios..but to me it doenst make any sense...every indian on this forum discuss the same and even pakistani. later thread will become hindu-islam and it never ends..
> 
> I want to make a constuctive thread here...lets discuss about whats the benifit and loss by loosing or gaining kashmir by each country. Ultimately it is the thing going to matter...no one wants to be looser.



India cant keep on sending hundreds of thousands of its troop to Kashmir, how long will India keep on doing this?

The world is realizing now what is going on in Kashmir. I'm glad Obama is talking about it, the 61 year old dispute must come to an end for both India and Pakistan to move on.

If there was no Kashmir problem, there would not be any India-Pakistan tensions rising. The center of India-Pakistan problem is Kashmir.


----------



## donrahul

How about this Scenario.. Both India and Pakistan agree on a treaty not to create mischief in each other's territory(Atleast JK). Let each region be under the complete administration of the respective country, without jihadi or RaW interference for another 2 decades or 25 years. Let the people see, which pasture is greener and let the State go to that country.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ANDUBYLL

option 7, but with Buddhist Ladakh ( East of Kargil) becoming part of India . I cant think of any other options that both nations will agree to.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beskar

ANDUBYLL said:


> option 7, but with Buddhist Ladakh ( East of Kargil) becoming part of India . I cant think of any other options that both nations will agree to.



Frankly, India would never agree to such a Solution. That would result in loosing massive amounts of land for her. But at the end of the day, "Someone" has to sacrifice their interests for the sake of stability and peace in the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Omar1984

ANDUBYLL said:


> option 7, but with Buddhist Ladakh ( East of Kargil) becoming part of India . I cant think of any other options that both nations will agree to.



It said this scenario was suggested in the 1960s....what happened, its the perfect scenario..and your right Buddhist Ladakh along with Hindu Jammu can go to India.


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> It said this scenario was suggested in the 1960s....what happened, its the perfect scenario..and your right Buddhist Ladakh along with Hindu Jammu can go to India.



sorry with too many posts....but kashmir is hot cake topic...

Lets see if we can conclude in another few days the best resolution (short term or long term) as a small group. If we fail to do so how can you expect billion ppl going to agree??

My short term resolution is Azad Kashmir should merge with pakistan completely. So both countries first stop cross border terrors. It looks like the idea is in Indias favour. But what ever violation happen in kashmir India cant point to pakistan. Now all inida telling is kashmir violation is due to cross border terrors. think about this point.


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> sorry with too many posts....but kashmir is hot cake topic...
> 
> Lets see if we can conclude in another few days the best resolution (short term or long term) as a small group. If we fail to do so how can you expect billion ppl going to agree??
> 
> My short term resolution is Azad Kashmir should merge with pakistan completely. So both countries first stop cross border terrors. It looks like the idea is in Indias favour. But what ever violation happen in kashmir India cant point to pakistan. Now all inida telling is kashmir violation is due to cross border terrors. think about this point.




hahaha we give the people of Azad Kashmir their freedom, no one sends troops into Azad Kashmir and forces them to do anything. Pakistan is not like India, and I'm glad the people of Azad Kashmir are making Indians worry

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beskar

roopesh said:


> sorry with too many posts....but kashmir is hot cake topic...
> 
> Lets see if we can conclude in another few days the best resolution (short term or long term) as a small group. If we fail to do so how can you expect billion ppl going to agree??
> 
> My short term resolution is Azad Kashmir should merge with pakistan completely. So both countries first stop cross border terrors. It looks like the idea is in Indias favour. But what ever violation happen in kashmir India cant point to pakistan. Now all inida telling is kashmir violation is due to cross border terrors. think about this point.



The only problem with adopting Short-term solutions is that it would delay the long-term process which already hasn't been sorted out for decades. That's not a feasible solution at all! Kashmir-issue should be sorted out properly and once for all! Otherwise, a short-term solution will further escalate another Generation of disputes.


----------



## Omar1984

The only solution is to have a fair plebiscite in each and every city, town, and village of Pakistan's Jammu & Kashmir and India Occupied Jammu & Kashmir. The ultimate choice for the people living in each of those cities, towns, and villages....Pakistan or India?

And we respect the plebiscite and move on with our lives.


----------



## Salahadin

pakistan should go for# 2


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> The only solution is to have a fair plebiscite in each and every city of Pakistan's Jammu & Kashmir and India Occupied Jammu & Kashmir. The ultimate choice for the people living in each of those cities....Pakistan or India? And we respect the plebiscite and move on with our lives.





Omar1984 said:


> hahaha we give the people of Azad Kashmir their freedom, no one sends troops into Azad Kashmir and forces them to do anything. Pakistan is not like India, and I'm glad the people of Azad Kashmir are making Indians worry



Lol...we both cant even agree with each other....how could you expect India to agree??? All you want is tomorrow morning u want kashmir in your hands. thats not going to happen and you are not willing to listen anyother. I am saying india not ready to loose kashmir. SIMPLE.

Now see Azad kashmir, its a strip across LOC. India claiming that terros enter from this area. Pakistan is telling its Azad kashmir so It wont control. So reducing the violation in this area is in hands of pakistan. Azad kashmir air and land is in the pak military control. Why does pakistan not supporing to stop cross border terrism?

India at this moment is claiming that all kashmir violation is becoz of cross border terrirsm....simple...so pak has a responsibility to show to the world that the it doenst have a role in kashmir violation. ZARDARI internationally agreed that they are terrors.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Beskar

Salahadin said:


> pakistan should go for# 2



If only it was that easy lol. Both countries will never agree to loosing big chunks of lands to their rivals. The only way both of them would swallow their pride, would be if there's an Independent state of Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

I have another idea. How about pakistan putting effors to make its kashmir economically stronger ???? best infrasture place in the pakistan? This will force India to take counter actions to develop its kashmir economically. 
U have to make kashmir economy depends on pakistan.


----------



## Beskar

roopesh said:


> I have another idea. How about pakistan putting effors to make its kashmir economically stronger ???? best infrasture place in the pakistan? This will force India to take counter actions to develop its kashmir economically.
> U have to make kashmir economy depends on pakistan.



If you're talking about the bullet-riddled infrastructure on the Indian side of Kashmir, then yes, we don't have that. 

Secondly, Infrastructures tend to grow stronger if the region isn't under a dispute for the past 6 decades.


----------



## Omar1984

Bezerk said:


> If only it was that easy lol. Both countries will never agree to loosing big chunks of lands to their rivals. The only way both of them would swallow their pride, would be if there's an Independent state of Kashmir.




Jammu and some parts of Ladakh would never want to leave India, Northern Areas would never want to leave Pakistan.

Kashmir Valley would like an independent Kashmir, Azad Kashmir would like to reunite with Kashmir valley, but some people in Azad Kashmir, especially pahari speakers, would never want to leave Pakistan.

Only solution is a fair plebiscite in every town, city, village of both Pakistan's Kashmir and Indian Occupied Kashmir.


----------



## Beskar

Omar1984 said:


> Jammu and some parts of Ladakh would never want to leave India, Northern Areas would never want to leave Pakistan.
> 
> Kashmir Valley would like an independent Kashmir, Azad Kashmir would like to reunite with Kashmir valley, but some people in Azad Kashmir, especially pahari speakers, would never want to leave Pakistan.
> 
> Only solution is a fair plebiscite in every town, city, village of both Pakistan's Kashmir and Indian Occupied Kashmir.



I was referring to solution 6. Independent Kashmir valley. That way, our Azad-Kashmir wouldn't have to leave Pakistan.


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> Jammu and some parts of Ladakh would never want to leave India, Northern Areas would never want to leave Pakistan.
> 
> Kashmir Valley would like an independent Kashmir, Azad Kashmir would like to reunite with Kashmir valley, but some people in Azad Kashmir, especially pahari speakers, would never want to leave Pakistan.
> 
> Only solution is a fair plebiscite in every town, city, village of both Pakistan's Kashmir and Indian Occupied Kashmir.




Omar do you have any suggestion to improve the situation or any temp resolution to pass for better peace for kashmir ppl. All you want to say is conduct elections..let ppl decide..etc...its not going to happen.


----------



## A1Kaid

Well Berzerk there are two additional options as well...

1) Co-Governance as first proposed by Fmr. Pres Musharraf he suggested BOTH Pakistan and India govern Kashmir together, with a joint governing body...Knowing both countries are against giving up any part of Kashmir he (Musharraf) proposed this idea.

2) The long awaited plebiscite!


Quite frankly a Kashmiri Plebiscite which can result in either ceding to Pakistan or independence but not ceding to India as we all know Kashmiris hate Hindu Indians for many agreeable reasons may be a good solution but as you know Indians know plebiscite means the end of there long bloody occupation.

Though I support dividing India, supporting separatist movements, attacking Indian outposts in the Mountain, intelligence gathering, calling upon the Mujahideen, economic sanctions from many Muslim countries against India, Geo-strategic warfare...

As you know after weakening India, we capture Kashmir honorably and just like the Mujahideen of the past would have done.

We must deliver the most painful pressure that this shameful country India has ever received.



SNIPER ON THE ROOF!!!


----------



## Black Stone

I think either Independent Kashmir or Status Quo because the other solutions require losses of land by Pakistan and India which neither of them are willing to.


----------



## roopesh

A1Kaid said:


> Though I support dividing India, supporting separatist movements, attacking Indian outposts in the Mountain, intelligence gathering, calling upon the Mujahideen, economic sanctions from many Muslim countries against India, Geo-strategic warfare...As you know after weakening India, we capture Kashmir honorably and just like the Mujahideen of the past would have done. We must deliver the most painful pressure that this shameful country India has ever received.



Wow! Here you go...The best solution ever found..Nice formula..Is this something not been implemented so far. I think you are already in action for a long long time. Muhahideen is active all the years. Good luck dear...u have a simple task of destoying 1 billion ppl.............

In the same forum we will discuss "IS A1KAID PAKISTANI OR NOT".


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> Omar do you have any suggestion to improve the situation or any temp resolution to pass for better peace for kashmir ppl. All you want to say is conduct elections..let ppl decide..etc...its not going to happen.



Why cant the people of the land decide their own fate. Its their right.


----------



## Awesome

We should consider the independence scenarios. Especially the 1st one. Sure we'll lose territory but not to each other and instead to the real people of Kashmir. That would make that region big enough to economically sustain itself.


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> Why cant the people of the land decide their own fate. Its their right.



I told you lets list after math of kashmir Omar. Thats the resolution...List advntage and disadange to pakistan and india by gaining or loosing kashmir...

see can a conutry afford to take such a price? If not we need to think otherlines....

if u dont want this..lets continue this thread..same hindu muslim...india pakistan ...usa ..un fight....same as other threads and this thread will die after another thread starts with kashmir name.


----------



## Omar1984

Black Stone said:


> I think either Independent Kashmir or Status Quo because the other solutions require losses of land by Pakistan and India which neither of them are willing to.




Many people in different parts of Kashmir dont want an independent Kashmir, such as southern part of the state, Jammu and Ladakh, which want to stay with India and Northern Areas of Kashmir and Azad Kashmir which want to stay with Pakistan.

The only part that wants an independent Kashmir are people from Kashmir valley and thats the part Pakistan and India are fighting for. Pakistan knows it cant control a pro-india jammu and ladakh and India knows it cant control a pro-pakistan northern areas and azad kashmir. While both want to control Kashmir valley, and people from that valley rather have an independent country.

So scenario 6 seems to be the best logic..give Kashmir valley what they want.


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> So scenario 6 seems to be the best logic..give Kashmir valley what they want.



take it man! its all yours...happy . ..

I feel so sorry that no pakistani can speak any otherthing than taking over kashmir which india never going to agree. Even if you are obama its not going to happen.

See how much you can enjoy from our frens conversation:



jeypore said:


> Great resolution to solving the kashmire problem, create more menace. Let me give an alternate solution, Why not make Azad Kashmire a economic powerhouse by infusing foreign investment, incentives to local entreprenuers, building infastructures, etc...Then Indian side Kashmire people will starts demanding better life or they will join the azad Kashmire. No Gun, No Terrorist Camp, No Infiltration, No Violence. How about that Kiddo!!! .





A1Kaid said:


> Oooo how sweet "Why not make Azad Kashmire a economic powerhouse by infusing foreign investment, incentives to local entreprenuers, building infastructures, etc" yeah and then let IAF and Indian army attack Azad Kashmir and destroy it's infrastructure huh or as their plans are...Coming from an Indian that's BS. .


----------



## Black Stone

Omar1984 said:


> Many people in different parts of Kashmir dont want an independent Kashmir, such as southern part of the state, Jammu and Ladakh, which want to stay with India and Northern Areas of Kashmir and Azad Kashmir which want to stay with Pakistan.
> 
> The only part that wants an independent Kashmir are people from Kashmir valley and thats the part Pakistan and India are fighting for. Pakistan knows it cant control a pro-india jammu and ladakh and India knows it cant control a pro-pakistan northern areas and azad kashmir. While both want to control Kashmir valley, and people from that valley rather have an independent country.
> 
> So scenario 6 seems to be the best logic..give Kashmir valley what they want.



The problem with that is Kashmir would be too small to sustain herself in the short term let alone long term. We must consider the bigger picture, the solution sound good, but if it is not viable in the long run then it is meaningless.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Omar1984

Black Stone said:


> The problem with that is Kashmir would be too small to sustain herself in the short term let alone long term. We must consider the bigger picture, the solution sound good, but if it is not viable in the long run then it is meaningless.




Then the only fair way to end this dispute is a plebiscite given to every town, village, and city in both Pakistan's Kashmir and Indian Occupied Kashmir. The choice... Pakistan or India...and we respect the people's decision.


----------



## beetel

Omar1984 said:


> Why cant the people of the land decide their own fate. Its their right.


Will you show your same side to baluchistan,swat,...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Black Stone

Omar1984 said:


> Then the only fair way to end this dispute is a plebiscite given to every town, village, and city in both Pakistan's Kashmir and Indian Occupied Kashmir. The choice... Pakistan or India...and we respect the people's decision.



If the people of Kashmir want an Independent Kashmir would you respect that decision?.


----------



## Beskar

beetel said:


> Will you show your same side to baluchistan,swat,...



Baluchistan and NWFP are official "States" of Pakistan and there's no border dispute between them. Both regions have had people elected governments since the creation of Pakistan. Don't derail the thread.

And please, DON'T REPLY to this message either. Stick to the topic!


----------



## Omar1984

beetel said:


> Will you show your same side to baluchistan,swat,...



Balochistan and Swat are not disputed areas, is India claiming Balochistan and Swat are their's too.

Balochistan and NWFP were given a referendum in 1947 and they decided to be part of Pakistan, Kashmir was never given the referndum.

Balochistan and NWFP is as part of Pakistan as Asaam and India's Punjab is part of India....Kashmir is a DISPUTED teritory recognized a DISPUTED territory by every country in the world.

The Line of Control is not an international boundary.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> Then the only fair way to end this dispute is a plebiscite given to every town, village, and city in both Pakistan's Kashmir and Indian Occupied Kashmir. The choice... Pakistan or India...and we respect the people's decision.



I know why Govt of India stop listening to seperate movements..they dont have anything else to talk....Dont care...another thread with no resolution within this small group.


----------



## Omar1984

Black Stone said:


> If the people of Kashmir want an Independent Kashmir would you respect that decision?.




Yes I think Pakistan will accept the decision of Kashmiris, but all areas have to have a fair plebiscite and agree.

Pakistan will always take the side of Kashmiris.


----------



## afriend

Either Scenario 1 or Secenario 3 would be be good secnario 4 can also be explored with but only as a fully autonomous region under india  i.e with much wider autonomy than any other regions of india, that can also be considered


----------



## roopesh

Black Stone said:


> If the people of Kashmir want an Independent Kashmir would you respect that decision?.



As an Indian I dont agree for any seperate movements. First its against integrity of india. Only the country has the final decision to make. We cant go against billion voices against few thousands. 

if u have any other cards lets talk.


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> As an Indian I dont agree for any seperate movements. First its against integrity of india. Only the country has the final decision to make. We cant go against billion voices against few thousands.
> 
> if u have any other cards lets talk.




When did a Kashmiri ever become an Indian, thats why the people of Kashmir are called Kashmiris and you're not.

The Line of Control is not an International boundary, why are these indians in denial?


----------



## Black Stone

roopesh said:


> As an Indian I dont agree for any seperate movements. First its against integrity of india. Only the country has the final decision to make. We cant go against billion voices against few thousands.
> 
> if u have any other cards lets talk.



It depends what you define as a separatist movement. Kashmir is an disputed territory, so separatism may not apply here. The goal here is to break this "disputed" deadlock and have a everlasting solution acceptable to Pakistan, India and the Kashmiri people.

Of course, in order for this to materialize we need the cooperation of both Pakistan and India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Beskar

Omar1984 said:


> When did a Kashmiri ever become an Indian, thats why the people of Kashmir are called Kashmiris and you're not.
> 
> The Line of Control is not an International boundary, why are these indians in denial?



If the Kashmiri's wanted to be a part of India, it never would've been a "Disputed" region for over six decades. It's common sense, but most of the Indians seem to deny this fact and keep calling it as an "Integral Part of India".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## beetel

Omar1984 said:


> Balochistan and Swat are not disputed areas, is India claiming Balochistan and Swat are their's too.
> 
> Balochistan and NWFP were given a referendum in 1947 and they decided to be part of Pakistan, Kashmir was never given the referndum.
> 
> Balochistan and NWFP is as part of Pakistan as Asaam and India's Punjab is part of India....Kashmir is a DISPUTED teritory recognized a DISPUTED territory by every country in the world.
> 
> The Line of Control is not an international boundary.



Yes it is not a international boundary ..Pakistan has no locus standi in kashmir ..If religion decides which land belongs to whome then Nepal should have been a Indian state..There should have been no srilanka.. If India demanded all this then those parts also termed as "disputed territerry" according to your know..
We wont accept LOC as border ..The whole of kashmir belongs to India..Thanks for remembering every time to every Indian..

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> When did a Kashmiri ever become an Indian, thats why the people of Kashmir are called Kashmiris and you're not.
> The Line of Control is not an International boundary, why are these indians in denial?



I thought this could be intersting discussion..but we both hasnt lost anything but gained nothing..we are on the same page. India dont want to loose land and Pakistan wants to aquire land. 

Are you going to really care for peace of Indian Kashmiri ppl as ur first priority--- answer is NO. If yes please explain and debate what you have done and how u can help more.

Is India really care about ppl in Pakistan kashmir. I dont think so. 

Again samething again and again...circle doesnt end.


----------



## A1Kaid

The fact is how dare these Indian members come on and tell us about their moral and legal rights to hold Kashmir!

Pm. Nehru said he would agree to a plebiscite he never did nor did future Indian leaders down the road.

If Incredible and democratic India truly supports democratic ideals then it should agree to a plebiscite in disputed Kashmir, with an international and neutral observers present, as well as observers from both countries....

Though you must understand there is a reason why India has over hundreds of thousands of it's soldiers in Kashmir, because they understand if they want to hold onto Kashmir they must do it with arms, they must oppress, they must kill the opposition...This is the mentality we are dealing with...They simply refuse to hold a plebiscite!

It is truly India that is exacerbating the Kashmir issue/dispute.


----------



## A1Kaid

May I ask the Indians

Would they be willing to free, total withdraw, and give up Indian occupied Kashmir to Pakistan or an independent Kashmir for certain rewards?

Perhaps economic and military rewards/gifts...Though keep it reasonable...

Perhaps military assistance, or more economic aid, or perhaps a permanent seat in the UN Security Counsel?


----------



## ejaz007

beetel said:


> Will you show your same side to baluchistan,swat,...



Balchistan and Swat are not disputed territory and are not claimed by anyone. Stop derailing the thread. Balochistan joined Pakistan by free will in 1947 when their jirga voted on it.

India considers it self worlds best democracy would you be willing to give the same right to people of Kashmir, Punjab, Assam, Chatisgarh, Tamil Nadu, Bangal, Mizoram, Nagaland, Jharkand and Sikim.

Lets see how many wish to remain with you

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

A1Kaid said:


> May I ask the Indians
> 
> Would they be willing to free, total withdraw, and give up Indian occupied Kashmir to Pakistan or an independent Kashmir for certain rewards?
> 
> Perhaps economic and military rewards/gifts...Though keep it reasonable...
> 
> Perhaps military assistance, or more economic aid, or perhaps a permanent seat in the UN Security Counsel?



I like your question. Lets assume India did this...complete kashmir to Pakistan or fraction ...what gift you can expect..nothing in return or may be something..doenst matter...

Lets do after maths of this inside India

1) Very big trigger for Hindu-Muslim violations. If Kashmir muslims are given what they want why not Rama mandir in Ayodhya ? hindu majority?? There are so many disputed hindu-muslim locations...all need to be reconsidered. Think of amount of violation and does govt capable of handling...Answer may be NO.

2) There are so many disputes between states which are very minor..Today two buses burnt becouse Maharastra states wants few cities from Karnaaka state as the states are divided per language. So all these trigger and end up in huge mass crime.

3) May result in chain reaction and ruling govt will loose power for another 20-30 years which no party can afford.

Other ppl can give more and more list...


Just imagine this much of incidents...why will India now think of handing over kashmir to pakistan what ever few lack ppl think of. I know now you want kashmir at any cost...LOL.


Now give the situation what would happen in pakistan if india takes kashmir completely...my guess is assosintion of head.


----------



## afriend

A1Kaid said:


> May I ask the Indians
> 
> Would they be willing to free, total withdraw, and give up Indian occupied Kashmir to Pakistan or an independent Kashmir for certain rewards?
> 
> Perhaps economic and military rewards/gifts...Though keep it reasonable...
> 
> Perhaps military assistance, or more economic aid, or perhaps a permanent seat in the UN Security Counsel?



I think pakistan can use the military assisatnce and economic aid more than india, and i would be willing to pay cess on my tax for the kashmir fund to take the adminsitration of the pakistani part of kashmir . Well see there is no denying that seperatist sentiments are there in kashmir. But the recent elections held in kashmir had shown a record turn out, reitrating the faith of kashmiri people in the indian constiutional mechanism. I hope its just matter of time rest of the seperatist would come around, but it would take some time, as many of the people who have become seperatists have some member of their family or seen their close friends getting killed in the cross fire between the army and the militants.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ANDUBYLL

How about what Kashmiris want ?
Is it ascesion to Pakistan or existing as an independant nation ?
India and Pakistan have not solved the K issue in the last 60 years and I have a hinch, they will not solve it in the next 60.

Simply because too much is at stake, Backing down from the status quo, means losing the battle to your arch enemy. If for example, Pakistan decides to back down and declare Indian adminstrated Kashmir as part of India, then the Indians will celebrate this as a great victory like 1971. Vice versa, the same will happen in Pakistan !

I think , over a period of say 50 years, Kashmir should pursue a policy of 'soft azaadi'. Starting with bus trips across the LOC (already implemented) to more people-people contacts, pakistani and indian rupees freely tradeable, reduction of armed personnel etc. 

All of this should include good relations between Pakistan and India. You cant choose your neighborhood , might as well live in peace. All this talk about nuclear wars etc, the world will not care if you guys blow yourselves to bits. It will be newsworthy for a week or so, before the world goes to another hotspot. I see, India and Pakistan trying their best to destroy themselves, 60 years since independance, and both nations are at the bottom of all social indicators. Poverty in rampant and so is corruption. Today, 10,000 miles away from South Asia, the hottest topic for my compatriots is to choose which is better, LCD or Plasma , and you guys !! Have a beer (or any legal drink) and relax  The world is far ahead and you have got a lot of catching up to do !!
Apologies for the rant

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

ANDUBYLL said:


> How about what Kashmiris want ?
> Is it ascesion to Pakistan or existing as an independant nation ?
> India and Pakistan have not solved the K issue in the last 60 years and I have a hinch, they will not solve it in the next 60



You are right. The loosing country could potentially break down in the worst case. This would trigger annoucing a war against each other. I dont think any country can afford that.


----------



## A1Kaid

In regards to Kashmir occupation,

An Indian military officer based in Kashmir once said that "my men cannot [Indian Terrorist/rapist/soldiers] defeat the Mujahideen, because unlike the Mujahideen my men are scared to die..." (paraphrasing)

Unfortunately don't have the source with me as of now, but I assure you this is true.


----------



## roopesh

A1Kaid said:


> In regards to Kashmir occupation,
> 
> An Indian military officer based in Kashmir once said that "my men cannot [Indian Terrorist/rapist/soldiers] defeat the Mujahideen, because unlike the Mujahideen my men are scared to die..." (paraphrasing)
> 
> Unfortunately don't have the source with me as of now, but I assure you this is true.




A1Kaid we can keep debating on this topic. Zardari recently said Mujahideen are terrors. He accepted it at international level. 
Do you support them? Could you give some details about them...their group..their motive..their traning ..their arms..their mission..etc


----------



## Smooth Operator

The scenario three is what most Indians really wish to see,but as a rising world power India would be under tremendous internal pressure not upset the current structure.Under tremendous pressure India might accept the first scenario.............but with greater influence over the areas of Kashmir currently occupied by Pakistan


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

roopesh said:


> . All you want to say is conduct elections..let ppl decide..etc...its not going to happen.



That is what India agreed to at partition and at the UNSC. India's leadership affirmed that position several times.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

beetel said:


> Yes it is not a international boundary ..Pakistan has no locus standi in kashmir ..If religion decides which land belongs to whome then Nepal should have been a Indian state..There should have been no srilanka.. If India demanded all this then those parts also termed as "disputed territerry" according to your know..
> *We wont accept LOC as border ..The whole of kashmir belongs to India*..Thanks for remembering every time to every Indian..



Again - under the UNSC and instrument of partition you are committed to holding a plebiscite in Kashmir to determine its final status as part of India or Pakistan. 

What Indians 'feel' like does not count here. For example, just because you 'feel like' Texas should be part of India does not legally make it yours. There are international and bilateral agreements and commitments to follow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## beetel

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Again - under the UNSC and instrument of partition you are committed to holding a plebiscite in Kashmir to determine its final status as part of India or Pakistan.
> 
> What Indians 'feel' like does not count here. For example, just because you 'feel like' Texas should be part of India does not legally make it yours. There are international and bilateral agreements and commitments to follow.


When UN cancelled kashmir acession to India by king through british..?
Plebcite demand was withdrawn by sheikh abdullah in 1972 who is by large considered as true representative of kashmiries then..Not to mention he won subsequent election with huge majority..


----------



## UnitedPak

Pakistan and India have already shown their ability to solve the Kashmir issue bilaterally. They have 3 wars to show for it. Neither side trusts the other and has no good faith in each other.

The only logical solution is to ignore what they have to say, and allow the Kashmiri people to decide their own future. UN like they promised, should make sure this happens in a democratic manner.

Pakistan and India have to accept that they wont gain all of Kashmir. There is no denying that religion will play an important part in the plebiscite. The same reason why Jammu will most likely accede to India in a regional plebiscite, and the Muslim regions will chose to accede to Pakistan.
If you think this is unfair, then please wake up. This is Asia. Religion has always been an important part of everything. We cant compare western lifestyles with that of South Asian. Religion has always been an important part of the peoples identity. Maybe if India had a history of respecting its Muslim population, then Kashmiris would be more trusting. But India has shown it only cares of Kashmiri land and not the people.

40 years of peaceful struggle, and India could only give the Kashmiri people a rigged election, followed by 20 years of turning Kashmir into an open air prison. More than a million troops have been terrorising the region in the past decades.
So while religion will affect their decision, Indian brutality against the Kashmiris and Muslims in general is the cause of this mess too.

Its time to put an end to the fighting. Kashmiri suffering cannot be justified because of Indians hurt feelings.


----------



## UnitedPak

beetel said:


> When UN cancelled kashmir acession to India by king through british..?
> Plebcite demand was withdrawn by sheikh abdullah in 1972 who is by large considered as true representative of kashmiries then..Not to mention he won subsequent election with huge majority..



True representatives? Most of Kashmiri leaders are in prisons. What fair elections are we talking about here?
Do these "true representatives" mention anything about the mass demand for "Azadi"? Then they are not really "true representatives" are they?

The people want their plebiscite and have always wanted their plebiscite. There is no changing this and there is no justifying not giving them a plebiscite.

The question is how much longer can India militarily occupy Kashmir. India cannot hold on to Kashmir without having a million troops stationed in the region. How long can the world ignore this oppression in the 'worlds biggest democracy'? The UN will get involved again, and the situation wont look pretty for India.


----------



## hasang20

option none we should expend our terroritory to BOMBAY and gain the land of 150million scared muslims


----------



## beetel

UnitedPak said:


> Pakistan and India have already shown their ability to solve the Kashmir issue bilaterally. They have 3 wars to show for it. Neither side trusts the other and has no good faith in each other.
> 
> The only logical solution is to ignore what they have to say, and allow the Kashmiri people to decide their own future. UN like they promised, should make sure this happens in a democratic manner.
> 
> Pakistan and India have to accept that they wont gain all of Kashmir. There is no denying that religion will play an important part in the plebiscite. The same reason why Jammu will most likely accede to India in a regional plebiscite, and the Muslim regions will chose to accede to Pakistan.
> If you think this is unfair, then please wake up. This is Asia. Religion has always been an important part of everything. We cant compare western lifestyles with that of South Asian. Religion has always been an important part of the peoples identity. Maybe if India had a history of respecting its Muslim population, then Kashmiris would be more trusting. But India has shown it only cares of Kashmiri land and not the people.
> 
> 40 years of peaceful struggle, and India could only give the Kashmiri people a rigged election, followed by 20 years of turning Kashmir into an open air prison. More than a million troops have been terrorising the region in the past decades.
> So while religion will affect their decision, Indian brutality against the Kashmiris and Muslims in general is the cause of this mess too.
> 
> *. Kashmiri suffering cannot be justified because of Indians hurt feelings*.



This lense with which you are watching infact all of you are watching is biased...
Everything is there in last 60 years ..
Do you really think blood will be spilled in kashmir streets if there is no cross border terrorism..?
Why kashmir was peacefull till 1980 s..Because there was no terrorism..

If you really want kashmiri suffering to end then you have to check those terrorists coming to kashmir...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flintlock

The only possible solution is converting the LOC to IB. Kashmiri separatism is unrealistic and unattainable, and neither country is willing to give up land to the other party. 

Nothing is going to happen in the near future, because both governments have to respond to domestic sentiments, which would prevent any deal-making.


----------



## beetel

self deleted


----------



## araz

beetel said:


> Will you show your same side to baluchistan,swat,...



if you show the same compassion to Khalistan, Naga lands, and all the other states whose struggle you quell with force. See my friend, we have the same problems. You dont achieve anything by digressing.There are simply too many chinks in Indian armour for it to stand up and play "holier than thou".
Regards
Araz


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Stay on topic please - no more responses or comments about any other territory except Kashmir - since Kashmir is the only internationally recognized disputed territory between India and Pakistan.


----------



## Rafael

How about asking US and Goi to give us some $500 billion for the kashmir valley and integrate it with India...and then move all kashmiris who want to be a part of pakistan to pakistani land..i.e somewhere in balauchistan or sindh...we can develop a far better infrastructure for them and ourselves.....same goes for india, (vice versa)....if she agreees....


----------



## TruthSeeker

The maps show a small portion of Kashmir under Chinese control. Are these Chinese controlled portions also disputed by India and Pakistan? Are the people living in these Chinese portions ethnically (language, religion) Kashmiris? No one seems to include them in the discussion. Is this just because neither Pakistan nor India has any hope that the Chinese would agree to having their parts of Kashmir become part of a final settlement of the issue?


----------



## Omar1984

TruthSeeker said:


> The maps show a small portion of Kashmir under Chinese control. Are these Chinese controlled portions also disputed by India and Pakistan? Are the people living in these Chinese portions ethnically (language, religion) Kashmiris? No one seems to include them in the discussion. Is this just because neither Pakistan nor India has any hope that the Chinese would agree to having their parts of Kashmir become part of a final settlement of the issue?




The only ethnically and linguistically Kashmiris, who follow Kashmiri traditions, culture, and speak the Kashmiri language, are found in Kashmir valley and a few are in Azad Kashmir. Majority Muslim areas are Northern Areas, Azad Kashmir, and Kashmir Valley. The people of Northern areas are culturally and linguistically different from everyone and dont even call themselves Kashmiris or their land Kashmir. The people of Azad Kashmir mostly speak pahari and are similar culturally and linguistically to the people of Northern Punjab of Pakistan.
Jammu is a majority Hindu area and Ladakh are majority Buddhists.
The Chinese controlled are mainly Buddhists.

As of now, Pakistan has Northern Areas and Azad Kashmir..no one from these areas are demanding independence from Pakistan and they see themselves as Pakistanis.

As of now, India has Kashmir valley, Jammu, and Ladakh..no one from Jammu and Ladakh are demanding independence from India and they see themselves as Indians. Kashmir valley, however, is demanding for independence from India and dont see themselves as Indians.

Pakistan and India are basically fighting for Kashmir valley. Pakistan knows it cant handle an indian jammu and ladakh and India knows it cant handle a pakistani northern areas and azad kashmir.

So in my opinion, either scenario 7 or scenario 6 can be a perfect solution.
Kashmir valley can be an independent country its very small but Swizerland is also very small and an independent country.

BTW there's another dispute between India and Pakistan and that is Sir Creek, believed to be rich in natural gas and oil on Pakistan's Sindh and India's Gujrat border.
Another solution to the Kashmir dispute can be whoever gets Kashmir valley should give up Sir Creek...so one country gets Kashmir and the other gets Sir Creek.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Neo

*India disagrees with Britain over Kashmir dispute​*
NEW DELHI (January 22 2009): India rejected on Wednesday a suggestion by Britain that security in South Asia was linked to the Kashmir dispute, and urged nations to act against states which sponsor terrorism. "When the foreign secretary of the UK visited us he shared his perceptions about the situations, and I equally told him and all the interlocutors that this is your perception," India's Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters.

"We do not share with it," he said. British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said last week he did not believe Pakistan's government directed the November attacks in Mumbai that killed 179 people, and showed no support for India's demand for extradition of the accused.

He also said stability in South Asia was linked to resolution of the dispute over occupied Kashmir, which both India and Pakistan claim in full but rule only in part. Miliband's comments were seen as embarrassing the Indian government and highlighting a chasm between New Delhi and some of its key Western allies, which think there may not be enough evidence to implicate the Pakistani state. India says Pakistan militants that carried out that attack must have had the support of some state agencies.

But what has alarmed India the most was Miliband's comment on Kashmir, cause of two wars with Pakistan. India, analysts say, is worried Miliband's comments signalled a broader Western strategy that sees resolution of the dispute as crucial to bringing stability to Pakistan and Afghanistan.

India sees Kashmir as a bilateral issue and dismisses any outside influence. Reiterating India's frustration at Pakistan's failure to act against the militant group India blames for the Mumbai raids, Mukherjee urged the international community to act fast.

"It is high time for international community to recognise that such recalcitrant states must be brought to discipline by resorting to various international mechanisms," he told a regional security conference in New Delhi on Wednesday.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthSeeker

It seems that the "most fair" way to decide this issue is a UN run plebiscite, or, probably, a series of them, which establish the facts on which peoples want which outcomes. Would an Indian poster educate me, an open minded observer, in a clear, non-confrontational way, why this is not viewed as an acceptable approach by the Indian public and Indian Government?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## TOPGUN

Cuz they just dont want to even talk about it ! forget going to the damn table how can it be resolved and how can peace come between the two nations ! India must comply with this issue and stop running away from it....


----------



## Evil Flare

roopesh said:


> A1Kaid we can keep debating on this topic. Zardari recently said Mujahideen are terrors. He accepted it at international level.
> Do you support them? Could you give some details about them...their group..their motive..their traning ..their arms..their mission..etc





Who Gave Zardari rights to decide ?


----------



## metalfalcon

TOPGUN said:


> Cuz they just dont want to even talk about it ! forget going to the damn table how can it be resolved and how can peace come between the two nations ! India must comply with this issue and stop running away from it....



India will never agree to any "Reasonable Solution". They want all the Kashmir Including our Northern areas as well, They want to share the Border with Afghanistan. 

There is no solution to Kashmir Except "By Force". India arrogantly denies that there is any problem in the Kashmir valley and blames Pakistan for Causing Troubles and terrorism.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hasang20

metalfalcon said:


> India will never agree to any "Reasonable Solution". They want all the Kashmir Including our Northern areas as well, They want to share the Border with Afghanistan.
> 
> There is no solution to Kashmir Except "By Force". India arrogantly denies that there is any problem in the Kashmir valley and blames Pakistan for Causing Troubles and terrorism.



i agree,we are still waiting for what......it has to be taken by force whether the world like it or not enough blood spill of kashmiri's


----------



## Omar1984

metalfalcon said:


> India will never agree to any "Reasonable Solution". They want all the Kashmir Including our Northern areas as well, They want to share the Border with Afghanistan.
> 
> There is no solution to Kashmir Except "By Force". India arrogantly denies that there is any problem in the Kashmir valley and blames Pakistan for Causing Troubles and terrorism.



Indians cant even control Kashmir valley with its million troops, what makes you think they can control Northern Areas and Azad Kashmir? They blame Azad Kashmiris for problems in their country and Indians made plans on striking places in Azad Kashmir.

Northern Areas and Azad Kashmir have shown no interst in joining India, theres more people in favor of India in other parts of Pakistan than Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas. People in Northern Areas dont even call their land Kashmir.

Its different in Indian Occupied Kashmir where some Kashmiris would like to be part of Pakistan, but most in Indian Occupied Kashmir favor an independent Kashmir, while Kashmiris in Pakistan's Kashmir never protested against Pakistan...India saw millions of Kashmiris protesting against India this past summer.


----------



## Neo

*World Agenda: Kashmir - the elephant in the room​*
​
January 22, 2009

In our latest daily column, the Times' Delhi bureau chief says India must not ignore Kashmir when searching for explanations for extremism

Arrogant, ham-handed, startling, impertinent  these are the sort of words used here, with reason, to describe David Miliband's comments on the Mumbai attacks last week.

There is another word, though, that applies equally well: correct.

Of course it was impolitic to contradict Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister, by saying that Britain does not believe the Pakistani state directed the Mumbai attacks.

As for suggesting that the root cause of such attacks is Kashmir, surely the FCO recalls India's outrage in 1997 when Robin Cook suggested mediating on that issue?

For the current Foreign Secretary of the former colonial ruler to make both these points publicly, while on Indian soil, was either deliberately provocative or incredibly naive.

Mr Miliband also managed to cause offence with his tone and body language  a schoolboy error in dealing with a notoriously sensitive partner.

The fact remains, however: he was spot on.

Indian officials admit in private that there is no evidence yet of a direct link between Mumbai and the Pakistani state, even if they are sure that it played a role.

More significantly, most regional experts agree with Mr Miliband that "resolution of the dispute over Kashmir would help deny extremists in the region one of their main calls to arms".

For too long, Kashmir has been the "elephant in the room" in the international discourse on security in South Asia  and a stain on the copybook of the world's largest democracy.

In 1948-9, the United Nations passed resolutions calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir on whether it should join India or Pakistan.

Ever since, India has refused to comply and blocked international efforts to resolve the issue, over which it has fought two of its three wars with Pakistan.

Now that both have nuclear weapons, Kashmir is a legitimate concern for the whole world, yet foreigners who bring it up are invariably shouted down.

India's media rarely challenges government policy there, while the foreign media has been understandably focused on Pakistan and Afghanistan since 9/11.

As a result, few outside the region are even aware that India still has half a million troops in Kashmir, making it one of the most heavily militarised corners of the planet.

Or that by official estimates, more than 47,000 people have been killed there since an uprising against Indian rule began in 1989 (rights groups put the toll nearer 70,000).

Or that that Kashmir's four million Muslims routinely suffer arbitrary arrest, torture and extra-judicial execution by security forces, according to most rights groups.

Last year alone, at least 42 people were killed by security forces in protests against Indian rule. By comparison, 22 people were killed in the anti-China riots in Tibet in 2008.

Kashmir's problems do not justify the Mumbai attacks.

But in trying to prevent more attacks in India and elsewhere, it is ludicrous to continue to ignore Indian policy in the region. The fact is that Kashmir is the primary motivation for most terrorists in India and Pakistan. It is also why Pakistan's spies maintain links with such people.

The real reason India is so upset is that Mr Miliband's words reflect the thinking of President Obama, who plans to appoint a special envoy on South Asia.

The idea is for this envoy to take a more holistic approach to the region, including Kashmir, to address the concerns of all the major stakeholders.

It is a good idea and Mr Obama and his allies should continue to promote it, however loudly India complains.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## paritosh

well going slightly off-topic...
would a sensible solution to kashmir result in good india pakistan relations??
would we live as peaceful neighbours as Jinnah wanted us to..?
all the years of rivlary and wars and all the billions spent on weaponry ...what do you think?
or are we classic die-hard arch-rivals...who'd never come to terms with each other...


----------



## hasang20

paritosh said:


> well going slightly off-topic...
> would a sensible solution to kashmir result in good india pakistan relations??
> would we live as peaceful neighbours as Jinnah wanted us to..?
> all the years of rivlary and wars and all the billions spent on weaponry ...what do you think?



Free kashmire than we will reduce the number of AMP and Ballestic Missiles and will not make ICBM's


----------



## rubyjackass

raheel1 said:


> How about asking US and Goi to give us some $500 billion for the kashmir valley and integrate it with India...and then move all kashmiris who want to be a part of pakistan to pakistani land..i.e somewhere in balauchistan or sindh...we can develop a far better infrastructure for them and ourselves.....same goes for india, (vice versa)....if she agreees....



I agree considering the money each country has already dished out for operations here. For comparison India is going to spend >10.5 bil on mrca.


For a lesser figure of course. 
start with 150 bil


----------



## Omar1984

paritosh said:


> well going slightly off-topic...
> would a sensible solution to kashmir result in good india pakistan relations??
> would we live as peaceful neighbours as Jinnah wanted us to..?
> all the years of rivlary and wars and all the billions spent on weaponry ...what do you think?
> or are we classic die-hard arch-rivals...who'd never come to terms with each other...



I think if Pakistan and India solved this major dispute then tensions between the two South Asian countries would drastically decrease. Then both countries can move on and work on the dreams they have for their nations. We can be peaceful friendly nations like U.S. and Canada...it'll be in the best interst for both India and Pakistan.


----------



## TruthSeeker

Dear Indian Forum Members,

Would you kindly instruct humble TruthSeeker on your views? Here is my question again:

It seems that the "most fair" way to decide this issue is a UN run plebiscite, or, probably, a series of them, which establish the facts on which peoples want which outcomes. Would an Indian poster educate me, an open minded observer, in a clear, non-confrontational way, *why this is not viewed as an acceptable approach by the Indian public and Indian Government?*

Thank you,

TS


----------



## roopesh

TruthSeeker said:


> Dear Indian Forum Members, It seems that the "most fair" way to decide this issue is a UN run plebiscite, or, probably, a series of them, which establish the facts on which peoples want which outcomes. Would an Indian poster educate me, an open minded observer, in a clear, non-confrontational way, *why this is not viewed as an acceptable approach by the Indian public and Indian Government?*




As an Indian here is my view...
Pakistan is not Intersted in Indian Kashmir ppl. I asked ppl here many times..Can you mention pakistan govt or NGO organisation help to ppl of kashmir. Nothing. If pakistan wants so badly the citizens of kashmir why cant they declare free citizenship so atleast POOR muslim ppl who doenst have property can go there. NO.
India also not done any work to help Pakistan kashmir. Indian kashmir started long time back with Hindu-Muslim. most of the hindus got shifted to other locations. Now also Kashmir ppl have many tax benifits across not only the state..its across the country. They have reservations in all the state colleges as govt couldnt develop their infrastcutre. Govt of India really making all the efforts to take care of kashmir ppl. 
Pakistan simply declared Azad Kashmir which is a small strip and allows terrors to cross over to fight. Its a question of Indias security.

Instead of solving the issue peacefully Pakistan helping terrors (not my claim, but no one rejects it). World knows how kargil happened. They feel india can be weakened by terrors. Even many forum ppl mentioned it.

All Pakistan wants is WATER from kashmir. India at this poletical game doenst want to loose its grip as it can control pakistan. If pakistan really kick india for any reason India can throw Indus water treaty which makes pakistan to listen to India. 

The best way for both countires is to stop cross border terrors (BOTH). and try to keep the relation neutral for few years so all the terros settle their lifes in different format. Some solution is possible after both ppl trust each other..
before then LOC is the border no matter UN US comes too....


----------



## TruthSeeker

roopesh said:


> As an Indian here is my view...



Thank you roopesh for answering. I have read your post three times and *I cannot see that you answered why not allow a UN plebiscite process?* If India has done so much for many or all of the Kashmiri's and parts of Kashmir, wouldn't they be grateful and vote to stay in India? Why not hear their voice. If they are ungrateful for all your help, let them be damned and go to Pakistan.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

TruthSeeker said:


> Thank you roopesh for answering. I have read your post three times and *I cannot see that you answered why not allow a UN plebiscite process?* If india has done so much for many or all of the Kashmiri's and parts of Kashmir, wouldn't they be grateful and vote to stay in India? Why not hear their voice. If they are ungrateful for all you help, let them be damned and go to Pakistan.



I was just going to say the same thing - its just a litany of complaints against Pakistan, not any comprehensive rebuttal of why solutions in line with the recommendations of the UNSC and the conditions of partition (referendum/plebiscite) agreed to by the GoI at the time - in fact they were strongly affirming these solutions (referendum) 'shouting from roof tops' at the time, are not implementable in some form or the other.

There are multiple proposals out there

- Referendum in all of kashmir as a single unit. 

- Referendum district wise.

- Referendum in 3 to 6 parts kashmir (kashmir valley+ Azad kashmir), Jammu,Laddakh, Northern Areas (Gilgit + Baltistan).

- Referendum in one region - Kashmir valley+Azad kashmir - with Northern Areas, Jammu and Laddakh remaining with Pakistan and India respectively.

'Irrational nationalism' is how I define the Indian opposition to something they themselves agreed to - and despite this India wants a permanent seat on the UN security council.

I would think one basic pre-condition of even thinking of applying for a permanent seat at the UNSC would be that the country applying has not blatantly violated or refused to implement binding UNSC resolutions.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

roopesh said:


> As an Indian here is my view...
> Pakistan is not Intersted in Indian Kashmir ppl. I asked ppl here many times..Can you mention pakistan govt or NGO organisation help to ppl of kashmir. Nothing. If pakistan wants so badly the citizens of kashmir why cant they declare free citizenship so atleast POOR muslim ppl who doenst have property can go there. NO.
> India also not done any work to help Pakistan kashmir. Indian kashmir started long time back with Hindu-Muslim. most of the hindus got shifted to other locations. Now also Kashmir ppl have many tax benifits across not only the state..its across the country. They have reservations in all the state colleges as govt couldnt develop their infrastcutre. Govt of India really making all the efforts to take care of kashmir ppl.
> Pakistan simply declared Azad Kashmir which is a small strip and allows terrors to cross over to fight. Its a question of Indias security.
> 
> Instead of solving the issue peacefully Pakistan helping terrors (not my claim, but no one rejects it). World knows how kargil happened. They feel india can be weakened by terrors. Even many forum ppl mentioned it.
> 
> All Pakistan wants is WATER from kashmir. India at this poletical game doenst want to loose its grip as it can control pakistan. If pakistan really kick india for any reason India can throw Indus water treaty which makes pakistan to listen to India.
> 
> The best way for both countires is to stop cross border terrors (BOTH). and try to keep the relation neutral for few years so all the terros settle their lifes in different format. Some solution is possible after both ppl trust each other..
> before then LOC is the border no matter UN US comes too....



Dear roopesh,

Your post is as stupid as is expected from an Indian member on this topic.
First of all Pakistan does not merely want land or people to either increase its population or land mass. We want a just resolution for the problem that has plagued us ever since independence. We want a solution so that millions of people on both sides of the LOC can finally decide what they want. 
We have not yet integrated Azad Kashmir into Pakistan merely for the reason that once the people of Kashmir have freely and without any pressure decided what they want then we shall proceed as per their wishes. If they wish to join us we shall integrate them as fifth province, they wish to go with India fine with us.
As for water you have yourself violated the agreement your government signed with Pakistan. Lets see how much water you can store. Ultimately you shall have to release it. The only problems is that you shall release the water without informing us to create flooding and stop its flow when crop cultivation season shall beging. This happened last year and also shows the mentality.
Any one who applies for Pakistani citizenship is given one without any questions asked.

Dear Truth Seeker,

The Indians wont respond to your question because they know if a plebiscite is held no matter what the Kashmirirs choose atleast they wont choose the option of remaining with India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## beetel

TruthSeeker said:


> Thank you roopesh for answering. I have read your post three times and *I cannot see that you answered why not allow a UN plebiscite process?* If india has done so much for many or all of the Kashmiri's and parts of Kashmir, wouldn't they be grateful and vote to stay in India? Why not hear their voice. If they are ungrateful for all you help, let them be damned and go to Pakistan.


Sir
because nationalistic sentiments are very high in subcontinent ..May be because We were under external rule for hundreds of years..Because of previous attack on country pakistan became its natural enemy..There was no space for logical thinking when two countries are planning to out do each other in arms race and preparing themselves for next war..
The situation is like two children fighting to check their position in heirarchy..
So collective national psyche is not matured in both sides..No leader is ready to take the decision and face the music ..In other words there is only one seat which has been occupied with enimity and logical sense has to wait for its turn


----------



## AliFarooq

roopesh said:


> hmm.kashmir....All indians want scenario 3. ..lol...does any pakistani agree with this...NO Never...!! Both countries wont be ready to loose land what ever the resolution or ppl say about. So LOC is the international border. Let the violation happen...we are there to fight and we will.....
> Now its upto ppl to decide where they want to be.....if they live in the place where they dont want to be better they packup!



tbh, i dnt think the kashmiris want to be part of india, its going to create for problems for india...


----------



## afriend

TruthSeeker said:


> Thank you roopesh for answering. I have read your post three times and *I cannot see that you answered why not allow a UN plebiscite process?* If india has done so much for many or all of the Kashmiri's and parts of Kashmir, wouldn't they be grateful and vote to stay in India? Why not hear their voice. If they are ungrateful for all you help, let them be damned and go to Pakistan.



Accordning to me, plebiscite cannot be held.. because

1. India agreed to plebiscite only if the pakistani troops withdrew completely from the state of kashmir, which it never did.. and in current situation a plebiscite is irrelevant due to cross border terrorim. And moreover as per shimla agreement i belive both countries have agreed to settle their disputes through bilateral discussions.

2. Loosing kashmir would fuel the other seperatist movment going on in the other parts of india(northe east,except mizoram/arunachal/Tripura).

3. As i said majority in india belives the issues in kashmir is majorily fueld by pakistan, and are aware of the every trick in the book applied by pakistan to get the kashmir out of indian federation. India cannot allow its land to be lost to the tricks played by pakistan.

Hence i support status quo, more autounmy under indian union or complete kashmir under indian union. As i think a kashmir would be well off under a secular india and india is better equipped to support kashmiries.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## roopesh

ejaz007 said:


> Dear roopesh, Your post is as stupid as is expected from an Indian member on this topic.:



Thanks. 
On UN resolution: Lets assume UN elections happen. There are not many ppl in northern kashmir so getting that land as per me is out of question. China occupation is out as no one talking about. Thousands of hindus are vacated the kashmir valley due to the attack. We cant just accept the ppl who live right now. If any chance lets say Indian land goes to pakistan..do you think terrors will stop.

Its nonsense to believe cross border terrors are coming to fight for Kashmir. its a attack on our land. Its same as today pakistan facing from Taliban. Its foolishness to allow these ppl closer to india. No country would do that.

Second the Kashmir weather. The land is perfect for limitary land defence to fight terror. India wont loose such a place.

If pakistan doenst want water or land why do you worry about ppl who doenst want to come to your country? Today lacks of ppl in Iraq and other places are dieing. Misusing ISLAM by pakistan is not acceptable. In this forum alone you can see how many threads against hindus. Spreading anti hinduism by pakistan terrors is never acceptable by a country like India. Pls understand how difficult it is to manage the violations

Azad kashmir is a joke. If India comes to Azad Kashmir why will it become violation to pakistan territory? Pakistan wants to support terror ppl living there. WHY CANT PAKISTAN STOP MILLITANTS TO CROSS BORDER ON THE FIRST PLACE? clearly indicates it wants ppl to come inside india. Ofcourse to kill ppl.

If Inida released water to create flood its most crual by india. Its against all human rules. I stronly hate their decision. I know the value of water as my village struggles with flood. What i feel is if india wants the water for its betterment i definitely want to use the water as its ours. 



ejaz007 said:


> The Indians wont respond to your question because they know if a plebiscite is held no matter what the Kashmirirs choose atleast they wont choose the option of remaining with India.




I was on phone call with my family...still with PDF so.... 

Again this thread getting some intersting....Lets make it a point to agree on something by end of the thread folks...accpetable to everyone...lets see TRUTHSEEKER suggests...


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

afriend said:


> 1. India agreed to plebiscite only if the pakistani troops withdrew completely from the state of kashmir, which it never did.. and in current situation a plebiscite is irrelevant due to cross border terrorim.


Incorrect - the UN resolutions (see this link: http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...es/7904-kashmir-resolutions-explanations.html) asked for Pakistan to start withdrawing troops, upon which India would also withdraw her troops to certain levels.


> *UN resolution 98 of 23RD December 1952*
> Urges the Governments of India and Pakistan to enter into immediate negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations Representative for India and Pakistan in order to reach agreement on the specific number of forces to remain on each side of the cease-fire line at the end of the period of demilitarization, *this number to be between 3,000 and 6,000 armed forces remaining on the Pakistan side of the cease-fire line and between 12,000 and 18,000 *armed forces remaining on the India side of the cease-fire line, as suggested by the United Nations Representative in his proposals of 16 July 1952, such specific numbers to be arrived at bearing in mind the principles or criteria contained in paragraph 7 of the United Nations Representative's proposal of 4 September 1952



Pakistan agreed with the proposals, and Liaquat Ali Khan the then Pakistani PM agreed with the UNCIP chief representative on the plan. It was the negotiations the UNCIP official carried out with India that proved to be the stumbling block, with the GoI insisting on keeping an additional 3,000 troops over and above the existing already superior troop numbers (relative to Pakistan) it had been allowed in the UNSC resolutions.

In fact, after the UNCIP official's failure in talks with the GoI, this letter was written by him:


> UNCIP representative: "in the end I became convinced that Indias agreement would never be obtained to demilitarization in any form or to provisions governing the period of plebiscite of such character, as would in my opinion, permit the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently guarding against intimidation and other forms of influence and abuse by which freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperiled."
> UNCIP chief representative



Why India put up roadblocks in the implementation of the UNSC resolutions and a referendum can also be gaged by Nehru's (the Indian PM at the time) comments, quoted below:



> "Perhaps, you have noticed that at no time have I said that under no circumstances will there be a plebiscite. What I have said is that a plebiscite is not a feasible proposition after all that has happened, and that Pakistan has not fulfilled the conditions necessary for it. When I have been asked if we will be agreeable to a plebiscite if every condition was fulfilled, my answer has been that this is a hypothetical question which can only be considered when such a situation arises.
> 
> "I know that you and Pantji and some others have often said that there can never be a plebiscite in Jammu & Kashmir State. I think that that kind of a statement is not helpful at present, certainly from the point of view of people in the outside world, though it may be helpful in Kashmir.*" Do what you will inside Kashmir but be smart enough to cover up for "the outside world"*. Union Home Minister G.B. Pant could not have ruled out plebiscite in Srinagar on July 7, 1955 without Nehru's prior approval.
> 
> On April 2, 1956, he himself had made statements at a press conference, which suggested that he had, indeed, ruled out a plebiscite. A question was put to him: "An inference has been drawn that you do not want now any plebiscite to be held in Kashmir. Is it correct?" Nehru replied: "Largely so; I shall explain myself. What I have said was that we have tried and discussed the question of plebiscite for six or seven years, but the preconditions have not been fulfilled. Meanwhile, other things have taken place, like the military aid etc., which have increased tremendously the difficulties of this problem. It is not that I am not willing to discuss this problem still further. But as a practical person I say this leads to a blind alley. We have, therefore, to discuss it from another point of view in regard to conditions that have arisen now and try to come to an agreement."
> 
> Offer of a settlement on the basis of the ceasefire line was the logical corollary. Nehru made this offer while addressing a public meeting in New Delhi on April 18, 1956. "I am willing to accept that the question of the part of Kashmir which is under you should be settled by demarcating the border on the basis of the present ceasefire line. We have no desire to take it by fighting."


It is obvious that Nehru had no intention of holding a plebiscite, and the highlighted quote only illustrates the charade played out for the world by the Indian government.

So blaming Pakistan on the basis of spurious and distorted information (not deliberately, this is the propaganda fed to you guys in India, to demonize Pakistan) for a failure to implement UNSC resolutions is disingenuous and unjustifiable. 


> And moreover as per shimla agreement i belive both countries have agreed to settle their disputes through bilateral discussions.


That is also incorrect.

The first clause of the Shimla agreement states this:


> (i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries.


That is a clear indication that the UNSC resolutions clearly apply, since the 'principles and purposes of the UN charter' indicate clear obligations of member states when it comes to binding UNSC resolutions, especially when they have been agreed to by all parties.


> 2. Loosing kashmir would fuel the other seperatist movment going on in the other parts of india(northe east,except mizoram/arunachal/Tripura).


This is a pretty sad reflection on the state of India, as you seem to imply, that India is so weak, so consumed by turmoil and ethnic hatred and differences, that it will splinter into pieces if India resolves a territorial dispute with Pakistan according to a method she herself agreed to, and suggested by the UN.

The fact of the mater is that your analogy of Kashmir with those other states is flawed, since none of those states are internationally recognized territorial disputes with other nations, that have UNSC resolutions recommending solutions agreed to by all parties.


> 3. As i said majority in india belives the issues in kashmir is majorily fueld by pakistan, and are aware of the every trick in the book applied by pakistan to get the kashmir out of indian federation. India cannot allow its land to be lost to the tricks played by pakistan.


Thats just more ranting against Pakistan, not a justification for not implementing the binding UNSC resolutions.


> As i think a kashmir would be well off under a secular india and india is better equipped to support kashmiries.


If that is true, then you are welcome to sell your nation's case to the Kashmiris and they can decide between the pluralistic society and economic miracle that is India - and the "violence wracked, Islamic terrorist, failed state, hell hole" that is Pakistan, in a fair and neutral referendum.

Should be an easy, easy choice for the Kashmiris and an easy, easy win for India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

All pakistani ppl want UN and elections

Yes India is ready for elections. BUT NOT WHEN THERE IS VIOLATIONS. First let Kashmir come under peace. Let ppl migrated from Kashmir for security reason return to kashmir. Lets have elections. There shount be any terror activities in kashmir, no cross border terrors.

Forget about any thought about resolving kashmir before this. If pakistan thinking in this direction we can talk..otherwise its same same story from 60 years and it will continue...


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

roopesh said:


> All pakistani ppl want UN and elections
> 
> Yes India is ready for elections. BUT NOT WHEN THERE IS VIOLATIONS. First let Kashmir come under peace. Let ppl migrated from Kashmir for security reason return to kashmir. Lets have elections. There shount be any terror activities in kashmir, no cross border terrors.
> 
> Forget about any thought about resolving kashmir before this. If pakistan thinking in this direction we can talk..otherwise its same same story from 60 years and it will continue...



The insurgency exists because India not only refuses to implement the UNSC resolutions and plebiscite under the instrument of partition, but because India refuses to even consider the territory disputed!

If India were to declare that yes, it is committed to holding a referendum to determine final status, and that will be its official position, but that it can only do so after say 10 years of peace and laying down of weapons by the insurgents, and it agrees to do so under a binding international commitment, then there is no reason why all interested parties would not oblige, and it would give Pakistan a reason to dismantle all camps.

Unfortunately, like I said, the GoI refuses to even consider the issue a dispute, so 'peace' is being held hostage only because of India's refusals. We have already seen India back out of international commitments under the UN as I explained in my post above, there needs to be some very strong and binding commitment made by India towards holding a referendum now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ANDUBYLL

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The insurgency exists because India not only refuses to implement the UNSC resolutions and plebiscite under the instrument of partition, but because India refuses to even consider the territory disputed!
> 
> If India were to declare that yes, it is committed to holding a referendum to determine final status, and that will be its official position, but that it can only do so after say 10 years of peace and laying down of weapons by the insurgents, and it agrees to do so under a binding international commitment, then there is no reason why all interested parties would not oblige, and it would give Pakistan a reason to dismantle all camps.
> 
> Unfortunately, like I said, the GoI refuses to even consider the issue a dispute, so 'peace' is being held hostage only because of India's refusals. We have already seen India back out of international commitments under the UN as I explained in my post above, there needs to be some very strong and binding commitment made by India towards holding a referendum now.



Agnostic 

The UN resolution of 1948 is non binding, that is it depends on the affected parties to cooperate to resolve their dispute. A binding commitment like East Timor was never implemented. 
At the end of the day, its all between India, Pakistanis and Kashmiris on both sides to resolve it in the best interest of anyone.


----------



## roopesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> then there is no reason why all interested parties would not oblige, *and it would give Pakistan a reason to dismantle all camps.* .



Fist take out all the terror camps! Stop cross border terros. Bring peace to Kashmir. This is the first gift to kashmir from pakistan. Pakistan is supporting all these camps. its open truth. Nothing to denie. How can india trust pakistan now with this situation and commit on anything??

If the kashmir issue after peace is in Indias interst definitely it will resolve the issue without fail. How can a country give assurance now ? It cant unless peace is maintained for suffienent time to trust pakistan.

If pakistan believes supporting the camps or seperate movement going to put pressure on Indam poletically might be,,but resultwise it will delay. All the 60 years proved nothing but fighting against terrors...if terrors continue for another generation then it will continue for ever.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

roopesh said:


> Fist take out all the terror camps! Stop cross border terros. Bring peace to Kashmir. This is the first gift to kashmir from pakistan. Pakistan is supporting all these camps. its open truth. Nothing to denie. How can india trust pakistan now with this situation and commit on anything??
> 
> If the kashmir issue after peace is in Indias interst definitely it will resolve the issue without fail. How can a country give assurance now ? It cant unless peace is maintained for suffienent time to trust pakistan.
> 
> If pakistan believes supporting the camps or seperate movement going to put pressure on Indam poletically might be,,but resultwise it will delay. All the 60 years proved nothing but fighting against terrors...if terrors continue for another generation then it will continue for ever.



Read my last post again instead of reiterating the same thing, I pointed out clearly my objections, and as is usual, you have not answered a single point but just gone on another rant.

India does not even consider Kashmir disputed, and it has walked out of commitments made under the UN already, and Nehru's facade and twisted psyche has been exposed in his own words.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

ANDUBYLL said:


> Agnostic
> 
> The UN resolution of 1948 is non binding, that is it depends on the affected parties to cooperate to resolve their dispute. A binding commitment like East Timor was never implemented.
> At the end of the day, its all between India, Pakistanis and Kashmiris on both sides to resolve it in the best interest of anyone.



The Pakistani view on this:


> However, two of these, adopted on August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949, are binding in character as India and Pakistan negotiated bilaterally to give them the shape of a treaty. This was acknowledged by Krishna Menon, then Indian foreign minister, who described these resolutions as being in the nature of an international agreement. The acceptance of their binding character by the Indian permanent representative to the UN during the 1957 Security Council debate on Kashmir further confirmed this.


 and (initially posted by UnitedPak).


> By Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai
> 
> 08 January, 2008
> Countercurrents.org
> 
> If promises are made to be broken, then Kashmir may be summoned to prove the treacherous proposition. Broken promises haunt Kashmir's history, and explain its tragedy.
> 
> *The United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP) passed a resolution on January 5, 1949 wherein it was agreed that the question of the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India or Pakistan will be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite. The resolution was negotiated with both India and Pakistan and accepted by all five members of the Commission, Argentina, Belgium, Columbia, Czechoslovakia and the United States. Professor Joseph Korbel, father of Dr. Madeleine Albright was the Chairman of the Commission at the time.*
> 
> Sir Benegal Rama Rau, the Indian delegate spoke during the 399th meeting of the Security Council on January 13, 1949, On behalf of my Government, I can give the assurance that it will not only cooperate to the utmost with the Commission itself towards a settlement in Kashmir, but also with the United Nations in securing peace everywhere, because it believes that this organization offers the only hope for peace for future generations, on a secure basis.
> 
> Sir Rau further said at the Security Council on March 1, 1951, The people of Kashmir are not mere chattels to be disposed of according to a rigid formula; their future must be decided on their own interest and in accordance with their own desires.
> 
> Mr. Setalwad, another Indian delegate spoke during the 572nd meeting of the Security Council on January 31, 1952, I was the first to declare that the people of Jammu and Kashmir should freely decide their own future.
> 
> India, however, was soon undeceived of its delusions over Kashmir's political yearning. Recognizing that its people would never freely vote accession to India, it contrived excuse after excuse to frustrate a plebiscite.
> 
> With the lapse of British paramountcy on August 14, 1947, broken promises over Kashmir came not like single spies but in battalions, to borrow from Hamlet. Princely states enjoyed three options: accession to India, accession to Pakistan, or independence. *But the choice, according to India's Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and tacitly endorsed by the British, was to be made by popular referendum in cases where the creed of the ruler varied from the religion of the majority.* *That fundamental democratic principle had been sternly applied by Nehru with military means in Hyderabad and Junagadh where the rulers were Muslim but their inhabitants largely Hindu.* Kashmir presented a converse case: the Maharaja was Hindu but the majority subscribed to Islam.
> *
> On November 2, 1947, Prime Minister Nehru reiterated, We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people. That pledge we have given and the Maharaja supported it, not only to the people of Kashmir but to the world. We will not and cannot back out of it."*
> 
> In recent past, Dr. Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister of India and General Pervez Musharraf, the President of Pakistan agreed at the United Nations on September 24, 2004 to explore all the possible options to settle the issue of Kashmir. Then exactly one year later, Prime Minister said at the United Nations on September 16, 2005, What I do believe, I have also said that borders cannot be redrawn but we must work together to make borders irrelevant. One fails to understand how can you explore all possible options when the only option available is to make borders irrelevant (status quo).
> 
> On September 5, 2005, Dr. Manmohan Singh promised Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Chairman, All Parties Hurriyet Conference that India will have zero tolerance on the human rights violations in Kashmir. Then he responded while replying to a question during a press conference in New York that The fact that there is so much of violence (in Kashmir), the fact that cross border infiltration continues, the terrorists are active, does impose some burden on the ordinary citizens.
> 
> The train of broken promises over Kashmir might be forgiven if the consequences were innocuous or inconsequential. But I submit the opposite is the case. India exerts an iron-fisted rule over Kashmir. With approximately 700,000 military and paramilitary troops in the territory, gruesome human rights violations are perpetrated with. Torture, rape, plunder, abduction, arson, custodial disappearances, arbitrary detentions, and ruthless suppression of peaceful political dissent have become commonplaces.
> 
> Let us hope that the last promise over Kashmir has been broken.



The United Nations, India And Kashmir By Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai[/quote]

Lastly, the UN resolutions were all passed unanimously and with clear agreement and consent from all five powers and India and Pakistan. 

By agreeing to them both nations agreed to a mechanism for resolving the dispute, and India violated it, while their government connived to deceive the world. 

I fail to see how any other agreement with India can be expected to be honored when they cannot even abide by something so clear cut as this. The UN resolutions calling for a referendum remain the only unanimously agreed upon mechanism to resolve the dispute.


----------



## roopesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Read my last post again instead of reiterating the same thing, I pointed out clearly my objections, and as is usual, you have not answered a single point but just gone on another rant.
> 
> India does not even consider Kashmir disputed, and it has walked out of commitments made under the UN already, and Nehru's facade and twisted psyche has been exposed in his own words.




Yes recognising Kashmir is disputed is against indias claim that entire kashmir belongs to India. So it cant accept till it gets decided oneway or other. Second Pakistan should stop any actiivies which will create violation in Indian side. Its not their business. Why do you promote violation??? 

First why should India call international forum to discuss this??? Whats international help in kashmir now. Do they fund us to fight? If pakistan takes money from US to run its show YES THEY HAVE to report. India is not doing any such. Till it gets any help why the hell it has to report.
Who is this Obama today to commnet? Will he come to our help if there is blast in kashmir??? India would tell the same to him .Ask pak to stop cross border terrorism first

Once we ensure the terrors are completely gone and no thret to India defenitely we will decide what to do NEXT depending on kashmir ppl wish without PAKISTAN influence. If they select to go let them with their land too.....till then pakistan has to wait and HELP HELP kashmir ppl to maintain peace

So please help kashmir. its in your hand. Nothing to do with india which is struggling


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

roopesh said:


> Yes recognising Kashmir is disputed is against indias claim that entire kashmir belongs to India. So it cant accept till it gets decided oneway or other. Second Pakistan should stop any actiivies which will create violation in Indian side. Its not their business. Why do you promote violation???
> 
> First why should India call international forum to discuss this??? Whats international help in kashmir now. Do they fund us to fight? If pakistan takes money from US to run its show YES THEY HAVE to report. India is not doing any such. Till it gets any help why the hell it has to report.
> Who is this Obama today to commnet? Will he come to our help if there is blast in kashmir??? India would tell the same to him .Ask pak to stop cross border terrorism first
> 
> Once we ensure the terrors are completely gone and no thret to India defenitely we will decide what to do NEXT depending on kashmir ppl wish without PAKISTAN influence. If they select to go let them with their land too.....till then pakistan has to wait and HELP HELP kashmir ppl to maintain peace
> 
> So please help kashmir. its in your hand. Nothing to do with india which is struggling



Stop ranting please and logically answer the questions raised. Otherwise I am deleting your posts.

This is all you have left after your arguments have been morally and legally been shot down, and India's leadership exposed as a lying pack of jackals.


----------



## roopesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Stop ranting please and logically answer the questions raised. Otherwise I am deleting your posts. This .



You are a super mod... I am putting my views..if you dont like what I can do.. or i cant write something to convenice you right....

You can delete my thread...Deleting my thread has no influence on anyone...or keeping it also....



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> This is all you have left after your arguments have been morally and legally been shot down, and India's leadership exposed as a lying pack of jackals.



How abt pak leadership!!

NO COUNTRY DOES ANYTHING WHICH IS AGAINST ITS INTERST. ONLY IF IT FEELS ITS GOING TO HELP, IMPROVE THE COUNTRY ONE WILL ATTEMPT. THIS IS THE BASELINE.

same logic applies to kashmir too. Nehru said something keeping indias interst. if today its not then its not. India's interst is most imp. If situation favours indias interst yes it will happen. otherwise NO.

I am out of this thread till someone post something intersting to debate on.....


----------



## duhastmish

sir 
there is no solution to Kashmir, for India its not just about land and people and respect but also biggest is the control the water. And same goes for Pakistan as well. its a land full of resources. there is no place like Kashmir ( i am a Kashmir born ). the biggest problem is crpf and certain bsf people earlier.
i tell you things have changed for some time with media given power. and sneak into Kashmir, its coming to democracy and people are getting some opportunity. but the process is too slow and to tell you truth there is no solution to Kashmir only way out is accept what it is or fight logically for their right! i accepted my self to be Indian because this is the country which have given me everything, and i love and live for it.And no body can tell me to do otherwise. things were hard for a Kashmiri but hard work does pay up.

people of Kashmir don't want Pakistan , they don't want India, they don't want independent state , they just want to progress and have a happy life, which they deserve!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## afriend

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> .



Thanks for the post brother it was absolutely loaded with information. However we understand the resolutions are in place in UN which requests(not enforcing) both parties to conduct plebiscite in kashmir, however we also understand that the resolutions was passed as per certain conditions and situations of that time. Now the question is Why india never impelmented the resolution, on searching the net i came across some interesting piece of information, i would like to get your comments on the below.



> The irrelevance of the 1948 and 1949 resolutions to the contemporary situation was highlighted by the President of the Security Council, Gunnar Jarring in his report to the Council in 1957 when he said ".. The Council, will, furthermore, be aware of the fact that the implementation of international agreements of an ad hoc character, which has not been achieved fairly speedily, may become progressively more difficult because the situation with which they were to cope has tended to change.."
> 
> Dr. Frank Graham, the UNCIP&#8217;s representative stated in March 1958 ".. the execution of the provisions of the resolution of 1948 might create more serious difficulties than were foreseen at the time the parties agreed to that. Whether the UN representative would be able to reconstitute the status quo which it had obtained ten years ago would seem to be doubtful.....".
> 
> If, in 1957 and 1958, Mr. Jarring and Mr. Graham felt that the resolutions of 1948 and 1949 could not be implemented because of the changed situation, the sheer implausibility of these resolutions having any meaning today is self-evident. The State of Jammu and Kashmir to which these resolutions applied does not exist any longer with a part of the territory having been handed over to China by Pakistan and demographic changes having been effected in Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas.


.

From the above what i understand is, with massive demographic changes in azad kashmir and northern areas, and with fueling of the extrimists from accross the border... conducting a plebsicte in kashmir would be a irrelevant. However as per article 370 of indian constituion jk enjoys sepcial status and people from outside can't buy land in kashmir, this shows clear intend of india to honour the aspirations of kashmiries but within the constituion of india.


----------



## kashmiri2498

the only solution to kashmir issue is the implementation of UN resolutions.election have no bearing on the real issue .









hope that indian people are shown the truth about kashmir

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ANDUBYLL

kashmiri2498 said:


> the only solution to kashmir issue is the implementation of UN resolutions.election have no bearing on the real issue .
> 
> hope that indian people are shown the truth about kashmir



As a Kashmiri ( I am making as assumption here) , if there is a Plebscite and Kashmiris in the Indian controlled areas vote for India and Kashmiris vin the Pakistan controlled areas vote for Pakistan. What do you thing should be the logical thing then ??


----------



## TruthSeeker

ANDUBYLL said:


> As a Kashmiri ( I am making as assumption here) , if there is a Plebscite and Kashmiris in the Indian controlled areas vote for India and Kashmiris vin the Pakistan controlled areas vote for Pakistan. What do you thing should be the logical thing then ??



The logical thing would be to honor these votes and settle the border between Pakistan and India accordingly. But, the strong reaction out of India, recently, against anyone (like UK or US) even trying to mediate the dispute shows that Agnostic Muslim's point about India not even agreeing that there is a dispute is true. How can India expect the Kashmir issue to ever be settled with Pakistan if it does not even acknowledge that there is a legitimate dispute? I agree also with whoever pointed out that India wanted a permanent member seat on the UN Security Council This should be opposed, at least, until the Kashmir dispute is legally settled under international law.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthSeeker

roopesh said:


> Again this thread getting some intersting....Lets make it a point to agree on something by end of the thread folks...accpetable to everyone...lets see TRUTHSEEKER suggests...



TruthSeekers suggestion:

Un plebiscite to decide which area of Kashmir shall be within the sovereignty of Pakistan and which to India. There can be some pre-negotiated "rules", for example:

(1) Result must be a contiguous border for Pakistan and India.
(2) Change in sovereignty of an area requires 60% vote;
(3) Voter eligibility determined by residency on some agreed date;
(4) Any changed area is granted certain degree of autonomy for some number of years;
(5) Independence requires positive vote of certain number of contiguous areas and over 60%;
(6) Timetable for holding the votes.

and so on. Key step is agreeing to hold the plebiscite. Second step is agreeing to the rules beforehand. Third step is to do it!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## TruthSeeker

I note that no Indian PDF posters have "thanked" me for my suggestions ^^^^^, nor even acknowledged the above post, "solicited" by roopesh. To me that is pretty telling as to where the REAL problem lies ......


----------



## Flintlock

TruthSeeker said:


> I note that no Indian PDF posters have "thanked" me for my suggestions ^^^^^, nor even asnowledged the above post, "solicited" by roopesh. To me that is pretty telling as to where the REAL problem lies ......



India does not want a plebiscite in Kashmir. Whatever 'solution' is considered, it should not include the option of creating a new country.


----------



## UnitedPak

Flintlock said:


> India does not want a plebiscite in Kashmir. Whatever 'solution' is considered, it should not include the option of creating a new country.



It doesnt matter what India wants now. The following passage tells the whole story.



> Princely states enjoyed three options: accession to India, accession to Pakistan, or independence. *But the choice, according to India's Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and tacitly endorsed by the British, was to be made by popular referendum in cases where the creed of the ruler varied from the religion of the majority.* *That fundamental democratic principle had been sternly applied by Nehru with military means in Hyderabad and Junagadh* where the rulers were Muslim but their inhabitants largely Hindu. Kashmir presented a converse case: the Maharaja was Hindu but the majority subscribed to Islam.
> 
> On November 2, 1947, Prime Minister Nehru reiterated, We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people. That pledge we have given and the Maharaja supported it, not only to the people of Kashmir but to the world. *We will not and cannot back out of it.*"

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthSeeker

Flintlock said:


> India does not want a plebiscite in Kashmir. Whatever 'solution' is considered, it should not include the option of creating a new country.



WELL, finally an honest answer from one of the most senior Indian PDF members.


----------



## Flintlock

TruthSeeker said:


> WELL, finally an honest answer from one of the most senior Indian PDF members.



That's always been India's position. I don't see what's especially honest about my post - I'm just being blunt that's all. 

India doesn't think that an independent Kashmir valley is in the best interests of anyone. Infact, it would be detrimental in the long term.

Not only that - India's unity and integrity is non-negotiable in any case.


----------



## TruthSeeker

Flintlock said:


> Not only that - India's unity and integrity is non-negotiable in any case.



So, you are saying that there is NO possibility for Kashmiris who would rather be part of Pakistan to EVER achieve their self-determination. And, that Pakistan has NO hope of ever negotiating a free and fair plebiscite with India that allows Kashmiri self-determination. This position seems to me to be arrogant, and a recipe for unending hostility between you and Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Flintlock

TruthSeeker said:


> So, you are saying that there is NO possibility for Kashmiris who would rather be part of Pakistan to EVER achieve their self-determination. And, that Pakistan has NO hope of ever negotiating a free and fair plebiscite with India that allows Kashmiri self-determination. This position seems to me to be arrogant, and a recipe for unending hostility between you and Pakistan.



I don't understand why Pakistan should continue to press the issue at all. Pakistan has its share of kashmir, and perhaps it should focus on developing it rather than continuing to spend all its energies on destabilizing India and supporting Islamic fundamentalism. 

It has failed to provide even the most basic freedoms to its portion of Kashmir, unlike India, where separatist leaders are not only tolerated, but given state protection. 

At the very heart of kashmiri separatism lies the idea that the people of one particular religion do not wish to coexist with the people of another. I don't see why such racist, xenophobic and religious thinking should be given more respect than it deserves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthSeeker

Flintlock said:


> At the very heart of kashmiri separatism lies the idea that the people of one particular religion do not wish to coexist with the people of another. I don't see why such racist, xenophobic and religious thinking should be given more respect than it deserves.



If you think about it, your statement is a rejection of the "right to exist" of Pakistan itself. As an American, I fully believe in religious "co-existence" and do not favor States that are based on a religion. BUT, the Muslims of the sub-continent DID want their own nation and it was agreed to -> Pakistan. They did not trust the Hindu majority to treat them with equality. PERHAPS, the Muslims of Kashmir have the same concerns, fortified with experience under Indian rule. Since this has been an issue since "day one" of India and Pakistan, you should give it fair consideration and not consider it revanchist. A plebiscite would settle the matter for once and all.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## haviZsultan

TruthSeeker said:


> So, you are saying that there is NO possibility for Kashmiris who would rather be part of Pakistan to EVER achieve their self-determination. And, that Pakistan has NO hope of ever negotiating a free and fair plebiscite with India that allows Kashmiri self-determination. This position seems to me to be arrogant, and a recipe for unending hostility between you and Pakistan.



Thats basically the point of it all. According to several Indians Kashmir is an integral part of India despite the wishes of the Kashmiri people to achieve independence and be free of Indian rule. I am glad to know that there are atleast some americans who are ashamed of the innocent blood being spilt across the world even if in this one case it is not the americans with their taliban and al qaeda friends who are the cause of it knowing the effects will only be felt on their victims (innocent people and civilians in Iraq Afghanistan and Pakistan)

This does not matter to India:

*Kashmir:'87% in Valley want Independence'*

*Let us begin by acknowledging something everyone knows but does not wish to talk about. People in Kashmir Valley want Azadi in the sense of becoming an independent country. As many as 87 per cent of the respondents in Kashmir chose this option over other options like maintaining status quo or merging both parts of Kashmir either with India or with Pakistan.*

Hardcore strategists in India will no doubt draw some consolation from the fact that Pakistan figures almost nowhere as a first preference for Kashmiris in this poll. Yet India is only marginally better placed. Even after allowing for the complexities of the sentiment for Azadi and recognising the peer pressure that operates more in Srinagar than outside, it is hard to dispute the basic finding that people in this part of our country do not display much attachment to the nation-state called India. This finding is very much in line with a much larger and more representative survey (carried out by CSDS and Jammu University) in 2002 that found a similar level of support for Azadi all over the Valley.

Not surprisingly, this sentiment is not shared outside the Valley. There are no takers for Kashmiri independence in Jammu town, with nearly everyone supporting an integration of Indian Kashmir and *** into the Indian Union. The opinion in other cities in the rest of the country is not as vehement as Jammu but there is an overwhelming preference for integration with India.

The opinion of urban Pakistanis are, predictably, opposed to the opinions of urban Indians. That makes it look like a perfect deadlock so familiar of national struggles in many parts of the world: a tiny minority wants freedom from nation-states that treat their land as nothing other than a piece of property.

If such a conclusion needs to be resisted, it is not merely because it is dark and depressing, but also because The Indian Express-The Dawn-CNN-IBN poll provides many concrete reasons for hope. Positive signs come from both sides of the border. Urban Pakistanis do not insist on Kashmir joining Pakistan; those who desire so are matched by as many who are willing to accept an independent status for Kashmir. A majority of urban Pakistanis are also willing to let Kashmiris decide their own fate.

Although a majority (higher among the Punjabis) insists that Indo-Pak relations cannot move forward till the Kashmir question is resolved, as many as 45 per cent of those who have an opinion do not see Kashmir as a pre-condition. This proportion is higher among the urban Indians. A series of national surveys conducted over the last few years by the CSDS have also shown that the Indian population endorses negotiation rather than suppression as the right approach in Kashmir.

The most positive signals come from within the troubled state. The state assembly election of 2002, widely seen as one of the few free and fair elections held in the state, has changed things for the better. Respondents in both the cities, more in Srinagar than in Jammu, said that the overall situation in the state has improved in the last five years. Besides, the state government is not without popular support. The people are not very unhappy with the Ghulam Nabi Azad government, though the Valley would prefer the Mufti government over the current one. As any observer of the state would know, these are no mean achievements.

Equally significantly, the two major regions of the state are not poles apart in their thinking on many key questions, despite stark differences in their population profile. Of course, their differences on the question of Azadi spill over to their assessment of the Indian security forces. While people in Jammu back the unrestricted powers to security forces and would like its misuse to be curbed, people in Srinagar are one in their rejection of the powers enjoyed by the security forces. Apart from this crucial difference, there is a lot that binds the people of Jammu and Kashmir together:

 Both the cities are unanimous in their rejection of the RSS-backed proposal for trifurcation of the state;

 The Muslims of Srinagar are as vocal in supporting the demand for bringing the Pandits back to the Valley as the Hindus in Jammu;

 Both the regions are overwhelmingly in support of retaining Article 370 of the Indian Constitution that gives special status to Jammu and Kashmir;

 A majority of the people from Jammu also agree that the struggle of the Kashmiri people is against the government, not the people of India; and,

 There is much higher willingness in Jammu to endorse a dialogue with Hurriyat than used to be the case.

This kind of public mood may not be the dream scenario hoped for by pacifists and democrats within and outside Kashmir Valley. But this is far from the nightmare that many had feared all along. This is much more than the minimum that a visionary statesman, or stateswoman, would need to start a historic initiative to bring lasting peace and democracy in this part of the world.


----------



## Flintlock

TruthSeeker said:


> If you think about it, your statement is a rejection of the "right to exist" of Pakistan itself.



No its not, because Pakistan is a soverign country and India respects its right to exist. That has nothing to do with matters which concern Indian citizens. 
Paksitan is free to promote any ideology/thinking among its own citizens, as long as that does not spill ove into neighbouring countries. India has different vaules.



> As an American, I fully believe in religious "co-existence" and do not favor States that are based on a religion. BUT, the Muslims of the sub-continent DID want their own nation and it was agreed to -> Pakistan. They did not trust the Hindu majority to treat them with equality. PERHAPS, the Muslims of Kashmir have the same concerns, fortified with experience under Indian rule. Since this has been an issue since "day one" of India and Pakistan, you should give it fair consideration and not consider it revanchist. A plebiscite would settle the matter for once and all.



I do not believe that such concerns are justified. Firstly, Kashmir is a semi-autonomous state - it has its own constitution. Secondly, it has full control over population movements because no Indian from outside Kashmir is allowed to settle there - so the idea of being overwhelmed by hindu-majority India is not justified. It even has its own flag. 

Agreed that the development of Kashmir was not stellar at all, and Kashmiris would have felt frustrated, but then the same can be said for all the countries in the subcontinent, including Pakistan. 
Are the people in Pakistan doing better than those in India? I don't think so. Infact, by several indicators they are doing worse.

If you compare the status of education and human development in Pakistani Kashmir and Indian kashmir, in spite of all the violence and bombings and wars, Indian kashmir has better universities and schools than Pakistani Kashmir.
Srinagar University (Staffed and run by Kashmiris themselves, but funded by the central government) was one of the top universities in Asia before the terrorism begain in 1989.

Even in terms of the right to practice their faith, Indian muslims are doing better - they don't have Taliban-types forcing them to adopt a certain strain of Islam. There has been religious violence in India over the years, but there has been religious violence in Pakistan too, and I daresay it has been worse.


----------



## TruthSeeker

^^^^
Mr. Flintlock, Sir! 

I hear all your arguments as to why the Kashmiri's are better off as Indian citizens. But why not trust them to agree with you? Are you afraid to let them vote in a plebiscite? If your arguments are so persuasive, then THEY will be persuaded, RIGHT? What is India afraid of? If it agreed to a plebiscite, it would WIN, right? No problem. Kashmir issue over and done!!

PS, TS is going to sleep now!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

India should announce a plan to resolve. 

No separate movements, no terror attacks, no cross border terrors for a period of 10 years will trigger a bill to pass in the parliment regaring conducting public openion in kashmir valley. Any violation during this time will reset this period. 
After 8 years of peaceful completing govt of india calls for citizens to apply of voting rights in kashmir. Each individual shall submit records to get the eligibility.
After the elections Indian partiment decide to take the necessary actions according to people wish. if in any case Independent kashmir is formed its finance, military, external affairs will be in complete control of India for about 10 years. Any peace violation will result in indian president rule for a mininum of 5 years.

Note to ppl...: US or UN or pakistan can tell anything..ppl can quote nehru...who ever they want. The fact is Indian parliment is highest authorized body in the country. 66&#37; majority is required to pass a resolution regarding kashmir. If this is not approved presnt status would be maintained.


----------



## blain2

Flintlock said:


> I don't understand why Pakistan should continue to press the issue at all. Pakistan has its share of kashmir, and perhaps it should focus on developing it rather than continuing to spend all its energies on destabilizing India and supporting Islamic fundamentalism.
> 
> It has failed to provide even the most basic freedoms to its portion of Kashmir, unlike India, where separatist leaders are not only tolerated, but given state protection.
> 
> At the very heart of kashmiri separatism lies the idea that the people of one particular religion do not wish to coexist with the people of another. I don't see why such racist, xenophobic and religious thinking should be given more respect than it deserves.



Flint,

Pakistani Kashmir, despite what you read in your media, is as the rest of Pakistan. The population dynamics of the Pakistani Kashmir are also much different than the Indian side. We have a considerable punjabi population over there. The infrastructure and governance is not the best, but it is like the rest of the country. I have never heard a Pakistani Kashmiri say that GoP has never done anything for them. The government could always do more, however there is no state repression, there is no exclusiveness or special treatment either. You go to Pakistani Kashmir and it does not even feel like its Kashmir. It feels the same as any of the other Northern areas of Pakistan.

Point being that the challenges are totally different between Pakistani Kashmir and what is going on in Indian Kashmir. They are not of the same fundamental type that the folks in Indian Kashmir are facing. For Kashmiris under the Indian rule, there is a disconnect at a national level from the rest of India.



> At the very heart of kashmiri separatism lies the idea that the people of one particular religion do not wish to coexist with the people of another. I don't see why such racist, xenophobic and religious thinking should be given more respect than it deserves.



That is because you have never been on the receiving end. You do not know what it feels like to have aspirations that are different from those of the rest of India. India still has not come to full terms with the integration of the low cast Hindus and Muslims into the Indian society. Kashmiris feel that they they are a nation different from the rest of India. They were promised something under the UN and they want to press on with the promise made. Now you cannot come and make a point of why they cannot co-exist with the rest of India. Your leadership and ours agreed to that formula and now for the past 60+ years, the Kashmiris have been trying to exercise upon that right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## blain2

roopesh said:


> India should announce a plan to resolve.
> 
> No separate movements, no terror attacks, no cross border terrors for a period of 10 years will trigger a bill to pass in the parliment regaring conducting public openion in kashmir valley. Any violation during this time will reset this period.
> After 8 years of peaceful completing govt of india calls for citizens to apply of voting rights in kashmir. Each individual shall submit records to get the eligibility.
> After the elections Indian partiment decide to take the necessary actions according to people wish. if in any case Independent kashmir is formed its finance, military, external affairs will be in complete control of India for about 10 years. Any peace violation will result in indian president rule for a mininum of 5 years.
> 
> Note to ppl...: US or UN or pakistan can tell anything..ppl can quote nehru...who ever they want. The fact is Indian parliment is highest authorized body in the country. 66% majority is required to pass a resolution regarding kashmir. If this is not approved presnt status would be maintained.



Good plan, albeit with many loopholes. Just for the fun of it, I would say one of the basic clauses to be added would be "no relocation of Indian citizens into IoK". Also what do you mean by "govt of india calls for citizens to apply of voting rights in kashmir. Each individual shall submit records to get the eligibility."? The voting should only be limited to those who live in Kashmir and not for anyone else from anywhere in India to apply for the voting right.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## roopesh

blain2 said:


> Good plan, albeit with many loopholes. Just for the fun of it, I would say one of the basic clauses to be added would be "no relocation of Indian citizens into IoK". Also what do you mean by "govt of india calls for citizens to apply of voting rights in kashmir. Each individual shall submit records to get the eligibility."? The voting should only be limited to those who live in Kashmir and not for anyone else from anywhere in India to apply for the voting right.



There are thousands of Hindu Pandits moved out of Kashmir due to violations. India should account them. Also illegal immgrants in kashmir valley cant be given the voting rights. Also criminals and terrors cant be given voting rights.


----------



## Flintlock

TruthSeeker said:


> ^^^^
> Mr. Flintlock, Sir!
> 
> I hear all your arguments as to why the Kashmiri's are better off as Indian citizens. But why not trust them to agree with you? Are you afraid to let them vote in a plebiscite? If your arguments are so persuasive, then THEY will be persuaded, RIGHT? What is India afraid of? If it agreed to a plebiscite, it would WIN, right? No problem. Kashmir issue over and done!!
> 
> PS, TS is going to sleep now!!



Yes, except that decades of violence and war-zone like conditions have alienated Kashmiris from the state - which is precisely what terrorists seek to achieve. 
The victims of terrorism, after a certain stage, hold the state responsible rather than the terrorists. This is why terrorism is such a useful tool to subvert the administration and bring instability. The lack of a "face" to identify as the enemy, eventually forces the public into making an enemy out of the state. 

Not to mention that religion plays a huge role in alienating the people. The weekly sermons at the Jama Mosque in Srinagar should be proof enough of the kind of radicalism and xenophobia that is being preached there. 
Most of the largest, violent and frenzied street protests occur after Friday prayers at the Srinagar Mosque. One doesn't need to be a genius to figure out why.

Of course, Nehru's mistake of promising a plebiscite is also coming back to haunt India, but the conditions under which the decision was taken were quite different from those today. the Secretary General Kofi Annan went as far as to say that UN Resolutions are obsolete and can no longer be used to decide the outcome.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## afriend

Well holding the plebscite is not relevant now as indicated in my post 105 becuase.

1. The definition of kashmir here in india and what is percieved by pakistan have long changed, I belive you dont include northern areas as a part of kashmir and you have given a part of kashmir to china. So the status quo as it was in 1947 have changed.

2. Demography of azad kashmir have changed from what was it in 1947 and it is almost as good as integreated with pakistan.

3. India belives kashmiri seperatism is fueled by forigen militants there by forcing indian troops to remain in there to check in the security and to prevent any anti nationalists from comming inside. This has lead to unfortunately curtailing the freedom of movement in kashmir. This have obviously not given any positive image for indian army and to so called "FREE AND FAIR" plebiscite wouldnt serve its purpouse as the results would have been influenced by the repeated interference of the forgien elemnts. And my friend above echos that sentiments perfectly..!!!!


> The victims of terrorism, after a certain stage, hold the state responsible rather than the terrorists. This is why terrorism is such a useful tool to subvert the administration and bring instability. The lack of a "face" to identify as the enemy, eventually forces the public into making an enemy out of the state.



However things are changing for good i guess as many of the kashmiri seperatists have laid down their arms since 1995 and recently kashmiri seperatists calls for boycott of elections was clearly ingnored by kashmiris. Lets give peace a chance, so that indian army can withdraw their troops from kashmir and they can lead a life peacefully. Kashmir enjoys special status in indian constitution, have its own constituion, have the full support of the center in the form of subsidised commodities and infrastructe funding, and indian citizens are not defacto citizens of kashmir, their land belongs to them alone...but only thing that is lacking is peace, if the militants stop comming in trying to snatch away kashmir, kashmir would return to what it was before a "paradise on earth". Then india can and would be confident about conducting a plebescite in a peaceful envionrment, as people who have tasted and enjoyed peace would never want to break away, and this is exactly what external forces dont want to happen in kashmir.


----------



## TruthSeeker

Well, I give up debating the Indian posters about a plebiscite. Now i see why the Pakistanis are so frustrated with India's position. So, IMHO, the Indian Kashmiri's who would like to be merged into Pakistan should mount a massive PEACEFUL protest movement with "demands" such as:

1) Non-binding plebiscite to see where opinions stand with the current residents;
2) Freedom of movement to/from Pakistani Kashmir;
3) Economic and cultural integration between Indian and Pakistani Kashmir groups allowed and supported (i.e joint businesses, school attendance, cultural groups, etc.).
4) Whatever else they think would begin the informal integration of Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> There are thousands of Hindu Pandits moved out of Kashmir due to violations. India should account them. Also illegal immgrants in kashmir valley cant be given the voting rights. Also criminals and terrors cant be given voting rights.



For you Indians, anyone who asks for independence is a terrorist.


----------



## Omar1984

kenchabhai said:


> not the Balochis



You indians seem to be really obsessed about balochis, if you want to bring up balochis every other post make another thread about balochis.

This thread is about Kashmir, a disputed territory.

We can also bring up the rights of people of Assam, Khalistan, Tamils, etc..

Kashmir is not an integral part of India like Assam and Indian Punjab are integral parts of India or Balochistan and Sindh are integral parts of Pakistan.

KASHMIR IS A DISPUTED TERITORY BETWEEN PAKISTAN AND INDIA FOR 61 YEARS NOW, THE LINE OF CONTROL IS NOT AN INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY. 

No referendum have been held in Kashmir on 1947, unlike the 4 provinces of Pakistan where referndum have been held in 1947, therefore theres a dispute and a referendum needs to be held and we must respect the wishes of the Kashmiri people.


----------



## afriend

Omar1984 said:


> For you Indians, anyone who asks for independence is a terrorist.



Well i dont agree with you Omar. If pakistan raise a question then that doesnt mean that the problem is disputed. If india says balochistan is an indian territory due you have any logic in that. No. So lets talk sensibliy, and to be frank, i never knew that there were so many troubles going on in pakistan before i joined this forum. Like nwfp,fata,balochistan.. infact it have helped to get my perspective right. Even about kashmir i didnt know much of the background. But now i belive i know somehting. So lets keep our discussion healthy..!!!


----------



## ejaz007

TruthSeeker said:


> Well, I give up debating the Indian posters about a plebiscite. Now i see why the Pakistanis are so frustrated with India's position. So, IMHO, the Indian Kashmiri's who would like to be merged into Pakistan should mount a massive PEACEFUL protest movement with "demands" such as:
> 
> 1) Non-binding plebiscite to see where opinions stand with the current residents;
> 2) Freedom of movement to/from Pakistani Kashmir;
> 3) Economic and cultural integration between Indian and Pakistani Kashmir groups allowed and supported (i.e joint businesses, school attendance, cultural groups, etc.).
> 4) Whatever else they think would begin the informal integration of Kashmir.



You have given up in a day, should appreciate Pakistan's passionce while dealing with India for 60 years.

As far as Kashmir is concerned the Indians have been fed a single tune in their mind and they all are dancing on it as faithfully as they can.

Unfortunately as a result of Indian attitude and use of brute force the chances of a massive peacefull protest are slim, contrary however might happen.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> That's always been India's position. I don't see what's especially honest about my post - I'm just being blunt that's all.


That is categorically false.

You have direct quotes from India's highest leadership affirming the rights of Kashmiris to determine their status through a referendum, as a means of resolving the dispute.

You have India's agreement on the multiple UNSC resolutions that stated a referendum should be used to resolve the dispute.

How you can utter such a statement in the face of all of this evidence is beyond me.



> India doesn't think that an independent Kashmir valley is in the best interests of anyone. Infact, it would be detrimental in the long term.
> 
> Not only that - India's unity and integrity is non-negotiable in any case.


The UN resolutions and the Instrument of partition that called for a plebiscite in the event of a disputed accession do not allow for independence. India agreed to both of those.

Independence, over the entire area or a smaller part of Kashmir, is merely an option floated to try and bridge the gaps so that nether country sees herself as losing too much or the other gaining too much.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

afriend said:


> Well i dont agree with you Omar. If pakistan raise a question then that doesnt mean that the problem is disputed.
> 
> If india says balochistan is an indian territory due you have any logic in that. No. So lets talk sensibliy, and to be frank, i never knew that there were so many troubles going on in pakistan before i joined this forum. Like nwfp,fata,balochistan.. infact it have helped to get my perspective right. Even about kashmir i didnt know much of the background. But now i belive i know somehting. So lets keep our discussion healthy..!!!


Again, this is patently false.

India and Pakistan agreed to the rules of partition that in the event of a disputed accession a plebiscite woudl take place. The plebiscite condition was reiterated by Mountbatten in the case of Kashmir before he agreed to accept the accession of the Mharajah.

India then reiterated her support for the plebiscite when she supported completely the UNSC resolutions, multiple times, and also through them supported the disputed status of Kashmir.

There is no comparison here between Kashmir (a territorial dispute between two nations) and Balochistan, FATA or Assam or whatever. Completely different situations.


----------



## Contrarian

Pakistan has still given away part of Kashmir to China and has changed a part of its to FATA. There are discrepencies about what is percieved to be Kashmir.


----------



## roopesh

malaymishra123 said:


> Pakistan has still given away part of Kashmir to China and has changed a part of its to FATA. There are discrepencies about what is percieved to be Kashmir.



OK guys..let me ask a question,.

What is pakistan action to resolve kashmir? What are they really doing? or what would be expected next??


----------



## Omar1984

malaymishra123 said:


> Pakistan has still given away part of Kashmir to China and has changed a part of its to FATA. There are discrepencies about what is percieved to be Kashmir.



China's part is China's and the inhabitants of the land are doing just fine in China as the inhabitants of Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas are doing just fine in Pakistan.

Its Indian Occupied Kashmir that sees 800,000 Indian troops creating massive violation of human rights upon the Kashmiri people, no wonder during this pass spring/summer the world saw over a million Kashmiris protesting in Indian Occupied Kashmir for Indians to get out...we never see that in Pakistan's or China's Kashmir, which means people are happy in Pakistan and China.
China's Kashmir has mostly Buddhists so they are happy in China.

And FATA didnt get any portion of Kashmir, what are you smoking.
Northern Areas, Baltistan and Gilgit, are not part of NWFP, FATA, or Azad Kashmir...they are separate because the inhabitants of the land are different culturally and linguistically from everyone...they dont call themselves Kashmiris and their land Kashmir, they do howeveer call themselves Pakistanis and their land part of Pakistan


----------



## UnitedPak

roopesh said:


> OK guys..let me ask a question,.
> 
> What is pakistan action to resolve kashmir? What are they really doing? or what would be expected next??



For Pakistan the Kashmir dispute is mainly about the Kashmiri people. Any solution is not as much for Pakistan as it is for the Kashmiri people. Whatever they decide, Pakistan will accept.
They have to decide their own future in a democratic manner so that no region of Kashmir is treated unfairly, and this can only be achieved with regional plebiscites.
I dont believe they need to be told what's best for them. They have to figure this out for themselves. Independence, Pakistan or India. Its entirely their decision, as it should have been in 1947.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

Not related to Kashmir but though should post it here instead of strating a new thread:

*Senators receive calendars showing Pakistan as part of India *

ISLAMABAD: Members of the Senate have received calendars posted by an Indian organisation that has the Indian map showing Pakistan within its territorial boundaries. Pakistan Muslim League-Quaids (PML-Q) Senator Gulshan Saeed raised the issue saying she had received two such calendars by post. She said one of her colleagues, Rehana Baloch, had also received the calendar. Gulshan said it was a very serious issue and needed to be taken up urgently. Senate Deputy Chairman Jan Muhammad Jamali, who was presiding over the House, said he had also received a similar calendar. Jamali asked Gulshan to bring the calendars to the House on Tuesday (today) so that the issue could be discussed in detail. Criticising India for posting the calendar, she said New Delhi was involved in insurgencies in Swat and Balochistan. staff report

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

After Americans I think Indians have also joined in to create a better world


----------



## roopesh

UnitedPak said:


> For Pakistan the Kashmir dispute is mainly about the Kashmiri people. Any solution is not as much for Pakistan as it is for the Kashmiri people. Whatever they decide, Pakistan will accept.
> They have to decide their own future in a democratic manner so that no region of Kashmir is treated unfairly, and this can only be achieved with regional plebiscites. I dont believe they need to be told what's best for them. They have to figure this out for themselves. Independence, Pakistan or India. Its entirely their decision, as it should have been in 1947.



Lets talk about cross border terrors. Zardari accepted that they are terrors..whats pakistan stand on them? Does pakistan think vilation in kashmir going to help them


----------



## ejaz007

roopesh said:


> There are thousands of Hindu Pandits moved out of Kashmir due to violations. India should account them. Also illegal immgrants in kashmir valley cant be given the voting rights. Also criminals and terrors cant be given voting rights.



Hindu pandints moved out due to violations. Then what I assume is that the violations were by the Indian Army.

By illegal immigrants you mean Kashmiris, right 

By criminals and terrorists you mean Indian Amry and BSF, again right


----------



## roopesh

ejaz007 said:


> Hindu pandints moved out due to violations. Then what I assume is that the violations were by the Indian Army. By illegal immigrants you mean Kashmiris, right  By criminals and terrorists you mean Indian Amry and BSF, again right



Yeah yeah......You want pakistan to vote in kashmir and grab all the land...NO WAY. India said unless terrorism completely goes away there is nothing to talk about kashmir and the decision going to be by Indian parliment...not by UN or US.


----------



## ejaz007

malaymishra123 said:


> Pakistan has still given away part of Kashmir to China and has changed a part of its to FATA. There are discrepencies about what is percieved to be Kashmir.



Being one of the senior most members I do expect better argument from you.

Pakistan and China have signed an agreement on the part of Kashmir that has been provided to them and as per agreement Chinese shall renegotiate when the Kashmir issue is settled with the competent authority of the time.

No part of Kashmir has become FATA. Perhaps you mean to say Northern Areas. In any future plebescite NA and KAshmir shall vote and no area comprising Kashmir in 1947 shall be left out.


----------



## afriend

ejaz007 said:


> Being one of the senior most members I do expect better argument from you.
> 
> Pakistan and China have signed an agreement on the part of Kashmir that has been provided to them and as per agreement Chinese shall renegotiate when the Kashmir issue is settled with the competent authority of the time.
> 
> No part of Kashmir has become FATA. Perhaps you mean to say Northern Areas. In any future plebescite NA and KAshmir shall vote and no area comprising Kashmir in 1947 shall be left out.



Then why is azad kashmir, and northern area different why cant the entire areas called azad kashmir, and why is northern areas integratd to pakistan??? and how can you re negotiate on an land you have willfully given to china..if ever your intentions was a free kashmir or kashmir a part of pakistan??? Is it given for them on lease or adminsitration??? Could you please provide the source..??? I feel the intentions are purely for water, and not the freedom of kashmiries, we have seen the aritrocacies in bangladesh. If there was no bias or aritrocacies there bangaladesh would not have wanted freedom, if peoples will is what pakistan wants then bangladesh would have been free through elections and not through armed struggle. So as an avg indian doubts the intentions of pakistan on kashmir..!!!!


----------



## ejaz007

roopesh said:


> Yeah yeah......You want pakistan to vote in kashmir and grab all the land...NO WAY. India said unless terrorism completely goes away there is nothing to talk about kashmir and the decision going to be by Indian parliment...not by UN or US.



A very hollow argument.

When it comes to Balochistan you want the people to decide and when it is Kashmir you want your parliament to decide.

If this was the case then why you went crying to UN in 1947. You have yourself agreed that the matter shall be decided by the people of Kashmir under the supervision of UN and not your parliament.


----------



## afriend

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Again, this is patently false.
> 
> India and Pakistan agreed to the rules of partition that in the event of a disputed accession a plebiscite woudl take place. The plebiscite condition was reiterated by Mountbatten in the case of Kashmir before he agreed to accept the accession of the Mharajah.
> 
> India then reiterated her support for the plebiscite when she supported completely the UNSC resolutions, multiple times, and also through them supported the disputed status of Kashmir.
> 
> There is no comparison here between Kashmir (a territorial dispute between two nations) and Balochistan, FATA or Assam or whatever. Completely different situations.



AM its a knowN fact that nehru had agreed for a plebiscite, but i feel the situation had changed from what was the status as on 1947 and hence the reason for this renwed stance of india. Could you please reply with reference to the points raised in support for indias stance against plebscite in my post no 126.


----------



## ejaz007

afriend said:


> Then why is azad kashmir, and northern area different why cant the entire areas called azad kashmir, and why is northern areas integratd to pakistan??? and how can you re negotiate on an land you have willfully given to china..if ever your intentions was a free kashmir or kashmir a part of pakistan??? Is it given for them on lease or adminsitration??? Could you please provide the source..??? I feel the intentions are purely for water, and not the freedom of kashmiries, we have seen the aritrocacies in bangladesh. If there was no bias or aritrocacies there bangaladesh would not have wanted freedom, if peoples will is what pakistan wants then bangladesh would have been free through elections and not through armed struggle. So as an avg indian doubts the intentions of pakistan on kashmir..!!!!



Northern Areas are also technically not part of Pakistan and are governed by legislative assembly not by a provincial assembly.

Despite a supreme court decision after case by NA to grant its people same status as that of other Pakistanis (broadly meaning create a new province) government is delaying the implementation because if it is granted provincial status and then has to vote in any Kashmir related plebescite Pakistan shall face legal situation as it can not allow a province to participate.

Our intentions are quite clear its you people who are not clear what to do.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Omar1984

afriend said:


> Then why is azad kashmir, and northern area different why cant the entire areas called azad kashmir, and why is northern areas integratd to pakistan???



The people of Northern Areas dont see themselves as Kashmiris, they are culturally different from Kashmiris, and dont call their land Kashmir unlike the people of Azad Kashmir....now we cant force the local inhabitants of Northern Areas to call themselves Kashmiris and call their land Kashmir if they dont want to.


----------



## ejaz007

roopesh said:


> Lets talk about cross border terrors. Zardari accepted that they are terrors..whats pakistan stand on them? Does pakistan think vilation in kashmir going to help them



Its LINE OF CONTROL NOT INTERNATIONAL BORDER.

If your 700,000 troops cant stop them then don't expect our 80,000 troops to stop them. Improve the skills of your troops.


----------



## ejaz007

Historically too NA has never been part of Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> The people of Northern Areas dont see themselves as Kashmiris, they are culturally different from Kashmiris, and dont call their land Kashmir unlike the people of Azad Kashmir....now we cant force the local inhabitants of Northern Areas to call themselves Kashmiris and call their land Kashmir if they dont want to.



Azad Kashmir is a area created by pakistan to send terrors into India. its around 13 thousnad sq km land across border. If you look at the map the kashmir the disputed area is too big compare to azad kashmir. Azad kashmir is financially and defence belongs to pakistan.
Pakistan supporting terrors and escapting from international community that its not responsible for kashmir violation.


----------



## ejaz007

This is Indian map as is shown on UN website. Take a close look, Kashmir is disputed territory. If its India's integral part than why does't India object to it.

http://cyberschoolbus.un.org/infonation/maps/india.gif


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> Azad Kashmir is a area created by pakistan to send terrors into India. its around 13 thousnad sq km land across border. If you look at the map the kashmir the disputed area is too big compare to azad kashmir. Azad kashmir is financially and defence belongs to pakistan.
> Pakistan supporting terrors and escapting from international community that its not responsible for kashmir violation.



How can Pakistan create any area? 

You should do a research on different kinds of people living all across Jammu and Kashmir. Theres many variety of people, who speak different languages, have different cultures. People of Northern Areas share no cultural or linguistic characteristics with people of Kashmir so they dont call themselves Kashmiris or their land Kashmir.
Some people of Azad Kashmir are culturally and linguistically same to the people of Kashmir Valley (in Indian occupied Kashmir), and some are culturally and linguistically similar to people of Northern Punjab of Pakistan...they've been living together in their land for thousands of years...they call themselves Kashmiris and call their land Kashmir thats why their land is called Azad Kashmir...they are not terrorists, they are regular people who go to universities, work in banks, work as doctors, lawyers, politicians..have families. 

You roopesh are one very ignorant person. It would help to learn about the people that you so dream to rule.


----------



## Salahadin

As the world knows Kashmir is the main cause of contention between Pakistan and India since 1948. Pakistan has always desired to resolve this dispute in-accordance with the UN`s Resolution of 1948 or through bilateral talks on the basis of the `Principle of Division` of 1947, but India always avoided it taking different pleas and excuses which clearly show her disinterest in resolving this issue, hence, contradicting its own stands and pleas, over the period, mentioned as below.
1. Kashmir, Hyderabad (Deccan) and Junagarh were declared as sovereign states at the time of partition in 1947. India took over Kashmir in 1948 taking the plea that Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir, had opted to go by India, although majority of the population of Kashmir, app.85%, consisted of Muslims. But, on the other hand, at the same time India also invaded Hyderabad (Deccan) and Junagarh taking the plea that the majority of the population, of these states, consists of Hindus whereas the Nawabs, of these states, had opted to go by Pakistan, at the time of Partition in 1947. Isn`t it biggest hypocrisy and self-contradiction of India?

2. The late Pundit Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, took the case of Kashmir to UN but did not accept UN`s Resolution for a plebiscite in Kashmir and now India has somersaulted and trying to make it a "bilateral issue". But, whenever there is an indigenous uprising in Kashmir, India always seek help from international community to intervene assuring to resolve the `issue` through `talks`. And when the intensity, in uprising, cools down, India starts avoiding the `talks` and after some time, takes the plea that Kashmir is an `integral part` of India so she cannot discuss this issue, again hypocrisy and self-contradiction of India prevails.

3. India has turned down arbitration offers from at least six heads of state during the last 15 years.

WHY? The answer is simple because her case is too weak to take any stand as if it is decided on merit, by any arbitrator, India is definitely going to lose it. Moreover, logically too, a weaker side will never opt to accept arbitration so does India.

Now again, India did not like US President Barack Obama`s remarks about settlement of Kashmir issue for a perpetual peace in the region. He gave his simple and logical analysis, foreseeing an atomic war between these two countries and the destruction at both the sides, if the issue remains unresolved further more. The appointment of an ambassador, for South Asia by him, is a good step towards resolving this issue, which is also a sort of his efforts for arbitration to resolve the issue amicably but India seemed to be reluctant to cooperate with US President Barack Obama, to resolve this issue.

India also did not like British Foreign Secretary`s remarks about Kashmir and its leaders are perturbed ever since. The pre-partition India was a British colony that is why British Foreign Secretary, David Milliband, feeling the responsibility to get this burning issue resolved which, ultimately, will lead to nuclear war between these two countries if the issue remains unresolved further.

Moreover, the unfortunate people of Kashmir may also be able get a sigh of relief after sacrificing at least 90,000, their near and dear ones, killed so far, since 1989, apart from rapes, burning of houses and shops, mosques and extra judicial killings their young ones which is going on since 1948, to-date, by Indian army and the police. The international community`s `giants` are also feeling to restrain both the nuclear arch rivals before it is too late and, thus, have decided to play an arbitrator`s role to defuse the dangerous situation as both these countries are on the brink of atomic war. If India does NOT obey international consensus, on this issue, then there is every possibility that India will drag Pakistan into an atomic war which will result in an unimaginable destruction on both the sides.

Pakistani government and the people are fully prepared to face "come what may" situation, but NOT prepared to give-up the issue at all. This is a major issue and has to be settled under any circumstances, however, if it is not decided even, through "Tripartite Talks", including the US ambassador for South Asia as a party, then it will be decided after the (nuclear) war which will prove to be horrific and devastating for both and then international community will forcibly intervene to decide it on merit and i.e. to hold plebiscite in Kashmir, in accordance with the UN Resolution of 1948 which, then, India will have to accept it.

Therefore, isn`t it better for India to accept it now, well before the holocaust of the nuclear war? There is no other dispute between Pakistan and India so once this dispute is resolved there will be total peace and harmony in the region. The people, of both the countries, will visit each other freely and it is quite likely that the visa restriction may be relaxed to the extent that it may be available on arrival at the borders. There will be no restriction on Indians to visit Kashmir or any part of Pakistan and the same for Pakistanis.

The trade and industry of both the countries will also prosper and flourish. There will be a boom in the tourism industry as the people of both the countries will throng the tourism spots in both the countries. Therefore, only India holds the key to make it or break it now but if India doesn`t want to give it up now then the (nuclear) war will decide it, as stated before, and then India will be forced to give-up, Kashmir, through international community`s pressure. It is clearly written on the wall but India is ignoring it.

End.


----------



## afriend

THROUGH A propaganda offensive an impression is being sought to be created that most Kashmiri Muslims are for joining Pakistan. To prove the point, the support being received by the pro-Pakistan elements from the people for its calls for bandhs and demonstrations, is being cited. It must be understood that the pro-Pakistan element in Kashmir wield the gun and the gun, as we know, can get the people to do a lot of things, which may not have been possible otherwise. 

Without doubt the introduction of violence and the gun makes any movement look much larger than it actually is. Let the pro-Pakistanis drop the gun and show to the world how many Kashmiri Muslims are on their side. But this they obviously cannot do. 

Notwithstanding, self-determination as its rallying cry, what is going on in Kashmir is Pakistans proxy war under the guise of local insurgency. Under this game plan terror must remain an indispensable weapon for garnering peoples support for the dubious cause. 


The genuineness of the support of the people for the cause  be it Azadi, self-determination or accession to Pakistan  may be gauged from the fact that the terrorists, (majority of whom are foreigners), have had to kill thousands Kashmiris to subdue their voice and control the situation in Pakistan. 


The role of terror in insurgency has been highlighted by numerous experts on the subject. All agree that terror that is employed in urban insurgency is of two types  selective terror and indiscriminate terror. 


While selective terror is used to coerce cooperation and to neutralise actual or potential individual enemies, indiscriminate terror is, according to the veteran French fighter and author, Roger Trinquier, a particularly appropriate weapon for bringing the populace under control. 


*A shattering effect of indiscriminate terror on the population is caused when, as Trinquier puts it, in the street, at work, at home, the citizen lives continually under the threat of violent death and in the presence of this permanent danger surrounding him, he has the depressing feeling of being an isolated and defenceless target. *

The fact that the public authority and the police are no longer capable of ensuring his security adds to his distress. 


*Consequently he loses confidence in the state whose inherent mission it is to guarantee his safety and gets more and more drawn to the side of the terrorists, who alone seem to be able to protect him. *

Trinquier also explains, why it is difficult to catch the terrorist. The terrorist, he argues, kills without personal interest and without the motive that could provide the police with leads, while he is surrounded by a vast organisation which prepares his tasks and assures his withdrawal and protection. 


To top it all, he runs practically no risks - neither that of retaliation by his victims nor that of having to appear before a court of justice; it being quite easy under the existing laws to escape the police. 

Both selective and indiscriminate killings have, indeed, been carried out in Kashmir as per the text book, not only for silencing dissent but also for ensuring positive support of the intelligentsia for their cause.

Even as there is a long list of intellectuals killed by the insurgents for refusing to follow their dictates, there are a lot more of them, who, though at one time on the hit list of the insurgents, have bought their lives through written assurances of such support as may be demanded of them. 

These are the intellectuals in the Valley who speak up for the insurgents and, who, while lending dignity to every insurgent activity, make wild allegations against the government and the security forces; if only for discrediting the two as per dictates of the insurgents.
The fact of the matter is that people, who are faced with terrorism are not so much concerned with ideologies and causes as they are with their security and have a tendency to flock around the side that can ensure this. 

When the terrorists have the upper hand they are with them and when the security forces dominate, they switch loyalty towards the government. 


*Punjab may be taken as a case in point. There was a time when a large majority appeared to be pro-Khalistan, today, when terrorism stands totally eliminated, there is hardly any one, who would appear to be its protagonist.**The strong action taken by the state and the centre against the terrorists emboldened the people to veer back to the constitutional authority. *Such strong action against the terrorists and their supporters seem to be lacking in Kashmir and, therefore, this apparent support of the people for the militants.
In this connection it would be pertinent to look back into the period between the Pakistani invasion of Kashmir in 1947 and the start of its proxy war in the State in 1989 when the pro-Pakistani element had no guns to support its cause.
While the Kashmiri Muslims largely and unmistakably welcomed the Maharajas decision to accede the State to the Indian Union to save them from the Pakistani marauders, masquerading as liberators, they gave a befitting rebuff to Pakistan in all the three wars it fought with India over Kashmir during this period. 
The refusal of the Kashmiri Muslims to cooperate with the armed infiltrators that Pakistan had pushed into Kashmir during the Indo-Pak war of 1965, for inciting the Kashmiri Muslims to revolt against the so called Indian occupation of the State, is considered, in authoritative military circles, as the single major factor that caused the failure of Pakistans design to take Kashmir by force. 

It is only after 1989, when Pakistan started pushing in armed terrorists into Kashmir that the pro-Pakistan element has been able to raise its head in Kashmir.

Even in context of the present situation in Kashmir, why talk of only those Kashmiri Muslims who are supporting the terrorists whatever the circumstances under which they may be doing so. 
*
What about those, who are bravely standing up to them. It is a fact that behind every success of the Security Forces there is the "tip off", from none other than the Muslims, which continues to flow-in despite the brutality with which even those suspected of having links with the security forces are treated by the terrorists. *

Let us also not forget that during the last elections held while Pakistans proxy war, (which it has been trying to pass off as local insurgency), was at its height the Kashmiri Muslims went out to vote in face of threats of having their hands and fingers maimed  threats that were not only made, but also carried out a number of times.

May be only 10 per cent went out to vote (as alleged) but then how many other states in India could boast of even this percentage of brave people, who would go to vote under such circumstances. God willing they may even better their showing at the hustings due in the coming months. *(AND THEY DID)*This is the only way they can cast the yoke of the terrorists from off their backs and breathe free once again.

Kashmiri Muslims not in favour of Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Yes indeed, and what better way to illustrate this than through a plebiscite.

India needs to put its money where its mouth is otherwise this is just nonsense and propaganda to make its citizens feel better about occupying another people and their land.


----------



## Beskar

Well AM, what CAN we expect? On their side of the border, Kashmir is an "Integral part of India" on the map and in their spirits, and Azad Kashmir is Azad Kashmir (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir)

Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. At least they still know how to humour us.


----------



## ahmeddsid

I say, Let the terrorists or so called "freedom fighters" stop getting Zilch support from across the border, and then We can Think Of Plebiscite. Isnt that fair?? How would you feel If some guys came over to ur house and pointed a gun and said "Dont Vote or else we will kill you!" The People voted inspite of that, You know why? Because They know, How much of a special status India gives Kashmir! Oh Come on, Its unfair sometimes because a Kashmiri can come to my state and settle down, But I cant go to his state and do the same! Now arent they getting all the protection from other states people running over their state? Which state has such a rule? Which state has special mention in the Constitution Of India! 

I say let Terrorism stop, let all of them lay down their arms, and then We can talk Peace. There is no way Peace can be hammered out under the influence of Guns!


----------



## afriend

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Yes indeed, and what better way to illustrate this than through a plebiscite.
> 
> India needs to put its money where its mouth is otherwise this is just nonsense and propaganda to make its citizens feel better about occupying another people and their land.



Well from what i read and understood fromt he article was, 10% came voted and author seems to back it, but why the rest didnt turn up he gives his explanations. So do you think it would be a fair deal in conduciting a plebiscite now if majority of india believs what is written in the article is true??? Author wonderfully drew parrellels between khalistan movement and kashmiri insurgency.

From the above article i would say.

*1. Forgien militants to lay down the arms(pakistan should give assurance to that).
2. If that promise is full filled and every one is satisfied, Indian army should remove itself from kashmir valley.*
3. Integrate Northern Areas,Azad Kashmir and Aksai chin(may be under your control and governce or support as in azad kashmir).
4. Ensure no outside people are in the above integrated entity, pass a law that no pakistani can buy land in these areas.
5. Let the status quo remain for another 10-15 years.
6. Then lets talk about plebiscite.

And i am sure that if such a situation arises india would be confident in conducting UN resolution in kashmir. Peace in kashmir for 10-15 years and then a plebiscite.!!! Wot do you say..????

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Omar1984

You Indians are really thinking out of your back sides. We know some Kashmiris dont want to be part of Pakistan and rather have an independent country, but no way do most Kashmiris want to be part of India. If thats true why dont u indians allow a plebiscite. Why u all went crazy when Obama even mentioned Kashmir.

Independence or be part of Pakistan..we just want Kashmir out of India and thats what Kashmiris want too. Stop posting biased indian articles.


----------



## roopesh

I have beeeeeeeeeen keep telling the same thing.. First peace then we can talk about. Pakistan need to believe in GANDHIIGIRI now and first show how much pakistan wants kashmirs peace on first page rather than attacking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> You Indians are really thinking out of your back sides. We know some Kashmiris dont want to be part of Pakistan and rather have an independent country, but no way do most Kashmiris want to be part of India. If thats true why dont u indians allow a plebiscite. Why u all went crazy when Obama even mentioned Kashmir.
> 
> Independence or be part of Pakistan..we just want Kashmir out of India and thats what Kashmiris want too. Stop posting biased indian articles.



Why do u bring OBAMA. Is it his property to give? Go and take. Today US told they dont come between kashmir issue. Why shall india accept what pak wants in its favour on first place? If you ppl are so much intersted in kashmir ppl then first stop supporting terrors. If ur concerned about muslims pls fight of palestine.
IF some one creating a constant threat to india why will idnia honor their request. We need to kill them.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

> 1. Forgien militants to lay down the arms(pakistan should give assurance to that).
> 2. If that promise is full filled and every one is satisfied, Indian army should remove itself from kashmir valley.
> 3. Integrate Northern Areas,Azad Kashmir and Aksai chin(may be under your control and governce or support as in azad kashmir).
> 4. Ensure no outside people are in the above integrated entity, pass a law that no pakistani can buy land in these areas.
> 5. Let the status quo remain for another 10-15 years.
> 6. Then lets talk about plebiscite.



I don't think that is a bad compromise - provided we can have ironclad guarantees from both sides that this time one side will not back out (as happened with the UNSC resolutions) and we would need international monitors in AK and IK to verify that the agreement was being adhered to.

India gets peace and development in the valley for 10 - 15 years, and therefore a chance to 'win' the Kashmiris over, and Pakistan gets the same chance plus its demands for a plebiscite ten years down the road.

But a guaranteed plebiscite in 10-15 years needs to be part of the original agreement, not something to 'talk about down the road'.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Threads merged.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> Why do u bring OBAMA. Is it his property to give? Go and take. Today US told they dont come between kashmir issue. Why shall india accept what pak wants in its favour on first place? If you ppl are so much intersted in kashmir ppl then first stop supporting terrors. If ur concerned about muslims pls fight of palestine.
> IF some one creating a constant threat to india why will idnia honor their request. We need to kill them.



No ones supporting terrors, we are supporting Kashmiri Mujahideens, if you dont know the defination of a Mujahideen ask a Kashmiri brother he will tell you.

We want Kashmiri people to decide what they want for their land, we are not forcing them to be part of Pakistan. We want to hear from the voices of Kashmiri people what they want for their land. If they say they want to be part of India, we will move on and Kashmir dispute is over. Only way to hear their voices is through a FAIR plebiscite.

This Kashmir dispute is a dispute between Pakistan and India, Palestine is not a dispute for Pakistan. Pakistan must work with the indians to solve this dispute, and if india is unwilling...we welcome US to intervene.


----------



## afriend

Omar1984 said:


> You Indians are really thinking out of your back sides. We know some Kashmiris dont want to be part of Pakistan and rather have an independent country, but no way do most Kashmiris want to be part of India. If thats true why dont u indians allow a plebiscite. Why u all went crazy when Obama even mentioned Kashmir.
> 
> Independence or be part of Pakistan..we just want Kashmir out of India and thats what Kashmiris want too. Stop posting biased indian articles.



OMAR first i would say NOW IS NOT THE TIME. There are two options. *Indians either dont want it.. or if it wants EVER LASTING Peace with pakistan india should have meaningful talk with pakistan and settle kashmir issue*. This goes both ways..*either pakistan wants peace with india, or it kashmir for itself.*. 

Now if you openly support the "SO CALLED FREEDOM STRUGGLE" for which we have another meaning. Then ask us to implement plebiscite, then do you think india would do that..??? 

As an indian i would say LETS FIRST GIVE PEACE A CHANCE and then implementaiton of UN resoltuion. But for that DIALOGUE IS THE way and dialogue should not be with an objective to get maximum mileage but a decision which keeps in mind the aspiration of kashmiries as well as a decision which satisfies both parties.. And it should be done also with the objective we are going to achieve I.E PEACE WITH PAKISTAN AND INDIA In the years to come, From enimes to Friends. Now think what we can achieve if this is settelled. For that first we should trust each others intentions.

For this if you threaten india and say my version is write and you should keep off from kashmir and vice versa.. we are going to be living in this uncertinity in the years to come and our future generations will be enimes beyond reconciliation.


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> No ones supporting terrors, we are supporting Kashmiri Mujahideens, if you dont know the defination of a Mujahideen ask a Kashmiri brother he will tell you. .



We call Mujahideens as terrors. Why do you support them on first place? Are they legal fighters. Its known that these Mujahideens are getting trained and funded through pakistan. LET is one of them too. Pakistan clearly know that what Mujahideen going to do when he comes to India. Directly you are supporting terrors against India. How could you expect India to talk about peace. 

Does Pakistan think that India will agree to resolve the issue by scaring for Mujahideens?? or do you think Mujahideens going to take control over Kashmir in near future?


----------



## kenchabhai

Agnostic Muslim, some comments..


1. Pakistan "claims" Kashmir, a multi-ethnic,multi-racial,multi-religious,multi-linguist region, albeit with a a majority muslim population based on 2-nation theory. As per 2-nation theory the basis of Pakistani/Subcontinental muslim nationhood is neither territorial, racial, linguistic nor ethnic; rather they are a nation because they belong to the same faith, Islam.


2. India declares Kashmir to be an "integral part" of India, as the Kashmiri King ceded the same to India.


3. Now Pakistan can only "legally" claim Kashmir if a plebiscite is held and majority vote for acceding to Pakistan, pending that plebiscite Pakistani claims over Kashmir are hollow/baseless/speculative.


4. I would also like to point out that the 2-nation theory on whose basis Pakistan claims Kashmir was roundly rejected by Bengali speaking Muslims of Bangladesh and Muslims of India. The alarming number of insurgencies in Pakistan are also a worrying fact.


5. I personally perceive Pakistan's moral outrage and outpourings of grief at "possible or hypothetical" injustices inflicted by "Hindus" on Kashmiris, Muslims or Dalits or any non-Hindu community as being hypocritical, 1-dimensional and unnecessary. Pakistan itself is going through a period of turmoil and upheavel, and hence IMO Pakistanis should first put their house in order and set standards, then be the moral authority to lash out at Indian injustices on its minorities. 


6. Supporting fellow muslims against non muslims could be correct as per Quran but Pakistan being a nuclear power, a responsible nation and a nation part of the international community, should realize that Quranic laws do not hold ground in international geopolitics. They ought not to have indulged in engineering a terrorist/freedom struggle on behalf of Kashmiris esp when the Kashmiris have not spoken in favour of Pakistan. The blood of innocents and soldiers spilled by Pakistanis and Pakistani trained militants is inexcusable, unpardonable, and unforgivable. This is not an action commensurate with a nation claiming to be a responsible world power. The world finally and thankfully has condemned Pakistan for such actions and Pakistan too has realised its folly and is now shutting down such terrorists camps. This is a welcome move.


7. Indians have also not implemented some UN resolutions due to a variety of reasons. This is unfortunate. At the same time Indian government is known for not being squeamish when it comes to COIN and tackling terrorism, hence it is possible that at times non-combatants can be victims but such is expected and tolerated. With the coming of Sher-e-Kashmir's grandson's govt. I expect most of the important issues affecting the Kashmiris to be addressed.


8. Personally, I have a feeling India is waiting for an opportune time to end this impasse/dispute diplomatically and to the satisfaction of international community (in its favour).


----------



## ahmeddsid

Yes, This is what we need. But do you think it will happen??? If this happens then LeT and other freaking terrorists must shut shop without any profit at hand!


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> We call Mujahideens as terrors. Why do you support them on first place? Are they legal fighters. Its known that these Mujahideens are getting trained and funded through pakistan. LET is one of them too. Pakistan clearly know that what Mujahideen going to do when he comes to India. Directly you are supporting terrors against India. How could you expect India to talk about peace.
> 
> Does Pakistan think that India will agree to resolve the issue by scaring for Mujahideens?? or do you think Mujahideens going to take control over Kashmir in near future?



This is what I mean by culture clash between Muslims and Hindus.
Mujahideens are heros for Muslims and terrorists for Hindus.

Indians just talk and talk without listening to what Kashmiri people have to say and please dont post any biased Indian article written by someone named Singh.


----------



## Omar1984

The only solution to the problem is hear what Kashmiris have to say and Indians are unwilling to listen to Kashmiris. I pray that Obama intervenes.


----------



## kenchabhai

Omar1984 said:


> This is what I mean by culture clash between Muslims and Hindus.
> Mujahideens are heros for Muslims and terrorists for Hindus.
> 
> Indians just talk and talk without listening to what Kashmiri people have to say and please dont post any biased Indian article written by someone named Singh.



Indians might not be listening to Kashmiris but even Biharis.. so ?
Are Kashmiris Pakistanis ? has their been a plebiscite ? 
What gives you the right to intervene on behalf of Kashmir ?


----------



## Omar1984

kenchabhai said:


> Indians might not be listening to Kashmiris but even Biharis.. so ?
> Are Kashmiris Pakistanis ? has their been a plebiscite ?
> What gives you the right to intervene on behalf of Kashmir ?




A plebiscite should be given in all areas of Kashmir, even the part under Pakistan's control. We need to hear the voice of Kashmiris to solve this dispute.


----------



## ahmeddsid

Omar1984 said:


> A plebiscite should be given in all areas of Kashmir, even the part under Pakistan's control. We need to hear the voice of Kashmiris to solve this dispute.


Then freaking stop the violence! A plebisicte will never be held with a gun to our Heads!


----------



## kenchabhai

Omar1984 said:


> A plebiscite should be given in all areas of Kashmir, even the part under Pakistan's control. We need to hear the voice of Kashmiris to solve this dispute.



what about ze chinese ?
should their be a partition ? 
what would happen if India were to ignore the voices ?
( Indian govt is pathetic at hearing the voice of its people and public memory is short.)
How do you think the vote will change anything ? (for eg you guys voted for Zardari and we guys voted for Modi even Americans voted for Bush twice !!)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> A plebiscite should be given in all areas of Kashmir, even the part under Pakistan's control. We need to hear the voice of Kashmiris to solve this dispute.




Let me ask you a question. Forget about hindu/muslim here. Talk about govts..Do you expect INDIA as a country should scare of Muhahadeen? Dont you think its a threat to country.

If pak doenst want to learn from US then let US come to blast these mujahideens..then we will talk about rest.


----------



## ejaz007

afriend said:


> Well from what i read and understood fromt he article was, 10% came voted and author seems to back it, but why the rest didnt turn up he gives his explanations. So do you think it would be a fair deal in conduciting a plebiscite now if majority of india believs what is written in the article is true??? Author wonderfully drew parrellels between khalistan movement and kashmiri insurgency.
> 
> From the above article i would say.
> 
> *1. Forgien militants to lay down the arms(pakistan should give assurance to that).
> 2. If that promise is full filled and every one is satisfied, Indian army should remove itself from kashmir valley.*
> 3. Integrate Northern Areas,Azad Kashmir and Aksai chin(may be under your control and governce or support as in azad kashmir).
> 4. Ensure no outside people are in the above integrated entity, pass a law that no pakistani can buy land in these areas.
> 5. Let the status quo remain for another 10-15 years.
> 6. Then lets talk about plebiscite.
> 
> And i am sure that if such a situation arises india would be confident in conducting UN resolution in kashmir. Peace in kashmir for 10-15 years and then a plebiscite.!!! Wot do you say..????



Ok so finally we have some point to start.

What about non Kashmiris in Indian Occupied Kashmir. Shouldn't same apply to them.

The agreement however must be ratified by both countries parliaments and the deadline to settle the issue should be 15 years plus guarantees that both countries shall honor the deal and not back out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

kenchabhai,

Here are the answers:

1. Pakistani claim is accepted by UN and international community. Every one recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory except Indians.

2. India has already declared Kashmir to be an integral part. There is a governor and chief minister. Azad Kashmir is governed by a President and a Prime Minister and has not been yet integrated into Pakistan simply because a final resolution is pending.

3. Pakistani claim is based on the rules of 1947 partition and shall only be verified by the plebescite.

4. Bengali speaking people remained part of Pakistan till 1971 therefore your claim is not correct. Even after 1971 large portion of population kept on protesting and go through the number of people killed by Mujib's government and you will see the clear picture.

5. Our moral standing is much better than yours. Our army does not enter minorities holy places and kill them inside those places. Our army does not descicrate holy places. We do not burn and destroy mosques. We do not burn alive Christians and we do not rape teenagers who come from other countries to visit and see the country. 

6. Perhaps you live in a state of denial. Kashmiris ever since 1947 have boycotted your republic day parade. They have never raised Indian flags on their houses. On the contrary Pakistani flags are found on their roof tops. If this does not explain any thing to you then go to Kashmir and see.

7. That shows Indian double standard and their moral standing.

8. That would not be an answer to people aspirations. Perhaps it would be better if you listen to the peoples voices and settle the matter to their satisfaction.


----------



## roopesh

ejaz007 said:


> kenchabhai,
> 
> Here are the answers:
> 
> 1. Pakistani claim is accepted by UN and international community. Every one recognizes Kashmir as a disputed territory except Indians.
> 
> 2. India has already declared Kashmir to be an integral part. There is a governor and chief minister. Azad Kashmir is governed by a President and a Prime Minister and has not been yet integrated into Pakistan simply because a final resolution is pending.
> 
> 3. Pakistani claim is based on the rules of 1947 partition and shall only be verified by the plebescite.
> 
> 4. Bengali speaking people remained part of Pakistan till 1971 therefore your claim is not correct. Even after 1971 large portion of population kept on protesting and go through the number of people killed by Mujib's government and you will see the clear picture.
> 
> 5. Our moral standing is much better than yours. Our army does not enter minorities holy places and kill them inside those places. Our army does not descicrate holy places. We do not burn and destroy mosques. We do not burn alive Christians and we do not rape teenagers who come from other countries to visit and see the country.
> 
> 6. Perhaps you live in a state of denial. Kashmiris ever since 1947 have boycotted your republic day parade. They have never raised Indian flags on their houses. On the contrary Pakistani flags are found on their roof tops. If this does not explain any thing to you then go to Kashmir and see.
> 
> 7. That shows Indian double standard and their moral standing.
> 
> 8. That would not be an answer to people aspirations. Perhaps it would be better if you listen to the peoples voices and settle the matter to their satisfaction.




Pakistan can do anything...It can goto UN..US why should India go. Kashmir is ours. Matter of fact India expects Pakistan to handover its kashmir as a resolution.
Why dont Azad Kashmir is a strip across the border. Why didnt u include big northern kashmir. Its clear that Azad kashmir is a place for Mujahideens and pakistan didnt want to take the itnernational pressure of taking action against them. 
Kashmir shall only be verified by the plebescite. Sure man. We will excute the public openion when the region is peaceful and when we get back all hindu pandits back to kashmir. Who ever trying to spoil the region peace 
like mujahideens should be kicked. PPl who wants seperate movement should act independently without influence of other nation and protest peacefully.
Please dont give the false prop on indian army. You dont have any rights to fight againt our troop. They did what ever needed. Imagine someone cheaply talk about pak army. 
Ppl aspirations..we are billion man. Dont talk about numbers...LOL. Every citizen has right to live anywhere. 

SO before you demand for kashmir resolution think of peace in the region and pak contribution to the peace with full heart. We will talk after that.


----------



## Omar1984

All Kashmiris have to decide what they want and everyone should respect their decision even if they want an independent country we should all accept it. Obama made a very good initiative saying taht he would try to resolve the Kashmir crisis.


----------



## roopesh

Omar1984 said:


> All Kashmiris have to decide what they want and everyone should respect their decision even if they want an independent country we should all accept it. Obama made a very good initiative saying taht he would try to resolve the Kashmir crisis.



Thanks OBAMA. If Mujahideens doesnt repect indians peace process let them face USA droons. !!!
Omar, then pakistan need not expect anything from USA. then can directly deal with USA. After all USA provides water to PAK

todays news: Breaking News! Firing has been reported from Wagah border this morning. The BSF personnel opened fire at a group of people who were trying to cross the border without permission. They fled after the BSF opened fire.The BSF has reportedly seized 13kg heroin, some fake currencies and 7 pistols from the spot. One BSF jawan was injured during the firing by Pakistani intruders. Further details are awaited. 

U say that these intruders are mujahideens and they are heros who carried heroin, fake currency and illegal weapons are heros and India should take its troops back to welcome these folks....


----------



## Omar1984

roopesh said:


> Thanks OBAMA. If Mujahideens doesnt repect indians peace process let them face USA droons. !!!
> Omar, then pakistan need not expect anything from USA. then can directly deal with USA. After all USA provides water to PAK
> 
> todays news: Breaking News! Firing has been reported from Wagah border this morning. The BSF personnel opened fire at a group of people who were trying to cross the border without permission. They fled after the BSF opened fire.The BSF has reportedly seized 13kg heroin, some fake currencies and 7 pistols from the spot. One BSF jawan was injured during the firing by Pakistani intruders. Further details are awaited.
> 
> U say that these intruders are mujahideens and they are heros who carried heroin, fake currency and illegal weapons are heros and India should take its troops back to welcome these folks....



How can we trust Indian media, your media lies about everything.

If Kashmiris love the Indian troops for "protecting" them why not allow a plebiscite, they will surely vote for India if India had done so much for them.


----------



## ahmeddsid

ejaz007 said:


> Ok so finally we have some point to start.
> 
> What about non Kashmiris in Indian Occupied Kashmir. Shouldn't same apply to them.
> 
> The agreement however must be ratified by both countries parliaments and the deadline to settle the issue should be 15 years plus guarantees that both countries shall honor the deal and not back out.


There is a law which states that No one from any part of India can settle down in Kashmir! A Kashmiri can buy a home and settle in My state Kerala (we got many here) But I cant do the same in Kashmir. Kashmir has special status in the Constitution. What about Pakistani Kashmir????


----------



## Omar1984

ahmeddsid said:


> There is a law which states that No one from any part of India can settle down in Kashmir! A Kashmiri can buy a home and settle in My state Kerala (we got many here) But I cant do the same in Kashmir. Kashmir has special status in the Constitution. What about Pakistani Kashmir????



Yea we all seen the special status of Kashmiris. What about Indian troops shooting at peaceful protestors? What about all the massive human rights violations on the Kashmiri people for decades? How special must Kashmiri people feel being part of India


----------



## ahmeddsid

Omar1984 said:


> Yea we all seen the special status of Kashmiris. What about Indian troops shooting at peaceful protestors? What about all the massive human rights violations on the Kashmiri people for decades? How special must Kashmiri people feel being part of India


Fine The Indian Army is the big bad wolf! They will move out when the Terrorists move out!

There will be worthwile peace talks Until and Unless the complete Terror Infrastructure Is Dismantled. After than I am sure India and Pak can solve their problems.


----------



## Omar1984

ahmeddsid said:


> Fine The Indian Army is the big bad wolf! They will move out when the Terrorists move out!
> 
> There will be worthwile peace talks Until and Unless the complete Terror Infrastructure Is Dismantled. After than I am sure India and Pak can solve their problems.




You Indians have your own definations of terrorists. For any regular human being with eyes and ears would see that the real terrorists are the Indian Armed Forces in Kashmir.


----------



## Omar1984

The only terrorists are Indian Armed Forces in Kashmir


----------



## kenchabhai

Ejazbhai

Here are the counter-arguments


1. NO. From an Indian PoV A disputed territory entitles that Pakistan and India both hold legal right over Kashmir. Since Pakistan has no legal right over Kashmir hence India calls it a bilateral issue. Claiming India occupies Kashmir entitles that Pakistan show legal proof that Kashmir belongs to it, no wonder all professional pakistani journalists call Jammu and Kashmir, Indian held Kashmir and not occupied. Instrument of Ascension, the only legal mandate, has been signed in favour of India and a plebiscite has not been held, therefore Pakistan has no legal grounds to claim Kashmir. 


2. As per Article 370, Jammu and Kashmir enjoys special autonomy, it has its own bank, flag, constitution, national anthem etc .
I am not bothered with what Pakistan does with its part of Kashmir which was forcibly and illegally grabbed in 1947-48. It has no legal authority over to administer Kashmir unless an internationally recognized free and fair plebiscite declares a majority vote in favour of Pakistan is declared. It had no right either to cede parts of Kashmir to China, or to directly rule Northern Areas or to IIRC engineer a demographic change.


3. Pakistani claim on Kashmir is based on 2-nation theory aka "the basis of Pakistani nationhood is neither territorial, racial, linguistic nor ethnic; rather they are a nation because they belong to the same faith, Islam". As per rules of 1947 partition, Pakistan had no right to invade Kashmir, it violated all legal treaties. Plebiscite under Indian adminstration in Kashmir would either squash or support "speculative" Pakistani claims on Kashmir (on the basis of 2-nation theory, a theory which was roundly debunked in 1971). Plebiscite would be held at the discretion of Indian govt. and I think Indian govt would wait for an opportune time to decide the matter in its favour.

4. 1971 proved that a nationhood based on faith ie Islam while disregarding ethnic, territorial, linguistic, ad racial dynamics is an erronous concept. Various insurgencies also debunk 2-nation theory.

5. Very commendable. Yet the world opinion is pro-India and Pakistan has had to shut down terror camps.


6. I don't live in denial.Some Kashmiris burst crackers when Pakistan wins matches against India, some burn Indian flags and raise Pakistani flags, some would rathe prefer death than to be ruled by Indians fine BUT at the same time over 60% of Kashmiris in a free, fair electin elected a Chief Minister who declares himself and Kashmir to be an Indian. 

7. LeT, JeM, SeS, Taliban rings a bell ? 

8. Perhaps it would be better that instead of lecturing me, you check the election results and accept the reality that 60% of Kashmiris voted for a pro-India CM.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Omar1984

*Kashmir not integral part of India: JKLF-R*

Srinagar, January 29 (KMS): In occupied Kashmir, the Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front Rajbagh (JKLF-R), Farooq Siddiqi has rejected the assertion of Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee that Kashmir is an integral part of India.

Farooq Siddiqi in a statement issued in Srinagar said that Mukherjees assertion reflects either his ignorance about Kashmir or a wilful distortion of historic, legal and political status of Kashmir.

Mukherjee must educate himself with geo-political history of India from Harsha Empire to present which will satisfy him that Kashmir was never a part of India, he said, adding that he should inform himself with the international legalities attached with dispute of Kashmir before issuing false statements.

The JKLF Chairman termed Mukherjee`s statement as lawless act of belligerence. He said that to ignore the continuous mass political uprising against India in last 60 years of Kashmirs occupation is absurd on the part of Indian Foreign Minister.

Farooq Siddiqi challenged Pranab Mukherjee to produce any legal document that will back his statement while reminded him that Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru had accepted the disputed status when he reiterated his position in a letter to the British Prime Minister on October 25, 1947.

The JKLF reminded Pranab Mukherjee when India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948; it did so under article 35 of Chapter VI, which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes.

He said that India did not present the Kashmir case under the UN Chapter VII, which relates to acts of aggression as India was alleging Pakistan. Therefore, he added, it was evident that by raising the issue under chapter VI, India recognised the Kashmir dispute.

http://www.kmsnews.org/news/kashmir-not-integral-part-india-jklf-r


----------



## suresh_

ahmeddsid said:


> Yes, This is what we need. But do you think it will happen??? If this happens then LeT and other freaking terrorists must shut shop without any profit at hand!



I think india will keep kashmir on backburner for another decade or so, meanwhile it will try to decrease militancy, combat terrorism, increase development of kashmir, and bring ppl into electoral process.

once india is confident enough, it will conduct some kind of plebiscite. 
kashmir muslim votes will be divided between 3 options pakistan, india and independence, so, the minority votes will be important. all the minorities in kashmir are with india. so, once india wins that, it can claim entire kashmir( including PaOK) morally.


----------



## hasang20

suresh_ said:


> I think india will keep kashmir on backburner for another decade or so, meanwhile it will try to decrease militancy, combat terrorism, increase development of kashmir, and bring ppl into electoral process.
> 
> once india is confident enough, it will conduct some kind of plebiscite.
> kashmir muslim votes will be divided between 3 options pakistan, india and independence, so, the minority votes will be important. all the minorities in kashmir are with india. so, once india wins that, it can claim entire kashmir( including PaOK) morally.



WE WANT OUR KAHSMIRE ITS NOT YOURS !


----------



## Pk_Thunder

*British MP for settling Kashmir Dispute *​ 

ISLAMABAD, Jan 29 (APP): *British Member of Parliament Sir Gerald Kaufman has supported Pakistan&#8217;s stance on Kashmir and admitted that Kashmir Dispute was of serious nature.* In a letter to President Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Raja Zulqarnain Khan, the British MP held out the assurance that he would make best efforts to find a peaceful solution of the Kashmir Dispute.

Sir Gerald Kaufman&#8217;s letter came a week ahead of Kashmir Solidarity Day being marked on February 5, which Pakistanis and Kashmir, at home and abroad, enthusiastically observe to condemn illegal Indian occupation of the held valley as well as support indigenous freedom struggle.

The day would also features rallies, seminars and other events to be attended by people from all walks of life.

Besides, Pakistanis and Kashmiris would also form a &#8216;Human Chain&#8217; three bridges that connects Kashmir to Pakistan as a sign to express solidarity with the Kashmiris.

The people would strongly abhor excesses done to innocent Kashmir people by India through brutal force.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## omairhr

*Kashmir Problem From Ambedkarite Perspective*

[http://www.ambedkar.org/jamanadas/KashmirProblem1.htm]

Dr. K. Jamanadas,

*Region and the People*

The state of Jammu and Kashmir has Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist population, mostly concentrated in valley, Jammu and Laddhak respectively.........

......*Recent Discussion*

During recent times, it was Ms, Tavleen Singh who in an article in Sunday Express of 20 April 2003, made a daring suggestion of third party international intervention by America in Kashmir dispute. She was correct in saying that India has already asked American help to tame down Pakistan and that we must realize to start with, that the problem can not be solved domestically.

Now supposing with some good fortune, wisdom prevails on all sides and such talks do take place, what the Indian side hopes best to bargain for? What is not only just and reasonable but also possible under the circumstances for the Indian side?

The answer to this has been given long time back by Dr. Ambedkar, who had said, as mentioned previously, that, the Hindu area of Jammu and Buddhist area of Laddhak be separated from the Muslim area of the Valley. These non-Muslim area should be the part of India and the valley be given independent status with every right to them to do what they want.

RSS realizes bifurcation is good

It is now after so many years that RSS has come to realize the sagacity of this formula and asked for bifurcation of J & K on such lines within Indian frame work, but the pride and prejudice will not allow them to implement even that.

Rule by force, how long?

From Pakistan point of view, no matter which group of people rule over Kashmir, it is going to be a Muslim rule. What more does Pak want? Unlike Hindus with thousands of castes and groups, Muslim society is comparatively more monolithic. If the individuals do not matter, how does it matter to Pak, whether Kashmiri people feel more comfortable in India or not?

From Indian point of view, Indian spending in Kashmir directly and indirectly has been so great that lot of developmental works could have been possible in rest of India with that money. Now, further, it is contemplated to spend on Railways in Kashmir from the resources from rest of India, as if it is going to be with you till the sun and moon last. The British could not rule India by the force of sword for long, will India or for that matter Pakistan rule Kashmir for long against their wishes? If the answer is negative, then why is the conflict?


A lost case for India

The Hindus, as a matter of fact, lost Kashmir forever in thirteenth century, when a boy of tender age, Ratanju, of no fixed religion or nationality was refused entry to Hinduism, and was converted by a Muslim fakir Bulbulshah to Islam. His son Shahamir usurped the throne. Kashmir, a Buddhist and Hindu country till then, became Muslim very soon. It is said, those pundits, who refused to become Muslims, were put in gunny bags and drowned in river Jehlam by Ratanju and Shahamir. The place in Shrinagar where they were drowned, is famous even now by the name of 'watta mazaar'. [Santram, Sarita Mukta vol. 8, p.162.]

Chenab formula

Muzamil Jaleel in Indian Express of 28 June 2003, wrote of Chenab Compromise. Though the official stance of both India and Pakistan says they want full control of Kashmir, they both are - may be under pressure from America - likely to come to accept the idea of compromise. India would be happy if LOC becomes International boundary, which has been strongly refuted by Pak. Now and again India talks of ***, knowing well that there are no takers.

What does Pak want to settle for - apart from full control of J & K - nobody knows. But Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan Prime Minister of ***, last month, had called upon both Delhi and Islamabad to consider River Chenab as the Border - ostensibly a Pak motivation. Australian Diplomat Sir Owen Dixon had expressed similar idea in 1950.Even in mid sixties, the Britain and US were urging both India and Pakistan for partition. In Pakistan media there seems to be support to Hayat proposal. Also the Kashmiri separatist leadership seems to favour the idea.

Will the caste ridden India accept it? Those who were talking of "Akhand Bharat", had to accept the Partition of India, as predicted by Ambedkar. But India and Pakistan both had to suffer a lot during the process with loss of life, property and human suffering, as the safeguards as advocated by Ambedkar were not followed.

Now the talks are likely to start on the problem. Partition along the river Chenab, which runs north of Jammu is one of the proposals for long time. But the partition involves human angle and all those precautions advocated by Ambedkar during partition of India and Pakistan will have to be taken, if the human tragedy has to be averted. ...

==========================

the *** are Pak occ Kashmir!


----------



## suresh_

hasang20 said:


> ye decade more our nukes are going to get rusty why so much you guys live in a dream world pathetic.



plz explain the relevance of nukes to wat I have said, that is, if you know it.


----------



## Vics

hasang20 said:


> is there any other option you guys wont talk peace



Ok go ahead and try your luck.....

The most peacefull nation on earth....


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

ahmeddsid said:


> Then freaking stop the violence! A plebisicte will never be held with a gun to our Heads!


The problem is that there are many fighting Indian occupation that do not believe India will allow a plebiscite even if they lay down arms, and that the occupation will continue regardless. The GoI is going to have to accept the disputed status (which it currently does not) and come to an agreement such as the one mentioned, which can be publicized and then used to get the insurgents to disarm, and if necessary the Pakistani state can use force at that point against them, since there will be an agreement on a plebisicte.

But to get started on stopping the violence requires accepting that there is a problem, first, and then laying out a solution conditional to the stop in violence.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

roopesh said:


> Pakistan can do anything...It can goto UN..US why should India go.



Pleas, read the existing posts - you are the ones that went to the UN, and came to an agreement in teh UN with Pakistan on a referendum, and accepted the UNSc resolutions as declaring Kashri disputed and the means of resolution a plebiscite.

Don't lay this canard of 'Pakistan can do anything, why should India' - India accepted everything Pakistan's policy on Kashmir states, and then violated those agreements.

So legally and morally India has not position - her only argument is 'might is right'.


----------



## suresh_

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The problem is that there are many fighting Indian occupation that do not believe India will allow a plebiscite even if they lay down arms, and that the occupation will continue regardless. The GoI is going to have to accept the disputed status (which it currently does not) and come to an agreement such as the one mentioned, which can be publicized and then used to get the insurgents to disarm, and if necessary the Pakistani state can use force at that point against them, since there will be an agreement on a plebisicte.
> 
> But to get started on stopping the violence requires accepting that there is a problem, first, and then laying out a solution conditional to the sto pin violence.



this sounds more like a threat: 'accept or violence'.
why should then india bow to such a threat?

whether some groups want to lay down arms or not, india only asks pakistan not to provide such terror groups with infrastructure and not let them use its territory. 
thats the only request/demand from GOI. can GOP give that assurance?


----------



## suresh_

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Pleas, read the existing posts - you are the ones that went to the UN, and came to an agreement in teh UN with Pakistan on a referendum, and accepted the UNSc resolutions as declaring Kashri disputed and the means of resolution a plebiscite.
> 
> Don't lay this canard of 'Pakistan can do anything, why should India' - India accepted everything Pakistan's policy on Kashmir states, and then violated those agreements.
> 
> So legally and morally India has not position - her only argument is 'might is right'.



expecting a country to stick to the same 'moral position' that it took half a century ago, is not very practical! pak's position must change to accept the new realities of today like the recent election results.


----------



## hasang20

suresh_ said:


> this sounds more like a threat: 'accept or violence'.
> why should then india bow to such a threat?
> 
> whether some groups want to lay down arms or not, india only asks pakistan not to provide such terror groups with infrastructure and not let them use its territory.
> thats the only request/demand from GOI. can GOP give that assurance?



Pakistan will stop providing "such terror camps" when you leave Kashmire they are not terrorist they are Mujahideen okay peace and wheres MODI ? Indian media is too mind controllling of illetrate kids.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Kenchabhai:

The Two nation theory is a philosophy, it is not the legal basis for partition, nor is it dead due to the existence of Bangladesh, but that is a subject for another thread.

Kashmir is not being claimed on the basis of 'Two nation theory', it is being claimed on the basis of the agreements reached between the Indian , Pakistani and British leadership on partition. That agreement stated that any accession that was disputed would be resolved via plebiscite in that state, and Mountbatten made a specific point of reiterating that condition, accession incomplete without plebiscite, on Kashmir.

So there is the first legal reason for Kashmir.

The second is the UNSC resolutions and India's agreement with Pakistan and the UN on the fact that Kashmir is disputed territory, and that a referendum is the means of resolving the dispute. This ties into the conditions of partition the Pakistani, Indians and British agreed upon.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

suresh_ said:


> this sounds more like a threat: 'accept or violence'.
> why should then india bow to such a threat?
> 
> whether some groups want to lay down arms or not, india only asks pakistan not to provide such terror groups with infrastructure and not let them use its territory.
> thats the only request/demand from GOI. can GOP give that assurance?



Its not a threat - its the reality of the views of the people fighting Indian occupation. There is evidence to back this up - India refused to resolve the dispute peacefully and politically according to the agreements she made with Pakistan and the international community for decades before the insurgency started.

So India needs to respect the principle behind those agreements made, and come to an agreement with Pakistan on a plebiscite in the future, sin some shape or form, provided the violence stops. The onus is on India here because India is the one who violated the agreements before and moved away from the peaceful option for resolution.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

suresh_ said:


> expecting a country to stick to the same 'moral position' that it took half a century ago, is not very practical! pak's position must change to accept the new realities of today like the recent election results.



Since when has 'freedom' and self determination come with an expiration date? How long was India a colony of teh British? Quite a bit more than a hundred years, I suppose giving India freedom was also not 'practical'.

The realities of today are that freedom and self determination are still recognized, and moral, as is the legal status for Kashmri as disputed, and the legality of the referendum.


----------



## suresh_

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Its not a threat - its the reality of the views of the people fighting Indian occupation. There is evidence to back this up - India refused to resolve the dispute peacefully and politically according to the agreements she made with Pakistan and the international community for decades before the insurgency started.
> 
> So India needs to respect the principle behind those agreements made, and come to an agreement with Pakistan on a plebiscite in the future, sin some shape or form, provided the violence stops. *The onus is on India here because India is the one who violated the agreements before and moved away from the peaceful option for resolution.*



your last sentence sums up the position of pak, that if india doesnt agree to 'peaceful' resoulution then violence will continue. this amounts to putting gun to head and wat more, it also makes pak a country using terrorism as a state foreign policy.this was commented upon by our PM as well recently.

the rest of your post explains pak's position and india doesnt agree with it. we can negotiate our differences of opinion but terrorism sponsored by pak or from its territory is disrupting the peace process. so stop terrorism in your land and we can explore resolving kashmir. simple. wat is wrong with this request?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hasang20

suresh_ said:


> your last sentence sums up the position of pak, that if india doesnt agree to 'peaceful' resoulution then violence will continue. this amounts to putting gun to head and wat more, it also makes pak a country using terrorism as a state foreign policy.this was commented upon by our PM as well recently.
> 
> the rest of your post explains pak's position and india doesnt agree with it. we can negotiate our differences of opinion but terrorism sponsored by pak or from its territory is disrupting the peace process. so stop terrorism in your land and we can explore resolving kashmir. simple. wat is wrong with this request?



too much bollywood movies and too much watching IBN CNN !


----------



## suresh_

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Since when has 'freedom' and self determination come with an expiration date? How long was India a colony of teh British? Quite a bit more than a hundred years, I suppose giving India freedom was also not 'practical'.
> 
> The realities of today are that freedom and self determination are still recognized, and moral, as is the legal status for Kashmri as disputed, and the legality of the referendum.



the only difference between indian independence struggle and 'kashmir freedom struggle' is that in kashmir the presence of violence/terror launched from foreign nations in large doses!

india has only asked pak to stop violence/terror. remember, even violence in indian independence was not appreciated by the world. just like today.
pak should wake up and smell the coffee. violence wont work.


----------



## ahmeddsid

I feel That If Pakistan and India agree to give peace a chance then There will be no problem. Some Political Parties in India dont want to solve the Kashmir Issue for their own use. The Army in Pakistan wont compromise on giving an inch of Kashmir away and in short if Kashmir is solved, the Army of Pakistan wont be as powerful as they are today. Again this is my view.

I say, Pakistan should put forward this idea of peace for 10 years and then plebiscite. Pakistan should take the first step and ask all these groups to Disarm as Peace is gonna be given a chance. This will make India act, and the onus will be on India. Get me? If India doesnt act then It means India is not willing to solve it. If thats the case then Pakistan can unmask Indias real face!

Lastly, I feel the suffering of Kashmir is not the Real issue. Its just a farce. Its the Water Resources. The One who holds Kashmir, Holds the Water! Again My view.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

suresh_ said:


> your last sentence sums up the position of pak, that if india doesnt agree to 'peaceful' resoulution then violence will continue. this amounts to putting gun to head and wat more, it also makes pak a country using terrorism as a state foreign policy.this was commented upon by our PM as well recently.
> 
> the rest of your post explains pak's position and india doesnt agree with it. we can negotiate our differences of opinion but terrorism sponsored by pak or from its territory is disrupting the peace process. so stop terrorism in your land and we can explore resolving kashmir. simple. wat is wrong with this request?



It is not terrorism since the right to resist an occupation is an internationally recognized right for an occupied people.

The choice is India's, since India was the one that violated the peaceful agreement to begin with. People like you will continue regurgitating jingoism and immoral and illegal positions based on 'might is right'. There is nothign to discuss with you. Other Indians have indicated an interest in compromise, peace, development, and plebiscite in limited areas (AK and IK for example) after a decade or two. Those are the people actually interested in peace and progress.

As to the rest, read the previous posts.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

ahmeddsid said:


> I feel That If Pakistan and India agree to give peace a chance then There will be no problem. Some Political Parties in India dont want to solve the Kashmir Issue for their own use. The Army in Pakistan wont compromise on giving an inch of Kashmir away and in short if Kashmir is solved, the Army of Pakistan wont be as powerful as they are today. Again this is my view.
> 
> I say, Pakistan should put forward this idea of peace for 10 years and then plebiscite. Pakistan should take the first step and ask all these groups to Disarm as Peace is gonna be given a chance. This will make India act, and the onus will be on India. Get me? If India doesnt act then It means India is not willing to solve it. If thats the case then Pakistan can unmask Indias real face!



I am willing to have Pakistan offer the first step, but to disarm the freedom fighters before India offers a quid pro quo would be harmful to Pakistan's position in several ways. First it will stir discontent in the Kashmiris who support the struggle that Pakistan sold them out without any movement from India.

I think the two sides need to come to this agreement first through dialog and engagement - its not like India will withdraw the day the agreement is made. Once an agreement is made public, Pakistan has to ensure that all camps and armed groups on her side are shut down, that will be verified by international observers, who will also monitor the situation in both AK and IK. Then 10 - 20 years from then, so long as relative peace is maintained, we can proceed with the plebiscite in whichever areas are determined (likely only AK and IK).

But this has to be a bilateral decision and announcement the two sides make, since there are groups on both sides who will not agree to unilateralism on Kashmir.



> Lastly, I feel the suffering of Kashmir is not the Real issue. Its just a farce. Its the Water Resources. The One who holds Kashmir, Holds the Water! Again My view.


If that were the case Pakistan would never be amenable to a compromise solution - a compromise still leaves major waterways in Indian control. Water is not an issue so long as the IWT is respected.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

suresh_ said:


> the only difference between indian independence struggle and 'kashmir freedom struggle' is that in kashmir the presence of violence/terror launched from foreign nations in large doses!
> 
> india has only asked pak to stop violence/terror. remember, even violence in indian independence was not appreciated by the world. just like today.
> pak should wake up and smell the coffee. violence wont work.



India should wake up and fulfill her commitments that she violated - a small first step would be admitting that Kashmir is a dispute, as she did under the UNSC resolutions that she then violated.

'Taali aek haath say nahin bajti'


----------



## ahmeddsid

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> I am willing to have Pakistan offer the first step, but to disarm the freedom fighters before India offers a quid pro quo would be harmful to Pakistan's position in several ways. First it will stir discontent in the Kashmiris who support the struggle that Pakistan sold them out without any movement from India.
> 
> I think the two sides need to come to this agreement first through dialog and engagement - its not like India will withdraw the day the agreement is made. Once an agreement is made public, Pakistan has to ensure that all camps and armed groups on her side are shut down, that will be verified by international observers, who will also monitor the situation in both AK and IK. Then 10 - 20 years from then, so long as relative peace is maintained, we can proceed with the plebiscite in whichever areas are determined (likely only AK and IK).
> 
> But this has to be a bilateral decision and announcement the two sides make, since there are groups on both sides who will not agree to unilateralism on Kashmir.
> 
> 
> If that were the case Pakistan would never be amenable to a compromise solution - a compromise still leaves major waterways in Indian control. Water is not an issue so long as the IWT is respected.


Its a Risk pakistan has to take, iF it feels India is an illegal entity in Kashmir and then Go onto Humiliate it. If India Doesnt Oblige, then you can wash your hands off Peace and Say, yes to Guns and Violence. I seriously would have done this If I was ruling Pakistan. India would have no choice but to play along with you if this happens!


----------



## suresh_

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> It is not terrorism since the right to resist an occupation is an internationally recognized right for an occupied people.
> 
> The choice is India's, since India was the one that violated the peaceful agreement to begin with. People like you will continue regurgitating jingoism and immoral and illegal positions based on 'might is right'. There is nothign to discuss with you. Other Indians have indicated an interest in compromise, peace, development, and plebiscite in limited areas (AK and IK for example) after a decade or two. Those are the people actually interested in peace and progress.
> 
> As to the rest, read the previous posts.



your next post made a lot of sense, and I agree that under some bilateral treaty we should stop violence in kashmir. then after relative peace for a decade or two, conduct a plebiscite. so, that both the countries can move on once and for all.

but, your accusation that india was the aggressor is not acceptable.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

ahmeddsid said:


> Its a Risk pakistan has to take, iF it feels India is an illegal entity in Kashmir and then Go onto Humiliate it. *If India Doesnt Oblige, then you can wash your hands off Peace and Say, yes to Guns and Violence. I seriously would have done this If I was ruling Pakistan. India would have no choice but to play along with you if this happens!*



This is what I pointed out earlier - Pakistan took to guns and violence only after almost two decades of no movement on Kashmir, and the GoI's decision (voiced by Nehru publicly in the sixties or late fifties I believe) that there would be no plebiscite in kashmir and the status quo would prevail.

That unilateral determination by the GoI is what led to the perception in Pakistan that India was not interested in peaceful resolution, which led to Op. Gibraltor and then eventually the Kashmir insurgency.

You have to look at it from Pakistan's perspective as well - given that the above happened, that we had India agree to multiple UNSC resolutions, and come to an agreement *in the UN* with us on conducting a plebiscite, and then back out unilaterally, what reason is there for us to act unilaterally now, when India does not even consider Kashmir a dispute?

That is why I said that there need to be negotiations and a joint declaration of the way forward, contingent upon peace in the valley - but the way forward has to be announced by both, given the history.


----------



## Captain03

scenerio 7 is the best for the people
and india doesnt have to worry about losing ALL the land as that is what they are after and thats what they care for


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> the only difference between indian independence struggle and 'kashmir freedom struggle' is that in kashmir the presence of violence/terror launched from foreign nations in large doses!
> 
> india has only asked pak to stop violence/terror. remember, even violence in indian independence was not appreciated by the world. just like today.
> pak should wake up and smell the coffee. violence wont work.



its not called violence or terror it called fighting fire with fire
if the indian troops can go around killing our people murdering our women and orphaning children then we have the right to resist anyway possible
and india has killed over 90,000 kashmiri civilians isnt that violence?
b4 u tell anyone to get up and smell the copy maybe u should know what ur goverment is really upto


----------



## ahmeddsid

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> This is what I pointed out earlier - Pakistan took to guns and violence only after almost two decades of no movement on Kashmir, and the GoI's decision (voiced by Nehru publicly in the sixties or late fifties I believe) that there would be no plebiscite in kashmir and the status quo would prevail.
> 
> That unilateral determination by the GoI is what led to the perception in Pakistan that India was not interested in peaceful resolution, which led to Op. Gibraltor and then eventually the Kashmir insurgency.
> 
> You have to look at it from Pakistan's perspective as well - given that the above happened, that we had India agree to multiple UNSC resolutions, and come to an agreement *in the UN* with us on conducting a plebiscite, and then back out unilaterally, what reason is there for us to act unilaterally now, when India does not even consider Kashmir a dispute?
> 
> That is why I said that there need to be negotiations and a joint declaration of the way forward, contingent upon peace in the valley - but the way forward has to be announced by both, given the history.


I just wish people like you were heading the country! Man we got many good leaders among us, If Imran Khan comes in, I believe Change can happen. Same case in India, If Rahul Gandhi comes in with a good majority, then we can expect some peace!


----------



## Contrarian

ahmeddsid said:


> I just wish people like you were heading the country! Man we got many good leaders among us, If Imran Khan comes in, I believe Change can happen. Same case in India, If Rahul Gandhi comes in with a good majority, then we can expect some peace!



Rahul Gandhi is not the be all end all politician. There are many others who are better than him.

Secondly, have you seen him give a speech? He's a third rate orator. You really have to see him in action and then you really need to be a hardcore Congress loyalist to think he's the next best thing after Indira Gandhi.


----------



## suresh_

Captain03 said:


> its not called violence or terror it called fighting fire with fire
> if the indian troops can go around killing our people murdering our women and orphaning children then we have the right to resist anyway possible
> and india has killed over 90,000 kashmiri civilians isnt that violence?
> b4 u tell anyone to get up and smell the copy maybe u should know what ur goverment is really upto



lets not start all over again.
there just seems to be a consensus of opinion. suffice to say that I dont agree with your "facts". I believe they are exaggarated and fabricated. these stories/rumours are present wherever there is army deployement.


----------



## ahmeddsid

malaymishra123 said:


> Rahul Gandhi is not the be all end all politician. There are many others who are better than him.
> 
> Secondly, have you seen him give a speech? He's a third rate orator. You really have to see him in action and then you really need to be a hardcore Congress loyalist to think he's the next best thing after Indira Gandhi.


I am not a congress Loyalist, Infact I believe Congress is using the Minorities in many ways. But they are the lesser of the two evils! I dont have to worry about Communalism in my state as BJP is not in the fray here. In fact its said that, A Man can Live on Mars, But a BJP candidate cant win from Kerala! But I agree the BJP did rule India in a good way when they were In power. 

The thing is that, A Leader should not be only measured by his Oratory skills! We have so many orators, what have they done for us?? Speaking in a great and passionate way wont help! ACTION is what we Need. I have been Following Rahul Gandhi for sometime now and He is Good, He has a vision. 

Its these freaking Politicians with freaking Oratory skills that has brought In so much misery to our Country. Same goes for Pakistan, Imran Khan is the Solution I feel.


----------



## suresh_

malaymishra123 said:


> Rahul Gandhi is not the be all end all politician. There are many others who are better than him.
> 
> Secondly, have you seen him give a speech? He's a third rate orator. You really have to see him in action and then you really need to be a hardcore Congress loyalist to think he's the next best thing after Indira Gandhi.



I think modi would come very close to indira gandhi. he can be a good candidtate for PM's post. recently saw even india inc encouraging him.


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> lets not start all over again.
> there just seems to be a consensus of opinion. suffice to say that I dont agree with your "facts". I believe they are exaggarated and fabricated. these stories/rumours are present wherever there is army deployement.



i am kashmiri
i have family living in both sides of kasmir
i know what goes on in indian occupied kashmir
if u dont believe me then do some research
there are many bbc and other documentaries going on about the genocide in kashmir
just because u ignore the truth doesnt mean its not happening


----------



## suresh_

Captain03 said:


> i am kashmiri
> i have family living in both sides of kasmir
> i know what goes on in indian occupied kashmir
> if u dont believe me then do some research
> there are many bbc and other documentaries going on about the genocide in kashmir
> just because u ignore the truth doesnt mean its not happening



you being kashmiri is irrelevant.
your personal experiences and opinions shouldnt be binding on others nor are they gospel truths.
those documentaries can be presented here, then we can discuss.

anyway, the basic point I was stressing on is that stop taking the debate back to where it started. if you accuse india, then we accuse pak .....and so on. do you like it that way? or are you interested in some solution?

if you are interested in solution then peace is the way forward not 'mujahideen'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## suresh_

sharan said:


> why dont they have open borders and travel without visa like us
> every one will be happy


 yeah, including terrorists. for open borders to be feasible, we need to have peace first, stop terrorism. then we can discuss a range of solutions. but violence cant be used as a way forward.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> you being kashmiri is irrelevant.
> your personal experiences and opinions shouldnt be binding on others nor are they gospel truths.
> those documentaries can be presented here, then we can discuss.
> 
> anyway, the basic point I was stressing on is that stop taking the debate back to where it started. if you accuse india, then we accuse pak .....and so on. do you like it that way? or are you interested in some solution?
> 
> if you are interested in solution then peace is the way forward not 'mujahideen'.



have u ever heard of unrest in the ak?
no
its always the indian held kashmir that is always protesting and trying to gain independence and wants to join ak
because kashmiris arent being massacared in ak
as far as the documentaries are concerned they are posted here
just search them 
also the world knows about the continuing genocide in the indian occupied kashmir
search up the news and stop being lazy
even recently the british pm told india to stop their aggresiveness in kashmir


----------



## Captain03

sharan said:


> why dont they have open borders and travel without visa like us
> every one will be happy



because indian doesnt care about the people but the land


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> yeah, including terrorists. for such a thing to happen, we need to have peace first, stop terrorism. then we can discuss a range of solutions. but violence cant be used as a way forward.



terrorist? meaning indian forces?


----------



## suresh_

Captain03 said:


> have u ever heard of unrest in the ak?
> no
> its always the indian held kashmir that is always protesting and trying to gain independence and wants to join ak
> because kashmiris arent being massacared in ak
> as far as the documentaries are concerned they are posted here
> just search them
> also the world knows about the continuing genocide in the indian occupied kashmir
> search up the news and stop being lazy
> even recently the british pm told india to stop their aggresiveness in kashmir



as if it matters to us wat a brits say! our line is 'india is an internal issue and we dont need anyone's advice'. now, wat happens in kashmir shouldnt be anyone's concern except india's. simple.
lets start the debate all over again now! happy!

wat foolishness is this!


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> as if it matters to us wat a brits say! our line is 'india is an internal issue and we dont need anyone's advice'. now, wat happens in kashmir shouldnt be anyone's concern except india's. simple.
> lets start the debate all over again now! happy!
> 
> wat foolishness is this!



actually kashmir is a disputd territory not an indian state
so it's our problem too when u kill innocent people

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Omar1984

suresh_ said:


> as if it matters to us wat a brits say! our line is 'india is an internal issue and we dont need anyone's advice'. now, wat happens in kashmir shouldnt be anyone's concern except india's. simple.
> lets start the debate all over again now! happy!
> 
> wat foolishness is this!



Even Nehru admitted that Kashmir is a disputed area...so Kashmir is as much Pakistan's concern as its India's concern.


----------



## ahmeddsid

Look we are going Backwards in this Thread! If you guys are taking up hard stances then I have nothing more to say but "KASHMIR IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF INDIA!" 

This is where it will lead us to eventually if this goes on. remember, India has come up despite the Kashmir Issue, But I feel Solving the Kashmir Issue willl be more benficial for Pakistan. Ofcourse it will better for us all! So give peace a chance!

And about India caring only for the land, Well then I can say Pak is after the WATER! Dont make us go in that direction! 

About Pak Kashmir being Peaceful, well when all the terrorists are crossing over to our Kashmir, there will be Peace in Pak kashmir Naturally!


----------



## suresh_

Captain03 said:


> actually kashmir is a disputd territory not an indian state
> so it's our problem too when u kill innocent people





Captain03 said:


> actually kashmir is a disputd territory not an indian state
> so it's our problem too when u kill innocent people



who said kashmir is disputed? only pak CLAIMS it to be disputed.
and we dont kill innocent ppl, they are terrorists and almost all of them have exclusive punjabi(not kashmiri) background. so stop painting it as if indian forces are doing some evil things in kashmir.

anyway, I just tried to show you that zidh se zidh paida hoti hai, but you clearly failed to grasp the point. ppl like you create roadblocks since you cant get over your emotions and move on in life. sorry to say, but your kind are the problem.


----------



## suresh_

Omar1984 said:


> Even Nehru admitted that Kashmir is a disputed area...so Kashmir is as much Pakistan's concern as its India's concern.



nehru only agree to plebiscite. and very foolishly.

anyway, the hard truth is that if push comes to shove, india wont care who said wat. if nehru said kashmir is disputed then go and ask nehru.

today, india is in advantageous position, we believe if we can hold on to kashmir for another decade, then world wont care any more. just like tibet. simple.
if you guys want us to take that position, we dont mind it. otherwise, lets give peace a chance by condemning and rejecting violence/terrorism.simple choice.


----------



## Captain03

ahmeddsid said:


> Look we are going Backwards in this Thread! If you guys are taking up hard stances then I have nothing more to say but "KASHMIR IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF INDIA!"
> 
> This is where it will lead us to eventually if this goes on. remember, India has come up despite the Kashmir Issue, But I feel Solving the Kashmir Issue willl be more benficial for Pakistan. Ofcourse it will better for us all! So give peace a chance!
> 
> And about India caring only for the land, Well then I can say Pak is after the WATER! Dont make us go in that direction!
> 
> About Pak Kashmir being Peaceful, well when all the terrorists are crossing over to our Kashmir, there will be Peace in Pak kashmir Naturally!



its not your kashmir
kashmir only belongs to the kashmiris
i pretty sure their actions have displayed that
and pak is not after the water as water was not the issue 60 years back when we fought for the kashmiris
and for us to stop our so called "terrorists" u have to keep out ur terrorists [the indian army] from ihk


----------



## Omar1984

suresh_ said:


> who said kashmir is disputed? only pak CLAIMS it to be disputed.



Kashmir not integral part of India: JKLF-R

Srinagar, January 29 (KMS): In occupied Kashmir, the Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front Rajbagh (JKLF-R), Farooq Siddiqi has rejected the assertion of Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee that Kashmir is an integral part of India.

Farooq Siddiqi in a statement issued in Srinagar said that Mukherjees assertion reflects either his ignorance about Kashmir or a wilful distortion of historic, legal and political status of Kashmir.

Mukherjee must educate himself with geo-political history of India from Harsha Empire to present which will satisfy him that Kashmir was never a part of India, he said, adding that he should inform himself with the international legalities attached with dispute of Kashmir before issuing false statements.

The JKLF Chairman termed Mukherjee`s statement as lawless act of belligerence. He said that to ignore the continuous mass political uprising against India in last 60 years of Kashmirs occupation is absurd on the part of Indian Foreign Minister.

Farooq Siddiqi challenged Pranab Mukherjee to produce any legal document that will back his statement while reminded him that Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru had accepted the disputed status when he reiterated his position in a letter to the British Prime Minister on October 25, 1947.

The JKLF reminded Pranab Mukherjee when India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948; it did so under article 35 of Chapter VI, which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes.

He said that India did not present the Kashmir case under the UN Chapter VII, which relates to acts of aggression as India was alleging Pakistan. Therefore, he added, it was evident that by raising the issue under chapter VI, India recognised the Kashmir dispute.

http://www.kmsnews.org/news/kashmir-not-integral-part-india-jklf-r


----------



## Omar1984

suresh_ said:


> and we dont kill innocent ppl, they are terrorists and almost all of them have exclusive punjabi(not kashmiri) background. so stop painting it as if indian forces are doing some evil things in kashmir.
> 
> anyway, I just tried to show you that zidh se zidh paida hoti hai, but you clearly failed to grasp the point. ppl like you create roadblocks since you cant get over your emotions and move on in life. sorry to say, but your kind are the problem.



So are these children "Punjabi terrorists" too?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ahmeddsid

Omar1984 said:


> Kashmir not integral part of India: JKLF-R
> 
> Srinagar, January 29 (KMS): In occupied Kashmir, the Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front Rajbagh (JKLF-R), Farooq Siddiqi has rejected the assertion of Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee that Kashmir is an integral part of India.
> 
> Farooq Siddiqi in a statement issued in Srinagar said that Mukherjees assertion reflects either his ignorance about Kashmir or a wilful distortion of historic, legal and political status of Kashmir.
> 
> Mukherjee must educate himself with geo-political history of India from Harsha Empire to present which will satisfy him that Kashmir was never a part of India, he said, adding that he should inform himself with the international legalities attached with dispute of Kashmir before issuing false statements.
> 
> The JKLF Chairman termed Mukherjee`s statement as lawless act of belligerence. He said that to ignore the continuous mass political uprising against India in last 60 years of Kashmirs occupation is absurd on the part of Indian Foreign Minister.
> 
> Farooq Siddiqi challenged Pranab Mukherjee to produce any legal document that will back his statement while reminded him that Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru had accepted the disputed status when he reiterated his position in a letter to the British Prime Minister on October 25, 1947.
> 
> The JKLF reminded Pranab Mukherjee when India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948; it did so under article 35 of Chapter VI, which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes.
> 
> He said that India did not present the Kashmir case under the UN Chapter VII, which relates to acts of aggression as India was alleging Pakistan. Therefore, he added, it was evident that by raising the issue under chapter VI, India recognised the Kashmir dispute.
> 
> Kashmir not integral part of India: JKLF-R | Kashmir Media Service


Who cares what KLF says??? These guys are not peacemakers, they are peacebreakers! I say, there is no use talking with stubborn people like you. Better to talk to AM and the others. Atleast then it will be worthwhile!


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> who said kashmir is disputed? only pak CLAIMS it to be disputed.
> and we dont kill innocent ppl, they are terrorists and almost all of them have exclusive punjabi(not kashmiri) background. so stop painting it as if indian forces are doing some evil things in kashmir.



the whole world claims kashmir is disputed even ur well love leader nehru
apparently ur living in a dream world where indian forces fight for the rights of people
WAKE UP
in a indian soldier's eyes every kashmiri is a terrorist
i guess thats how they justify their killings



> anyway, I just tried to show you that zidh se zidh paida hoti hai, but you clearly failed to grasp the point. ppl like you create roadblocks since you cant get over your emotions and move on in life. sorry to say, but your kind are the problem.



zidh pe zidh hoti hai
ur negligence as well as ur governments is the only thing that comes between the kashmir issue
kashmiris dont want to be a part of ur country and we have made that clear
from weapons to protests we have all declared the same thing:
we dont want u in the region
but ur government as well as u dont care much for the people but for the land so what can be said about u


----------



## Captain03

sharan said:


> pakistan cannot protect its own people who r being killed by usa
> J&K should be in india they are planning for winter games next year in ladhak
> currently there is ice hockey championship is going on now



one word:
WHAT!!!!!


----------



## Captain03

ahmeddsid said:


> Who cares what KLF says??? These guys are not peacemakers, they are peacebreakers! I say, *there is no use talking with stubborn people like you.* Better to talk to AM and the others. Atleast then it will be worthwhile!



stubborn
hmm so staying in the region for 60 years even when ur not wanted there and destabilizing the whole region and killing innocent people is not being stubborn by the indian government
be serious and stop posting krap up


----------



## Omar1984

ahmeddsid said:


> Who cares what KLF says??? These guys are not peacemakers, they are peacebreakers! I say, there is no use talking with stubborn people like you. Better to talk to AM and the others. Atleast then it will be worthwhile!



Those guys are talking with FACTS backed up by official documents.

'*Farooq Siddiqi challenged Pranab Mukherjee to produce any legal document that will back his statement while reminded him that Indian Prime Minister Jawahar Lal Nehru had accepted the disputed status when he reiterated his position in a letter to the British Prime Minister on October 25, 1947.

The JKLF reminded Pranab Mukherjee when India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948; it did so under article 35 of Chapter VI, which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes.

He said that India did not present the Kashmir case under the UN Chapter VII, which relates to acts of aggression as India was alleging Pakistan. Therefore, he added, it was evident that by raising the issue under chapter VI, India recognised the Kashmir dispute.*'

http://www.kmsnews.org/news/kashmir-not-integral-part-india-jklf-r

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Captain03

sharan said:


> google it
> do you know what is ice hockey ?
> in usa it is called simply 'hockey'



i know but for sports let india kill innocent kashmiris?
thats just barbaric my friend


----------



## ahmeddsid

I have nothing to talk to with any of you because you keep harping on the same points over and over! Think ahead!


----------



## Captain03

sharan said:


> i have been to ladakh they are so friendly people and there isn't any thing you mentioned there
> if you get a chance please visit its very beautiful place
> and about kashmir valley you cannot do nothing if there is a such a thing



have u been to the kashmir valley?
the population of muslims in ladkh increased due to fleeing kashmiris to escape violence in the kashmir valley
thats how bad it is


----------



## Captain03

ahmeddsid said:


> I have nothing to talk to with any of you because you keep harping on the same points over and over! Think ahead!



in order to move ahead our past and especially our present plays big roles
so think present and past first before u tell people to think ahead


----------



## ahmeddsid

I ask the Indian members stay off this thread till Agnostic Muslim and the Others come in, because this Thread is going no where with the current set of discussions, We started this to bridge Gaps, Not build barriers and Go back to SQUARE ONE.


----------



## araz

The problem in Kashmir is an old one and unfortunatelky out of the focus in view of other more urgent issues. To those who think it is an integral part of India, the current situation should be an eye opener. If you think that this is just an outside interference, then think again as the ;local people are dying in this struggle and it engges hundreds of thousands of Indian troops. For Pakistan, it is an issue of survival due to our water resources being sourced from there. However, Pakistani perception of Kashmir as a part of Pakistan is unreal as the wishes of the people are now different.
The solution lies somewhere in between the two wishes and possibly in an autonomous Kashmir which governs itself under joint governance of INDO_PAK. Any other solution will cause acrimony and a war to sort the problem will leave a rather charred Sub continent which I am sure both Governments will be eagreto avoid. The trick is to keep India involved in both political and other endeavours to reach a mutually acceptable solution.
WaSalam
Araz

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ahmeddsid

araz said:


> The problem in Kashmir is an old one and unfortunatelky out of the focus in view of other more urgent issues. To those who think it is an integral part of India, the current situation should be an eye opener. If you think that this is just an outside interference, then think again as the ;local people are dying in this struggle and it engges hundreds of thousands of Indian troops. For Pakistan, it is an issue of survival due to our water resources being sourced from there. However, Pakistani perception of Kashmir as a part of Pakistan is unreal as the wishes of the people are now different.
> The solution lies somewhere in between the two wishes and possibly in an autonomous Kashmir which governs itself under joint governance of INDO_PAK. Any other solution will cause acrimony and a war to sort the problem will leave a rather charred Sub continent which I am sure both Governments will be eagreto avoid. The trick is to keep India involved in both political and other endeavours to reach a mutually acceptable solution.
> WaSalam
> Araz


Now we are talking! I feel We should give the 10 year peace then Plebiscite Idea some thinking. We should push our governments to do more, thats whats needs to be urgently pursued.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Omar1984

ahmeddsid said:


> Now we are talking! I feel We should give the 10 year peace then Plebiscite Idea some thinking. We should push our governments to do more, thats whats needs to be urgently pursued.



India keeps postponing talks on Kashmir. They say 10 years then another 10 years. Its been 61 years now, the dispute must come to an end NOW.


----------



## Omar1984

araz said:


> The problem in Kashmir is an old one and unfortunatelky out of the focus in view of other more urgent issues. To those who think it is an integral part of India, the current situation should be an eye opener. If you think that this is just an outside interference, then think again as the ;local people are dying in this struggle and it engges hundreds of thousands of Indian troops. For Pakistan, it is an issue of survival due to our water resources being sourced from there. However, Pakistani perception of Kashmir as a part of Pakistan is unreal as the wishes of the people are now different.
> The solution lies somewhere in between the two wishes and possibly in an autonomous Kashmir which governs itself under joint governance of INDO_PAK. Any other solution will cause acrimony and a war to sort the problem will leave a rather charred Sub continent which I am sure both Governments will be eagreto avoid. The trick is to keep India involved in both political and other endeavours to reach a mutually acceptable solution.
> WaSalam
> Araz



I dont know about the Pakistani government, but the Pakistani people want Kashmiris to decide what they want for their land and we will always support our Kashmiri brothers and sisters. Ever since we were little kids, we heard horror stories of how Kashmiris are treated in their own land by Indian troops.
Even if Kashmiri people dont want to be part of Pakistan, Pakistanis should accept it. The only way the world will know what Kashmiris want is through a fair plebiscite. Kashmiris were promised a plebiscite in 1948 and they are still waiting for it, its been 61 years and they are still waiting for it, now is the time to fix the dispute...Kashmiris have waited enough.


----------



## Captain03

sharan said:


> if people of kashmir can live peacefully in ladakh then why is there a problem in kashmir



because the indian forces are massacring innocent people
their presence is not welcome there


----------



## Captain03

Omar1984 said:


> I dont know about the Pakistani government, but the Pakistani people want Kashmiris to decide what they want for their land and we will always support our Kashmiri brothers and sisters. Ever since we were little kids, we heard horror stories of how Kashmiris are treated in their own land by Indian troops.
> Even if Kashmiri people dont want to be part of Pakistan, Pakistanis should accept it. The only way the world will know what Kashmiris want is through a fair plebiscite. Kashmiris were promised a plebiscite in 1948 and they are still waiting for it, its been 61 years and they are still waiting for it, now is the time to fix the dispute...Kashmiris have waited enough.



the indians dont want the kashmiris to choose
they know that the result will be anything BUT india


----------



## afriend

Omar1984 said:


> I dont know about the Pakistani government, but the Pakistani people want Kashmiris to decide what they want for their land and we will always support our Kashmiri brothers and sisters. Ever since we were little kids, we heard horror stories of how Kashmiris are treated in their own land by Indian troops.
> Even if Kashmiri people dont want to be part of Pakistan, Pakistanis should accept it. *The only way the world will know what Kashmiris want is through a fair plebiscite. Kashmiris were promised a plebiscite in 1948 and they are still waiting for it, its been 61 years and they are still waiting for it, now is the time to fix the dispute...Kashmiris have waited enough*.



Well omar you keep repeating the same thing again and again, Brother there are two perceptions.
1. India is killing innocent civlians and supressing voice of Kashmiries.
2. Pakistan is fueling insurgency in kashmir by bombing innocent civilians forcing indian army to take more stricter measures in the name of security.

These are both contradictary beiliefs of the two country, unless these two notions are completely wiped out of the box then only a FAIR PLEBISCITE can be talked about. India have to come down from believing kashmir is an integral part of india, and you have to also come down from defining your own areas of kashmir and believing kashmir is part of pakistan( even though your support is for plebiscite ), and make sure your part of kashmir is restored to its 1947 definition and no outsiders are there in these place. Unless compromises are made no mandate would be fair enough. So dialogue should be in that direction with a stipulated time plan. 

I dont know how well these would work out, because of the mistrust we are nourishing, as you yourselves have said from childhood you have heard only about the demon called india, and i dont know how well one can co-exists with a demon , but by anlysing the siutaiton i feel this would be a fair deal for all the three parties involved.

Now please dont ask for plebiscite NOW NOW NOW.. coz it is not going to happen NOW NOW NOW . Lets talk talk talk without divising plans to backstab each other


----------



## indiapakistanfriendship

> Agnostic Muslim
> 
> It is not *terrorism* since the right to resist an occupation is an internationally recognized right for an occupied people.



Depends on who says it



> The choice is India's, since India was the one that violated the peaceful agreement to begin with



If we violated then you must have referred the issue to your now high and mighty UNSC. Do the Judges in Pakistan allow you to take matters in your own hand when the case is in proces?



> People like you will continue regurgitating jingoism and immoral and illegal positions based on 'might is right'. There is nothign to discuss with you.



People here want to live and let live, keep ypur Kashmir with yours while we keep ours.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

indiapakistanfriendship said:


> Depends on who says it
> 
> 
> 
> If we violated then you must have referred the issue to your now high and mighty UNSC. Do the Judges in Pakistan allow you to take matters in your own hand when the case is in proces?
> 
> 
> 
> People here want to live and let live, keep ypur Kashmir with yours while we keep ours.



You are behind the times - read the thread and post - I am not going to regurgitate arguments a dozen times. More regurgitated posts asking the same old questions will be deleted without notice.


----------



## suresh_

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> You are behind the times - read the thread and post - I am not going to regurgitate arguments a dozen times. More regurgitated posts asking the same old questions will be deleted without notice.



but old questions are repeated since no mutual satisfactory consensus is reached! when some pakistanis regurgitate the old arguements, then indians regurgitate our old stand. if the posts are going to be deleted, I hope that this would be applied to both sides, otherwise the plz let the debate continue.


----------



## indiapakistanfriendship

> You are behind the times - read the thread and post - I am not going to regurgitate arguments a dozen times



Nothing like jumping from UNSC to Pakistans feelings to taking justice into own hands ... sounds like the arguments have been ping ponging from one plane to another.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

suresh_ said:


> but old questions are repeated since no mutual satisfactory consensus is reached! when some pakistanis regurgitate the old arguements, then indians regurgitate our old stand. if the posts are going to be deleted, I hope that this would be applied to both sides, otherwise the plz let the debate continue.



Old questions are repeated when answers have been given - if he wants to then question the answers that is fine, but ignoring the answers and repeating the same question is a waste of time.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

You have successively shown yourself to be more and more of a troll on this forum.

And your posts on other threads show the same tendency to flame and troll.

Good bye.


----------



## suresh_

@AM
it is right that you have answered some questions(though they havent been accepted completely), but you also showed more flexibility in the traditional stand of pak. so there was some consensus reached.
but when some pakistanis start bashing india due to their over zealous emotions by taking the old stand of portraying as if the fault lies only with india, then the indians have no way but to counter those arguements by raising the old questions. this has become a cycle.
I hope that you will take strict view of some pakistanis giving the same old arguements as well.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

suresh_ said:


> @AM
> it is right that you have answered some questions(though they havent been accepted completely), but you also showed more flexibility in the traditional stand of pak. so there was some consensus reached.
> but when some pakistanis start bashing india due to their over zealous emotions by taking the old stand of portraying as if the fault lies only with india, then the indians have no way but to counter those arguements by raising the old questions. this has become a cycle.
> I hope that you will take strict view of some pakistanis giving the same old arguements as well.



IPF and I have had this discussion several times. If you look at his profile you will notice he is an old member with a few hundred posts.

My warning to him came out of that history, not just on Kashmir, but other threads as well.

Secondly, I object to your painting my arguments as 'bashing India'. If you go back through this thread, and the UNSC resolutions thread, we have constructed our arguments indicating India's responsibility out of facts, sources, quotes (Nehru, UN officials etc.).

No one questions the fact that India accepted a resolution of the dispute in the UN under the UNSC resolutions. No one questions the fact that India also agreed to the condition of plebiscite for disputed states under the rules of partition.

If India accepted all of that, then why did Nehru change India's position in the mid to late fifties?

I think Indians need to seriously think about Nehru's role in this. I am not against compromising on Kashmir, but historical fact is fact and should not be made PC for the sake of 'harmony', and backing out of an agreement is violating it!

Pakistanis are coming to terms with the fact that our government created the suffocating conditions hat allowed secessionist sentiment to exist in EP, and we refer to it often when analyzing current instability. I think Indians also need to do some soul searching and realize that India also has skeletons in her closet.


----------



## nwmalik

kashmir issue will never be resolved. This is a trump card in the great game. It will be continued to be used by USA and allies to get what they want. The recent statement by Mr miliband is an example. This was done to rock the indians. Maybe they will sent troops to afghanistan more quickly.


----------



## suresh_

^ 'bashing india' was not aimed at you but some other members, if you want me to specify them, then I will.

we already know the role of nehru and think that he was foolish to promise plebiscite, I think he realised it himself and tried to distance india from the resolution.

anyways, lets not start all over again. I understood your point. but there are still lot of difference of opinions.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

suresh_ said:


> ^ 'bashing india' was not aimed at you but some other members, if you want me to specify them, then I will.
> 
> we already know the role of nehru and think that he was foolish to promise plebiscite, I think he realised it himself and tried to distance india from the resolution.
> 
> anyways, lets not start all over again. I understood your point. but there are still lot of difference of opinions.



Suresh _, 

I agree on the difference of opinion and that it is hard to bridge, and believe me I appreciate the fact that members such as yourself, afriend, ahmedsidd and even our resident RSS member Roopesh ( to some degree) are interested in atleast exploring long term compromise options.

It helps move away from the 'same old same old'. Even if we cannot affect the policy makers, discussing things outside of the traditional policy straitjackets is a refreshing change, and who knows, maybe more and more Indians and Pakistanis will come around to the idea.

I would encourage the Pakistani members to also think beyond traditional viewpoints and look at the possibilities offered by a ten to twenty year peace, with a plebiscite at the end, or other such options, just to change things up a bit. I think if that peace agreement is also attached with increased trade and travel between India and Pakistan, when the time comes the plebiscite will be nowhere near as apocalyptic as it seems now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Captain03

afriend said:


> Well omar you keep repeating the same thing again and again, Brother there are two perceptions.
> 1. India is killing innocent civlians and supressing voice of Kashmiries.
> 2. Pakistan is fueling insurgency in kashmir by bombing innocent civilians forcing indian army to take more stricter measures in the name of security.
> 
> These are both contradictary beiliefs of the two country, unless these two notions are completely wiped out of the box then only a FAIR PLEBISCITE can be talked about. India have to come down from believing kashmir is an integral part of india, and you have to also come down from defining your own areas of kashmir and believing kashmir is part of pakistan( even though your support is for plebiscite ), and make sure your part of kashmir is restored to its 1947 definition and no outsiders are there in these place. Unless compromises are made no mandate would be fair enough. So dialogue should be in that direction with a stipulated time plan.
> 
> I dont know how well these would work out, because of the mistrust we are nourishing, as you yourselves have said from childhood you have heard only about the demon called india, and i dont know how well one can co-exists with a demon , but by anlysing the siutaiton i feel this would be a fair deal for all the three parties involved.
> 
> Now please dont ask for plebiscite NOW NOW NOW.. coz it is not going to happen NOW NOW NOW . Lets talk talk talk without divising plans to backstab each other



dude
i dont think u know much about kashmiri history
india is the only one not giving kashmiris a voice to choose their fate
look it up
[and stop winking so much]

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> @AM
> it is right that you have answered some questions(though they havent been accepted completely), but you also showed more flexibility in the traditional stand of pak. so there was some consensus reached.
> but when some pakistanis start bashing india due to their over zealous emotions by taking the old stand of portraying as if the fault lies only with india, then the indians have no way but to counter those arguements by raising the old questions. this has become a cycle.
> I hope that you will take strict view of some pakistanis giving the same old arguements as well.



DUDE U SAID THE GENOCIDE IN KASHMIR DOESNT EXIST!!!!!
wat the hell is wrong with u
ur worster than the people who deny the holocaust


----------



## ahmeddsid

AM, We are talking here, but why havent these Solutions like the 10 year solution been explored by our leaders?? We thought them out instantaneously and they are simple. I believe there are entities in bot Pak and India who dont want Peace to Dawn in the valley! There is a lot more than what meets the eye! We as citizens should do something!


----------



## suresh_

Captain03 said:


> DUDE U SAID THE GENOCIDE IN KASHMIR DOESNT EXIST!!!!!
> wat the hell is wrong with u
> ur worster than the people who deny the holocaust



now, now. as soon as you start equating kashmir with holocaust, your opinions cant be taken seriously. there has been no genocide in kashmir, but there definitely was change in demographics of kashmir.
the innocent and the original inhabitors of kashmir are kashmiri pandits, they have forcefully made to runaway from their homes and live as refugees in their own country by the terrorists who are being 'hailed' as 'freedom fighters' by pak.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dave007

Kashmir is a probably remain on the back burner for many years to come. With both sides refusing to budge, there will never be a solution to the issue.
There will be more Milibands and Kofi Annans, but the there is not much international community can do now, even little in the future. Kashmir needs to be solved bilaterally. There is no need to internationalize the issue. After all even the UN resolution has never been binding on India.


----------



## suresh_

dave007 said:


> Kashmir is a probably remain on the back burner for many years to come. With both sides refusing to budge, there will never be a solution to the issue.
> There will be more Milibands and Kofi Annans, but the there is not much international community can do now, even little in the future. Kashmir needs to be solved bilaterally. There is no need to internationalize the issue. After all even the UN resolution has never been binding on India.



I personally think that if the solution is delayed, it is better for india provided we find a method to deal with terrorism or atleast if we are able to keep it under control.

kashmiri are reconciling to the fact that they have to live in india and they are coming around to accept the democratic ways of india. separatism is steadily losing support. so, in the long run, it may not be bad for us to put off solving kashmir.


----------



## ahmeddsid

No, Kashmir is an issue to be fast tracked my friend. Terrorists are born everyday due to many issues, and you do know that even if the Kashmiris dont turn terrorists, a lot of Afghans and other nationals are ready to die for Kashmir as they are promised Heaven when Kashmir is delivered! We Need peace ASAP, and for that Kashmir needs to be fastracked I believe!


----------



## Contrarian

ahmeddsid said:


> AM, We are talking here, but why havent these Solutions like the 10 year solution been explored by our leaders?? We thought them out instantaneously and they are simple.* I believe there are entities in bot Pak and India who dont want Peace to Dawn in the valley*! There is a lot more than what meets the eye! We as citizens should do something!



I am a citizen of India, and i dont believe or agree with this plan-the 10 year solution. I favour status quo. The day GoI agrees to such a mindless proposal is the day i will stand up to protest.

This has nothing to do with peace in the Valley. The valley is peacefull right now, and we'v had peacefull elections. Peace does not mean plebicite or anything else for that matter. It means normal functioning in the state. It means that the people are happy. People can be happy provided the right atmosphere, right functioning, right jobs, etc. It means there should be no excesses by the security forces there among a hundred other things.

What i do want however is that there should not be any violence in the valley, and the security forces to be checked. There have been not one but many instances, when the security forces there have abused their powers. This should be stopped somehow, there should be better checks and balances there. The Army regularly meets out punishments to those found guilty, but not nearly enough get caught. Then there are local policemen(Kashmiri) who abuse the citizens there, and what happens is that the Army gets the blame for their actions as well. Either ways, it has to and should stop.

Pakistan can not and will not be allowed to dictate the tempo of the Valley again. A wide variety of extremists in the valley have been shot in COIN ops, the momentum must not be lost. Every terrorist must be shot. But there must be adequate balances to ensure no innocent gets caught. A small percentage of errors are expected, but not even near the scale of what has gone on there for a long time.

Peace in the valley does not mean a compromise with Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## suresh_

agree with malaymishra.
at the same time it wont be a bad idea to conduct a plebiscite after 20yrs, when more kashmiris will be in favour of india. so, that we can remove any excuse for 'martyrdom'.


----------



## ahmeddsid

malaymishra123 said:


> I am a citizen of India, and i dont believe or agree with this plan-the 10 year solution. I favour status quo. The day GoI agrees to such a mindless proposal is the day i will stand up to protest.
> 
> This has nothing to do with peace in the Valley. The valley is peacefull right now, and we'v had peacefull elections. Peace does not mean plebicite or anything else for that matter. It means normal functioning in the state. It means that the people are happy. People can be happy provided the right atmosphere, right functioning, right jobs, etc. It means there should be no excesses by the security forces there among a hundred other things.
> 
> What i do want however is that there should not be any violence in the valley, and the security forces to be checked. There have been not one but many instances, when the security forces there have abused their powers. This should be stopped somehow, there should be better checks and balances there. The Army regularly meets out punishments to those found guilty, but not nearly enough get caught. Then there are local policemen(Kashmiri) who abuse the citizens there, and what happens is that the Army gets the blame for their actions as well. Either ways, it has to and should stop.
> 
> Pakistan can not and will not be allowed to dictate the tempo of the Valley again. A wide variety of extremists in the valley have been shot in COIN ops, the momentum must not be lost. Every terrorist must be shot. But there must be adequate balances to ensure no innocent gets caught. A small percentage of errors are expected, but not even near the scale of what has gone on there for a long time.
> 
> Peace in the valley does not mean a compromise with Pakistan.


Its not Compromise, I feel If Pakistan puts across this 10-20 year solution then we should look at it. The Kashmiris will know that they are better with us, and will eventually say, no need of Plebiscite and will rise up when the Word Plebiscite is uttered! We can show even the idiotic JKLF that we can govern better and bring peace better than pakistan!


----------



## suresh_

ahmeddsid said:


> Its not Compromise, I feel If Pakistan puts across this 10-20 year solution then we should look at it. The Kashmiris will know that they are better with us, and will eventually say, no need of Plebiscite and will rise up when the Word Plebiscite is uttered! We can show even the idiotic JKLF that we can govern better and bring peace better than pakistan!



it would be better to execute this plan from india unilaterally. instead of bringing pak on board. otherwise, it will create hope for all those separatists. they will think that if they can keep the pyre burning for enough time they will get wat they want.
so india should combat terrorism and develop kashmir till we are confident that majority of kashmiris are in favour of india(ie 2/3 decades) and then conduct a plebiscite, so that we can be free from this issue once and for all.
infact, then we should claim the entire kashmir including the PaOK and aksi chin. they are important strategic locations.


----------



## ahmeddsid

suresh_ said:


> it would be better to execute this plan from india unilaterally. instead of bringing pak on board. otherwise, it will create hope for all those separatists. they will think that if they can keep the pyre burning for enough time they will get wat they want.
> so india should combat terrorism and develop kashmir till we are confident that majority of kashmiris are in favour of india(ie 2/3 decades) and then conduct a plebiscite, so that we can be free from this issue once and for all.
> infact, then we should claim the entire kashmir including the PaOK and aksi chin. they are important strategic locations.


The thing is that, Pakistan can ask the Militants to lay down their arms (I dont know how successful Pakistan will be because the Terrorists are now training their guns on Pak!) But still Pakistan can try, If Not then India can tell that, the terrorists are the real problem and then can go on full steam without being blamed! Atleast We Tried! We need to try!


----------



## Contrarian

ahmeddsid said:


> Its not Compromise, I feel If Pakistan puts across this 10-20 year solution then we should look at it. The Kashmiris will know that they are better with us, and will eventually say, no need of Plebiscite and will rise up when the Word Plebiscite is uttered! We can show even the idiotic JKLF that we can govern better and bring peace better than pakistan!



We can still govern better, create oppurtunities, bring investment, better education-heck open an IIT or IIM there,the whole shabang for Kashmir. Why do we have to give a definitive time frame for a plebicite? This way, when GoI feels, that a sizeable percentage of the population would not vote against India, then go for a plebicite at a time of our choosing, with the freedom to chose whenever we want.

Its exactly as suresh said. If you declare a time frame, then the separatists might keep the fire burning long enough such that when the time comes, the unexpected(or rather expected?) happens and they vote to secede. This would give them something to look forward to. Nope, there cannot be any timeframe.

You dont get it, do you mate..


*Do you realize, that the moment Kashmir breaks away from India, India would cease to become a single entity? Riots would break out of a scale you would and can never even imagine. Gujarat would look like a joke to you when compared with what would happen. And that was one state, the riots that would ensue if Kashmir seceded would engulf the entire nation. Assam might break away as well.* ULFA still remains strong, though beaten compared to what it was in the past.

This country would never remain normal if Kashmir ever went to Pakistan. Kashmir is not just the lovey dovey concept of giving self determination, its question of millions of lives that would be at stake in the rest of the country and land for India. Its about controlling the waterways for Pakistan and get more land. Dont get taken in by the bull-$hit paraded in the media. And There is no real option of an independent Kashmir, neither India nor Pakistan want it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ahmeddsid

malaymishra123 said:


> We can still govern better, create oppurtunities, bring investment, better education-heck open an IIT or IIM there,the whole shabang for Kashmir. Why do we have to give a definitive time frame for a plebicite? This way, when GoI feels, that a sizeable percentage of the population would not vote against India, then go for a plebicite at a time of our choosing, with the freedom to chose whenever we want.
> 
> Its exactly as suresh said. If you declare a time frame, then the separatists might keep the fire burning long enough such that when the time comes, the unexpected(or rather expected?) happens and they vote to secede. This would give them something to look forward to. Nope, there cannot be any timeframe.
> 
> You dont get it, do you mate..
> I dont even know if i should post this, but anyways...
> 
> *Do you realize, that the moment Kashmir breaks away from India, India would cease to become a single entity? Riots would break out of a scale you would and can never even imagine. Gujarat would look like a joke to you when compared with what would happen. And that was one state, the riots that would ensue if Kashmir seceded would engulf the entire nation. Assam might break away as well.* ULFA still remains strong, though beaten compared to what it was in the past.
> 
> This country would never remain normal if Kashmir ever went to Pakistan. Kashmir is not just the lovey dovey concept of giving self determination, its question of millions of lives that would be at stake in the rest of the country and land for India. Its about controlling the waterways for Pakistan and get more land. Dont get taken in by the bull- paraded in the media. And There is no real option of an independent Kashmir, neither India nor Pakistan want it.


Look, The Separatists in Kashmir are weak now, The elections were a success, and things are changing, But still terrorism is there! If an IIT is set up, they might try to blow it up, same for investment! I would never want nor agree to Kashmir depart from Indian control, and I truly feel we can win over the remanats of the weak sepratists! 

You are underestimating the separatists! The ground reality is different, Kashmiris know that they are better off with India. They know Pakistan cant bring in the level of Development India can!

You are questioning the Loyalty of the Kashmiris I feel, They are Indians, and will remain so. I am sure when Terrorism stops and peace dawns they will **** up anyone who asks for a Plebisicite, and that Includes Pakistan! The Separatists are too weak to do anything. 

There is a huge Influx of Foreign terrorists, its them that we need to stop, for that Pakistan needs to step in. If it cant do anything, then Again we can say We Tried! 

Yes, 10 years etc timeframe might prove to be bad, but Still this idea should work if given a shot and Kashmir will be with India.

PS: If the People Of Kashmir werent so happy, They would Have Revolted the Way the people of BD revolted in 71, The People Of Kashmir have proved on Numerous occasions that they are more loyal than any Hindu Fanatic claiming to be So! We shouldnt let them down!


----------



## suresh_

very good post malaymishra.


ahmeddsid said:


> The thing is that, Pakistan can ask the Militants to lay down their arms (I dont know how successful Pakistan will be because the Terrorists are now training their guns on Pak!) But still Pakistan can try, If Not then India can tell that, the terrorists are the real problem and then can go on full steam without being blamed! Atleast We Tried! We need to try!


bro, wat malaymishra says is true. once, there is a time frame, separatists will feel vindicated and just try to keep the issue burning till plebiscite.

so india should act unilaterally, I think the GOIs have been doing exactly that.
also, dont forget before independece india was not one single nation, if any part secedes on the basis or religion/region then the concept of india is gone.
how long before there are calls for other such 'freedom movements'?

if we delay the issue for another decade, the world wont be interested in it anymore like tibet. and everyone will just accept the reality. the truth is 'might is right'. also the ability to sponsor terrorists by other nations is decreasing steadily while our ability to fight it has been increasing.

one more thing, wat would have happened if we start conducting plebiscite at the height of khalistan movement or just after operation bluestar?
some times the best solution is to sit tight and and allow the status quo.
this will be our biggest victory.


----------



## Contrarian

ahmeddsid said:


> Look, The Separatists in Kashmir are weak now, The elections were a success, and things are changing, But still terrorism is there! If an IIT is set up, they might try to blow it up, same for investment! I would never want nor agree to Kashmir depart from Indian control, and I truly feel we can win over the remanats of the weak sepratists!


There lies the rub. They have already damaged their reputation in Kashmir, they had started extortion and rape and whatnot. Now if you notice, the Kashmir train was recently started, they all tried to bomb it and stop it while it was in construction, there has been NOT ONE attempt after it has started running. Thats the key to understand, after something starts getting used by the locals frequently, they cant target it and kill indiscriminately, it harms their reputation and their goal that much more.

If investment oppurtunities are created, and the locals are the ones who actually benefit, then the terrorists cant or would not blow it up. What they try to do, is stop the project midway, stop it from getting completed, as every development project completed makes life easier for Kashmiri's and thus reduces their anger at Delhi.



> You are underestimating the separatists! The ground reality is different, Kashmiris know that they are better off with India. They know Pakistan cant bring in the level of Development India can!


Yes, we all know a lot of things, but when the elections come, the smallest incident causes one party to lose and the other one to win. This would be a one shot affair, either you win, or you lose.



> You are *questioning the Loyalty of the Kashmiris I feel*, They are Indians, and will remain so. I am sure when Terrorism stops and peace dawns they will **** up anyone who asks for a Plebisicite, and that Includes Pakistan! The Separatists are too weak to do anything.


Frankly, yes i am. There is a good number of people who support India, and want to continue being a part of India, but then there's a bigger number of people against India. Home grown terrorism is already down, the last vestiges of terrorism remaining are due to external terrorists(Pakistani's) in the Valley. 



> There is a huge Influx of Foreign terrorists, its them that we need to stop, for that Pakistan needs to step in. If it cant do anything, then Again we can say We Tried!
> 
> Yes, 10 years etc timeframe might prove to be bad, but Still this idea should work if given a shot and Kashmir will be with India.


No, i disagree.Foreign terrorists can be controlled by better policing, intelligence among numerous other things. The fence has already played its part in reducing the infiltration.

Do whatever you want to in Kashmir regarding development, but no time frame must be given.

Note i use the word Kashmir as in Kashmir Valley. It is certain Jammu and Leh/Laddakh will stay in India.

Time is our friend, and this has been proven so. Undue haste will lead to the loss of Kashmir. The more, the time passes, the lesser is the demand for separatism provided development and the accountability of security forces.


----------



## ahmeddsid

I feel the best time to Engage Pakistan in Kashmir talks is now! If they fail to stop the flow of Terrorism even after we reach a Deal with them, Then We can always look for other options! 

If Pakistan doesnt Have the will to engage in serious talks now, It means they are not confident about whether the So called Freedom Fighters will Listen to them, so they might stall it. We can then sense it and Go ahead with out own plan!


----------



## Contrarian

ahmeddsid said:


> I feel the best time to Engage Pakistan in Kashmir talks is now! If they fail to stop the flow of Terrorism even after we reach a Deal with them, Then We can always look for other options!


No, they cannot control the terrorist organizations down to the last terrorist. They control the broad policy and outlines, their inflow/outflow through the LoC. They cannot control the last local commander who gets swayed by a speech on Friday and blows up a cycle on Saturday. If we reach a deal with them, then we would be giving ammunition to them again, like the UN resolutions. No one gives a damn about it except for Pakistan, and it doesnt work, neither does anyone expect it to, atleast not against a country like India, but its bankable. That is what must be avoided.

Our options are already on the table, and we have a wide variety of them. Having a timeframe reduces them considerably.



> If Pakistan doesnt Have the will to engage in serious talks now, It means they are not confident about whether the So called Freedom Fighters will Listen to them, so they might stall it. We can then sense it and Go ahead with out own plan!


They will always be willing to engage, they would want such a time bound plan. Suppose there is a blast in the 5th year of the timeframe. We know that it was a terrorist group, and Pakistan starts claiming its some disaffected Muslim in India who did it, and SUPPOSE we dont have the kind of proof we did this time. How would we go about then? We would still be bound by the time frame. We were lucky this time that Kasab was caught, else Pakistan was already playing the charade that no Pakistani was involved. Even after such overwhelming proof, and their own media conducting their own investigations and saying that Kasab was Pakistani, their govt kept on denying it. That might happen again, and we might not have proof.

Your willing to take a risk, i am not.


----------



## Captain03

suresh_ said:


> now, now. as soon as you start equating kashmir with holocaust, your opinions cant be taken seriously. there has been no genocide in kashmir, but there definitely was change in demographics of kashmir.
> the innocent and the original inhabitors of kashmir are kashmiri pandits, they have forcefully made to runaway from their homes and live as refugees in their own country by the terrorists who are being 'hailed' as 'freedom fighters' by pak.



so a few kashmiri pundits are victims and the millions of kashmiris being killed by the indian forces are terrorists? this is your logic?!?
you can bullsh!t on forever and say that kashmir is an intergal part of india and u dont even know whats going on in kashmir?!?
so when kashmiris pick up arms because they take a stand against the indian injustice they become terrorists?!? 
then who are the 700,000 + troops that killed more than 90,000 kashmiri civilians and forced the so called "terrorists" to pick up arms?!? 
seriously, go and learn something about kashmir and then post in this thread
and if u deny the genocide in kashmir by the indian forces then u are truely the biggest duffer i have ever seen.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

malaymishra123 said:


> No, they cannot control the terrorist organizations down to the last terrorist. They control the broad policy and outlines, their inflow/outflow through the LoC. They cannot control the last local commander who gets swayed by a speech on Friday and blows up a cycle on Saturday. If we reach a deal with them, then we would be giving ammunition to them again, like the UN resolutions. No one gives a damn about it except for Pakistan, and it doesnt work, neither does anyone expect it to, atleast not against a country like India, but its bankable. That is what must be avoided.
> 
> Our options are already on the table, and we have a wide variety of them. Having a timeframe reduces them considerably.
> 
> 
> They will always be willing to engage, they would want such a time bound plan. Suppose there is a blast in the 5th year of the timeframe. We know that it was a terrorist group, and Pakistan starts claiming its some disaffected Muslim in India who did it, and SUPPOSE we dont have the kind of proof we did this time. How would we go about then? We would still be bound by the time frame. We were lucky this time that Kasab was caught, else Pakistan was already playing the charade that no Pakistani was involved. Even after such overwhelming proof, and their own media conducting their own investigations and saying that Kasab was Pakistani, their govt kept on denying it. That might happen again, and we might not have proof.
> 
> Your willing to take a risk, i am not.



In essence, you are completely fine with India continuing an illegal and immoral occupation, in violation of her previous agreements, commitments and the UN resolutions.

As I said elsewhere, based on these violations, why should India's word be trusted on anything, terrorism, the IWT, any other agreement. She chose to violate her commitments under the UN, can't get any more irresponsible and 'rogueish' than that.

I think it is also clear which side has maintained hatred and hostility in South Asia, and refused compromise, and it is not Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

The reality is that the Kashmiri people consider the Indian occupation as "terrorism". I hear all the suggestions that Pakistan should abandon Kashmiris and not support any movements, but the Kashmiri people have made their wishes clear. You cannot in any good conscience suggest to let them wait for another 10 years while "things calm down".
This conflict should not be about some petty land gain or loss. This is essentially about bringing justice and security to the Kashmiri people *as soon as possible.*

The main problem is Kashmir valley. Indian members here are far too concerned with loss of land, humiliation and hurt feelings.
Kashmiri lives, promises and wishes are given very little thought, if any.

Their mass protests should be sending some kind of a message. They are calling for *Azadi*.
Indian involvement in this whole conflict is very much pointless. They went out of their way to disregard the instrument of partition and UN resolutions to pointlessly occupy people who were promised self determination, and all at the expense of their own lives, hard earned money and stability.

Just remember that nobody stays occupied forever. How long can India distract the world from their pointless involvement in Kashmir?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flintlock

UnitedPak said:


> The reality is that the Kashmiri people consider the Indian occupation as "terrorism". I hear all the suggestions that Pakistan should abandon Kashmiris and not support any movements, but the Kashmiri people have made their wishes clear. You cannot in any good conscience suggest to let them wait for another 10 years while "things calm down".
> This conflict should not be about some petty land gain or loss. This is essentially about bringing justice and security to the Kashmiri people *as soon as possible.*



The definition of terrorism is not up for grabs, whatever the political views of Kashmiris are, it does not authorize Pakistan to use extremism as a tool to create havoc in the valley. 

Things like democracy, rule of law, safety, health and wealth are far more important than some political ideal. 



> The main problem is Kashmir valley. Indian members here are far too concerned with loss of land, humiliation and hurt feelings.
> Kashmiri lives, promises and wishes are given very little thought, if any.



I'd say that the support for jehadi movements in the valley by Pakistan means that Pakistanis are far more interested in securing their political ends than in the lives and safety of Kashmiris. 

Would you consider a person who approves planting bombs in Srinagar or opening blind-fire in the middle of a crowded street as someone who cares about kashmiri lives? I don't.



> Their mass protests should be sending some kind of a message. They are calling for *Azadi*.
> Indian involvement in this whole conflict is very much pointless. They went out of their way to disregard the instrument of partition and UN resolutions to pointlessly occupy people who were promised self determination, and all at the expense of their own lives, hard earned money and stability.



The mass protests are more a result of the frustration with daily violence and the resulting poor economic situation.
As a result, the separatist leaders have managed to sell the "final solution" of "Azadi" to kashmiris. 

Of course, all this favours Pakistan, so they see their advantage in continuing fuel violence in the valley and make the lives of ordinary Kashmiris miserable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## UnitedPak

Flintlock said:


> I'd say that the support for jehadi movements in the valley by Pakistan means that Pakistanis are far more interested in securing their political ends than in the lives and safety of Kashmiris.
> 
> Would you consider a person who approves planting bombs in Srinagar or opening blind-fire in the middle of a crowded street as someone who cares about kashmiri lives? I don't.



When you do speak to the "jehadi" fan base, let me know what you find out.
I am talking to you as a person genuinely concerned for the Kashmiri people. I dont know why you are having such a hard time comprehending this.

You simply proved my point about not caring for Kashmiri wishes and promises. There is simply no acknowledging that they want Azadi. You insist focussing on your superior understanding of the _real_ intentions of Kashmiri leaders and what the Kashmiri people _really_ need.
Has it occurred to you that Kashmiris are capable of making their own decisions?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flintlock

UnitedPak said:


> When you do speak to the "jehadi" fan base, let me know what you find out.
> I am talking to you as a person genuinely concerned for the Kashmiri people. I dont know why you are having such a hard time comprehending this.



I'm sure you are genuinely concerned about them, and so am I. That doesn't make your posts automatically correct, now does it.

I think its obvious that I refer to the Pakistani state as supporting jehadis, and not you personally. Isn't it? 



> You simply proved my point about not caring for Kashmiri wishes and promises. There is simply no acknowledging that they want Azadi. You insist focussing on your superior understanding of the _real_ intentions of Kashmiri leaders and what the Kashmiri people _really_ need.
> Has it occurred to you that Kashmiris are capable of making their own decisions?



I did acknolwdge that their leaders have misled them into believing that "Azadi" is the only solution to the violence. 

Kashmiris are as capable as any other human beings of making their own decisions, which is why they are allowed to choose their representatives rather than be forced to accept whoever comes to power on the back of a rigged election or a military coup.

However, when it comes to issues with implications far beyond and far greater the tiny valley that they inhabit, I'm afraid that the consequences of letting the valley secede will be far worse than those of maintaining the states quo.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TruthSeeker

Hey! You guys! Still talking about this stuff! Like I said, I got bored with it after a day or two. IT IS OBVIOUS! INDIA doesn't, at its core, believe in democracy, or it would agree to a UN Kashmir plebiscite! End of story! All the rest of this Indian self-serving rationale is BS!! Indians! Look in the mirror!!! You are the problem!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Flintlock

TruthSeeker said:


> Hey! You guys! Still talking about this stuff! Like I said, I got bored with it after a day or two. IT IS OBVIOUS! INDIA doesn't, at its core, believe in democracy, or it would agree to a UN Kashmir plebiscite! End of story! All the rest of this Indian self-serving rationale is BS!! Indians! Look in the mirror!!! You are the problem!



India believes in Democracy - democracy according to the rules of the Indian constitution. 

The problem, unfortunately, is people who are hypocritical enough to demand "democracy" when they themselves cannot exercise it effectively and use terrorism instead.


----------



## duhastmish

there is only one logical and pragmatic solution which will make life beautiful for kashmiri ......
*
That both Kashmir regions should remain with India and Pakistan respectively and the line of control between the valley I O K and P O k disappears so that people can have a life of peace and tranquility. *

*A bomb don't ask if you are Muslim or Sikh before it kills you*


----------



## Contrarian

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> In essence, you are completely fine with India continuing an illegal and immoral occupation, in violation of her previous agreements, commitments and the UN resolutions.


Frankly, i dont consider India as being an occupier in Kashmir, i think Kashmir is India. On an international level India has said that the plebicite cannot be conducted in view of the conditions of the plebicite not being fulfilled. That is all there is to it. You may disagree with that, and your free to. I consider it right that Kashmir stays in India for many more reasons than one.



> As I said elsewhere, based on these violations, why should India's word be trusted on anything, terrorism, the IWT, any other agreement. She chose to violate her commitments under the UN, can't get any more irresponsible and 'rogueish' than that.


You are also free to not trust India on anything. The rest of the world trusts India and her word, as well as India's legal commitments, thats all that matters. Enough to sign agreements as important as the civil nuclear deal.



> I think it is also clear which side has maintained hatred and hostility in South Asia, and refused compromise, and it is not Pakistan.


There is no compromise on Kashmir. That does not imply maintaining hatred and hostility. There is a significant difference between the two things.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> India believes in Democracy - democracy according to the rules of the Indian constitution.



Absurd - just becasue you put somethign in your constitution that violates international agreements and is illegal and immoral does not give you a free pass. Your argument is akin to the Nazi's saying that exterminating Jews and putting them in concentration camps was 'in their constitution', and therefore they had every right to do what they did.

But as is evident from the views of people such as yourself and Malay, you would fit into that category of the people exercising such morally bankrupt and illegal excuses as those above


> The problem, unfortunately, is people who are hypocritical enough to demand "democracy" when they themselves cannot exercise it effectively and use terrorism instead.


We aren't demanding 'democracy' - one would think that after so many discussions any half informed individual would realize that whether Pakistan is a totalitarian or democratic state is not the issue - the issue is allowing the Kashmiris exercise the right of self determination guaranteed them by the Indian, Pakistani and British leadership at partition, and again guaranteed them by the UNSC resolutions (multiple times) and again accepted by India, Pakistan and the international community.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

malaymishra123 said:


> Frankly, i dont consider India as being an occupier in Kashmir, i think Kashmir is India. On an international level India has said that the plebicite cannot be conducted in view of the conditions of the plebicite not being fulfilled. That is all there is to it. You may disagree with that, and your free to. I consider it right that Kashmir stays in India for many more reasons than one.


And 'frankly', if you believe Pixies and goblins exist does not make them a reality or what you believe the 'truth'.

The most damning refutation of your bankrupt argument is not from me or any Pakistani, it is the acceptance of the right of a plebiscite by Indian leadership at Partition, the right reiterated at the time of acceptance of the instrument of accession, and reiterated by Nehru several times after that. 

The most damning refutation is the FACT that India took the dispute to the UNSC, and accepted in the UN the disputed status and the means of resolving the dispute through a referendum. 

So sir, before spouting your twisted rationale and excuses, realize that India herself accepted the disputed status and right to plebiscite in multiple forums and at multiple times.



> You are also free to not trust India on anything. The rest of the world trusts India and her word, as well as India's legal commitments, thats all that matters. Enough to sign agreements as important as the civil nuclear deal.



We don't - that much is obvious from what I outlined above in terms of India holding to her commitment.

India will walk out of any commitment that she can if it seeks to impose a severe loss on her. Violating the NSG agreements will inflict losses on India economically and in other areas down the line, since the NSG members are nations with tremendous economic, military and technological clout - that is the only reason India will stick to the contracts inked under it - otherwise her behaviour and violations, on as high a forum as the UNSC, is reprehensible, untrustworthy and irresponsible.



> There is no compromise on Kashmir. That does not imply maintaining hatred and hostility. There is a significant difference between the two things.


By continuing to occupy Kashmir you are arguing in favor of behaviors I outlined above - that is not any basis for building trust or working towards progress, it is in fact a basis for perpetuating distrust and therefore hostility.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flintlock

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Absurd - just becasue you put somethign in your constitution that violates international agreements and is illegal and immoral does not give you a free pass. Your argument is akin to the Nazi's saying that exterminating Jews and putting them in concentration camps was 'in their constitution', and therefore they had every right to do what they did.[/QUOTE
> 
> Haha. Clever! Bring the Nazis in! Hyperbole at its finest folk!


----------



## ejaz007

*Obama wants resolution of Kashmir dispute: Hunt*

LAHORE: The principal officer of US Consulate in Lahore, Bryan D Hunt, has said United States President Barack Obama wants to resolve the Kashmir dispute and will soon bring a change in the US foreign policy, a private TV channel reported on Tuesday. The US diplomat told the channel during his visit to Bahawalpur that President Obama wanted an end to all the disputes in the South Asian region and said all issues could be resolved through dialogue. He said he saw with concern the US drone attacks inside Pakistan. daily times monitor

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Captain03

http://www.outlookindia.com/fullprint.asp?choice=1&fodname=20080901&fname=Arundhati+Roy+(F)&sid=1

Azadi

It's the only thing the Kashmiri wants. Denial is delusion.

ARUNDHATI ROY

For the past sixty days or so, since about the end of June, the people of Kashmir have been free. Free in the most profound sense. They have shrugged off the terror of living their lives in the gun-sights of half-a-million heavily-armed soldiers in the most densely militarised zone in the world.

After 18 years of administering a military occupation, the Indian government's worst nightmare has come true. Having declared that the militant movement has been crushed, it is now faced with a non-violent mass protest, but not the kind it knows how to manage. This one is nourished by people's memory of years of repression in which tens of thousands have been killed, thousands have been 'disappeared', hundreds of thousands tortured, injured, raped and humiliated. That kind of rage, once it finds utterance, cannot easily be tamed, re-bottled and sent back to where it came from.

For all these years, the Indian State, known amongst the knowing as the Deep State, has done everything it can to subvert, suppress, represent, misrepresent, discredit, interpret, intimidate, purchaseand simply snuff out the voice of the Kashmiri people. It has used money (lots of it), violence (lots of it), disinformation, propaganda, torture, elaborate networks of collaborators and informers, terror, imprisonment, blackmail and rigged elections to subdue what democrats would call "the will of the people". But now the Deep State, as Deep States eventually tend to, has tripped on its own hubris and bought into its own publicity. It made the mistake of believing that domination was victory, that the 'normalcy' it had enforced through the barrel of a gun was indeed normal, and that the people's sullen silence was acquiescence.






People's movement: Protesters march towards the UN office in Srinagar

The well-endowed peace industry, speaking on people's behalf, informed us that "Kashmiris are tired of violence and want peace". What kind of peace they were willing to settle for was never clarified. Bollywood's cache of Kashmir/Muslim-terrorist films has brainwashed most Indians into believing that all of Kashmir's sorrows could be laid at the door of evil, people-hating terrorists.

To anybody who cared to ask, or, more importantly, to listen, it was always clear that even in their darkest moments, people in Kashmir had kept the fires burning and that it was not peace they yearned for, but freedom too. Over the last two months, the carefully confected picture of an innocent people trapped between 'two guns', both equally hated, has, pardon the pun, been shot to hell.

A sudden twist of fate, an ill-conceived move over the transfer of 100 acres of state forest land to the Amarnath Shrine Board (which manages the annual Hindu pilgrimage to a cave deep in the Kashmir Himalayas) suddenly became the equivalent of tossing a lit match into a barrel of petrol. Until 1989, the Amarnath pilgrimage used to attract about 20,000 people who travelled to the Amarnath cave over a period of about two weeks. In 1990, when the overtly Islamic militant uprising in the Valley coincided with the spread of virulent Hindutva in the Indian plains, the number of pilgrims began to increase exponentially. By 2008, more than 5,00,000 pilgrims visited the Amarnath cave in large groups, their passage often sponsored by Indian business houses. To many people in the Valley, this dramatic increase in numbers was seen as an aggressive political statement by an increasingly Hindu-fundamentalist Indian State. Rightly or wrongly, the land transfer was viewed as the thin edge of the wedge. It triggered an apprehension that it was the beginning of an elaborate plan to build Israeli-style settlements, and change the demography of the Valley.Days of massive protest forced the Valley to shut down completely. Within hours, the protests spread from the cities to villages. Young stone-pelters took to the streets and faced armed police who fired straight at them, killing several. For people as well as the government, it resurrected memories of the uprising in the early '90s. Throughout the weeks of protest, hartal and police firing, while the Hindutva publicity machine charged Kashmiris with committing every kind of communal excess, the 5,00,000 Amarnath pilgrims completed their pilgrimage, not just unhurt, but touched by the hospitality they had been shown by local people.

Eventually, taken completely by surprise at the ferocity of the response, the government revoked the land transfer. But by then the land transfer had become what senior separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani called a "non-issue".

Massive protests against the revocation erupted in Jammu. There, too, the issue snowballed into something much bigger. Hindus began to raise issues of neglect and discrimination by the Indian State. (For some odd reason they blamed Kashmiris for that neglect.) The protests led to the blockading of the Jammu-Srinagar highway, the only functional road link between Kashmir and India. The army was called out to clear the highway and allow safe passage of trucks between Jammu and Srinagar. But incidents of violence against Kashmiri truckers were being reported from as far away as Punjab where there was no protection at all. As a result, Kashmiri truckers, fearing for their lives, refused to drive on the highway. Truckloads of perishable fresh fruit and Valley produce began to rot. It became very obvious that the blockade had caused the situation to spin out of control. The government announced that the blockade had been cleared and that trucks were going through. Embedded sections of the Indian media, quoting the inevitable 'Intelligence' sources, began to refer to it as a 'perceived' blockade, and even to suggest that there had never been one.





Flaming chinars: People climb atop trees to hear Hurriyat leaders

But it was too late for those games, the damage had been done. It had been demonstrated in no uncertain terms to people in Kashmir that they lived on sufferance, and that if they didn't behave themselves they could be put under siege, starved, deprived of essential commodities and medical supplies. The real blockade became a psychological one. The last fragile link between India and Kashmir was all but snapped.

To expect matters to end there was of course absurd. Hadn't anybody noticed that in Kashmir even minor protests about civic issues like water and electricity inevitably turned into demands for azadi? To threaten them with mass starvation amounted to committing political suicide.

Not surprisingly, the voice that the Government of India has tried so hard to silence in Kashmir has massed into a deafening roar. Hundreds of thousands of unarmed people have come out to reclaim their cities, their streets and mohallas. They have simply overwhelmed the heavily armed security forces by their sheer numbers, and with a remarkable display of raw courage.

Raised in a playground of army camps, checkposts and bunkers, with screams from torture chambers for a soundtrack, the young generation has suddenly discovered the power of mass protest, and above all, the dignity of being able to straighten their shoulders and speak for themselves, represent themselves. For them it is nothing short of an epiphany. They're in full flow, not even the fear of death seems to hold them back.And once that fear has gone, of what use is the largest or second-largest army in the world? What threat does it hold? Who should know that better than the people of India who won their independence in the way that they did?

The circumstances in Kashmir being what they are, it is hard for the spin doctors to fall back on the same old same old; to claim that it's all the doing of Pakistan's ISI, or that people are being coerced by militants. Since the '30s onwards, the question of who can claim the right to represent that elusive thing known as "Kashmiri sentiment" has been bitterly contested. Was it Sheikh Abdullah? The Muslim Conference? Who is it today? The mainstream political parties? The Hurriyat? The militants? This time around, the people are in charge. There have been mass rallies in the past, but none in recent memory that have been so sustained and widespread. The mainstream political parties of Kashmirthe National Conference, the People's Democratic Partyfeted by the Deep State and the Indian media despite the pathetic voter turnout in election after election appear dutifully for debates in New Delhi's TV studios, but can't muster the courage to appear on the streets of Kashmir. The armed militants who, through the worst years of repression, were seen as the only ones carrying the torch of azadi forward, if they are around at all, seem to be content to take a backseat and let people do the fighting for a change.





Everywhere in chains: But it's no barricade to freedom

The separatist leaders who do appear and speak at the rallies are not leaders so much as followers, being guided by the phenomenal spontaneous energy of a caged, enraged people that has exploded on Kashmir's streets. The leaders, such as they are, have been presented with a full-blown revolution. The only condition seems to be that they have to do as the people say. If they say things that people do not wish to hear, they are gently persuaded to come out, publicly apologise and correct their course. This applies to all of them, including Syed Ali Shah Geelani who at a public rally recently proclaimed himself the movement's only leader. It was a monumental political blunder that very nearly shattered the fragile new alliance between the various factions of the struggle. Within hours he retracted his statement. Like it or not, this is democracy. No democrat can pretend otherwise.

Day after day, hundreds of thousands of people swarm around places that hold terrible memories for them. They demolish bunkers, break through cordons of concertina wire and stare straight down the barrels of soldiers' machine-guns, saying what very few in India want to hear. Hum kya chahte? Azadi! We Want Freedom. And, it has to be said, in equal numbers and with equal intensity: Jeevey Jeevey Pakistan. Long live Pakistan.

That sound reverberates through the Valley like the drumbeat of steady rain on a tin roof, like the roll of thunder before an electric storm. It's the plebiscite that was never held, the referendum that has been indefinitely postponed.

On August 15, India's Independence Day, the city of Srinagar shut down completely. The Bakshi stadium where Governor N.N. Vohra hoisted the flag was empty except for a few officials. Hours later, Lal Chowk, the nerve centre of the city (where in 1992, Murli Manohar Joshi, BJP leader and mentor of the controversial "Hinduisation" of children's history textbooks, started a tradition of flag-hoisting by the Border Security Force), was taken over by thousands of people who hoisted the Pakistani flag and wished each other "Happy belated Independence Day" (Pakistan celebrates Independence on August 14) and "Happy Slavery Day".Humour, obviously, has survived India's many torture centres and Abu Ghraibs in Kashmir.

On August 16, more than 3,00,000 people marched to Pampore, to the village of Hurriyat leader Sheikh Abdul Aziz, who was shot down in cold blood five days earlier. He was part of a massive march to the Line of Control demanding that since the Jammu road had been blocked, it was only logical that the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad highway be opened for goods and people, the way it used to be before Kashmir was partitioned.





Goodbye, fear: A police post being dismantled in Srinagar

On August 18, an equal number gathered in Srinagar in the huge TRC grounds (Tourist Reception Centre, not the Truth and Reconciliation Committee) close to the United Nations Military Observers Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) to submit a memorandum asking for three thingsthe end to Indian rule, the deployment of a UN Peacekeeping Force and an investigation into two decades of war crimes committed with almost complete impunity by the Indian army and police.

The day before the rally the Deep State was hard at work. A senior journalist friend called to say that late in the afternoon the home secretary called a high-level meeting in New Delhi. Also present were the defence secretary and the intelligence chiefs. The purpose of the meeting, he said, was to brief the editors of TV news channels that the government had reason to believe that the insurrection was being managed by a small splinter cell of the ISI and to request the channels to keep this piece of exclusive, highly secret intelligence in mind while covering (or preferably not covering?) the news from Kashmir. Unfortunately for the Deep State, things have gone so far that TV channels, were they to obey those instructions, would run the risk of looking ridiculous. Thankfully, it looks as though this revolution will, after all, be televised.

On the night of August 17, the police sealed the city. Streets were barricaded, thousands of armed police manned the barriers. The roads leading into Srinagar were blocked. For the first time in eighteen years, the police had to plead with Hurriyat leaders to address the rally at the TRC grounds instead of marching right up to the UNMOGIP office which is on Gupkar Road, Srinagar's Green Zone where, for years, the Indian Establishment has barricaded itself in style and splendour.

On the morning of the 18th, people began pouring into Srinagar from villages and towns across the Valley. In trucks, tempos, jeeps, buses and on foot. Once again, barriers were broken and people reclaimed their city. The police were faced with a choice of either stepping aside or executing a massacre. They stepped aside. Not a single bullet was fired.

The city floated on a sea of smiles. There was ecstasy in the air. Everyone had a banner; houseboat owners, traders, students, lawyers, doctors. One said, "We are all prisoners, set us free." Another said, "Democracy without freedom is Demon-crazy". Demon Crazy. That was a good one. Perhaps he was referring to the twisted logic of a country that needed to commit communal carnage in order to bolster its secular credentials. Or the insanity that permits the world's largest democracy to administer the world's largest military occupation and continue to call itself a democracy.

There was a green flag on every lamp post, every roof, every bus stop and on the top of chinar trees. A big one fluttered outside the All India Radio building. Road signs to Hazratbal, Batmaloo, Sopore were painted over. Rawalpindi they said. Or simply Pakistan. It would be a mistake to assume that the public expression of affection for Pakistan automatically translates into a desire to accede to Pakistan.Some of it has to do with gratitude for the supportcynical or otherwisefor what Kashmiris see as a freedom struggle and the Indian State sees as a terrorist campaign. It also has to do with mischief. With saying and doing what galls India, the enemy, most of all. (It's easy to scoff at the idea of a 'freedom struggle' that wishes to distance itself from a country that is supposed to be a democracy and align itself with another that has, for the most part, been ruled by military dictators. A country whose army has committed genocide in what is now Bangladesh. A country that is even now being torn apart by its own ethnic war. These are important questions, but right now perhaps it's more useful to wonder what this so-called democracy did in Kashmir to make people hate it so.)

Everywhere there were Pakistani flags, everywhere the cry, Pakistan se rishta kya? La ilaha illa llah. What is our bond with Pakistan? There is no god but Allah. Azadi ka matlab kya? La ilaha illallah. What does Freedom mean? There is no god but Allah.

For somebody like myself, who is not Muslim, that interpretation of freedom is hardif not impossibleto understand. I asked a young woman whether freedom for Kashmir would not mean less freedom for her, as a woman. She shrugged and said, "What kind of freedom do we have now? The freedom to be raped by Indian soldiers?" Her reply silenced me.





She's no terrorist: A woman pelts stones at policemen

Standing in the grounds of the TRC, surrounded by a sea of green flags, it was impossible to doubt or ignore the deeply Islamic nature of the uprising taking place around me. It was equally impossible to label it a vicious, terrorist jehad. For Kashmiris, it was a catharsis. A historical moment in a long and complicated struggle for freedom with all the imperfections, cruelties and confusions that freedom struggles have. This one cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account foramong other thingsthe brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of almost the entire community from the Kashmir Valley.

As the crowd continued to swell, I listened carefully to the slogans, because rhetoric often clarifies things and holds the key to all kinds of understanding. I'd heard many of them before, a few years ago, at a militant's funeral. A new one, obviously coined after the blockade, was Kashmir ki mandi! Rawalpindi! (It doesn't lend itself to translation, but it meansKashmir's marketplace? Rawalpindi!) Another was Khooni lakir tod do, aar paar jod do (Break down the blood-soaked Line of Control, let Kashmir be united again). There were plenty of insults and humiliation for India: Ay jabiron ay zalimon, Kashmir hamara chhod do (Oh oppressors, Oh wicked ones, Get out of our Kashmir). Jis Kashmir ko khoon se seencha, woh Kashmir hamara hai (The Kashmir we have irrigated with our blood, that Kashmir is ours!).

The slogan that cut through me like a knife and clean broke my heart was this one: Nanga bhookha Hindustan, jaan se pyaara Pakistan (Naked, starving India, More precious than life itselfPakistan). Why was it so galling, so painful to listen to this? I tried to work it out and settled on three reasons. First, because we all know that the first part of the slogan is the embarrassing and unadorned truth about India, the emerging superpower. Second, because all Indians who are not nanga or bhookha areand have beencomplicit in complex and historical ways with the cruel cultural and economic systems that make Indian society so cruel, so vulgarly unequal.And third, because it was painful to listen to people who have suffered so much themselves mock others who suffer in different ways, but no less intensely, under the same oppressor. In that slogan I saw the seeds of how easily victims can become perpetrators.

It took hours for Mirwaiz Umer Farooq and Syed Ali Shah Geelani to wade through the thronging crowds and make it onto the podium. When they arrived, they were born aloft on the shoulders of young men, over the surging crowd to the podium. The roar of greeting was deafening. Mirwaiz Umer spoke first. He repeated the demand that the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, Disturbed Areas Act and Public Safety Actunder which thousands have been killed, jailed and torturedbe withdrawn. He called for the release of political prisoners, for the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad road to be opened for the free movement of goods and people, and for the demilitarisation of the Kashmir Valley.

Syed Ali Shah Geelani began his address with a recitation from the Quran. He then said what he has said before, on hundreds of occasions. The only way for the struggle to succeed, he said, was to turn to the Quran for guidance. He said Islam would guide the struggle and that it was a complete social and moral code that would govern the people of a free Kashmir. He said Pakistan had been created as the home of Islam, and that that goal should never be subverted. He said just as Pakistan belonged to Kashmir, Kashmir belonged to Pakistan. He said minority communities would have full rights and their places of worship would be safe. Each point he made was applauded.





Window of opportunity: Spectators for the march to Srinagar

Oddly enough, the apparent doctrinal clarity of what he said made everything a little unclear. I wondered how the somewhat disparate views of the various factions in the freedom struggle would resolve themselvesthe Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front's vision of an independent state, Geelani's desire to merge with Pakistan and Mirwaiz Umer Farooq balanced precariously between them.

An old man with a red eye standing next to me said, "Kashmir was one country. Half was taken by India, the other half by Pakistan. Both by force. We want freedom." I wondered if, in the new dispensation, the old man would get a hearing. I wondered what he would think of the trucks that roared down the highways in the plains of India, owned and driven by men who knew nothing of history, or of Kashmir, but still had slogans on their tailgates that said, "Doodh maango to kheer denge, Kashmir maango to cheer denge (Ask for milk, you'll get cream; Ask for Kashmir, we'll tear you open)."

Briefly, I had another thought. I imagined myself standing in the heart of an RSS or VHP rally being addressed by L.K. Advani. Replace the word Islam with the word Hindutva, replace the word Pakistan with Hindustan, replace the sea of green flags with saffron ones, and we would have the BJP's nightmare vision of an ideal India.

Is that what we should accept as our future? Monolithic religious states handing down a complete social and moral code, "a complete way of life"? Millions of us in India reject the Hindutva project. Our rejection springs from love, from passion, from a kind of idealism, from having enormous emotional stakes in the society in which we live. What our neighbours do, how they choose to handle their affairs does not affect our argument, it only strengthens it.

Arguments that spring from love are also fraught with danger. It is for the people of Kashmir to agree or disagree with the Islamic project (which is as contested, in equally complex ways, all over the world by Muslims as Hindutva is contested by Hindus).Perhaps now that the threat of violence has receded and there is some space in which to debate views and air ideas, it is time for those who are part of the struggle to outline a vision for what kind of society they are fighting for. Perhaps it is time to offer people something more than martyrs, slogans and vague generalisations. Those who wish to turn to the Quran for guidance will no doubt find guidance there. But what of those who do not wish to do that, or for whom the Quran does not make place? Do the Hindus of Jammu and other minorities also have the right to self-determination? Will the hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri Pandits living in exile, many of them in terrible poverty, have the right to return? Will they be paid reparations for the terrible losses they have suffered? Or will a free Kashmir do to its minorities what India has done to Kashmiris for 61 years? What will happen to homosexuals and adulterers and blasphemers? What of thieves and lafangas and writers who do not agree with the "complete social and moral code"? Will we be put to death as we are in Saudi Arabia? Will the cycle of death, repression and bloodshed continue? History offers many models for Kashmir's thinkers and intellectuals and politicians to study. What will the Kashmir of their dreams look like? Algeria? Iran? South Africa? Switzerland? Pakistan?

At a crucial time like this, few things are more important than dreams. A lazy utopia and a flawed sense of justice will have consequences that do not bear thinking about. This is not the time for intellectual sloth or a reluctance to assess a situation clearly and honestly. It could be argued that the prevarication of Maharaja Hari Singh in 1947 has been Kashmir's great modern tragedy, one that eventually led to unthinkable bloodshed and the prolonged bondage of people who were very nearly free.

Already the spectre of partition has reared its head. Hindutva networks are alive with rumours about Hindus in the Valley being attacked and forced to flee. In response, phone calls from Jammu reported that an armed Hindu militia was threatening a massacre and that Muslims from the two Hindu majority districts were preparing to flee. (Memories of the bloodbath that ensued and claimed the lives of more than a million people when India and Pakistan were partitioned have come flooding back. That nightmare will haunt all of us forever.)

There is absolutely no reason to believe that history will repeat itself. Not unless it is made to. Not unless people actively work to create such a cataclysm.

However, none of these fears of what the future holds can justify the continued military occupation of a nation and a people. No more than the old colonial argument about how the natives were not ready for freedom justified the colonial project.

Of course there are many ways for the Indian State to continue to hold on to Kashmir. It could do what it does best. Wait. And hope the people's energy will dissipate in the absence of a concrete plan. It could try and fracture the fragile coalition that is emerging. It could extinguish this non-violent uprising and reinvite armed militancy. It could increase the number of troops from half-a-million to a whole million. A few strategic massacres, a couple of targeted assassinations, some disappearances and a massive round of arrests should do the trick for a few more years.

The unimaginable sums of public money that are needed to keep the military occupation of Kashmir going is money that ought by right to be spent on schools and hospitals and food for an impoverished, malnourished population in India. What kind of government can possibly believe that it has the right to spend it on more weapons, more concertina wire and more prisons in Kashmir?

The Indian military occupation of Kashmir makes monsters of us all.It allows Hindu chauvinists to target and victimise Muslims in India by holding them hostage to the freedom struggle being waged by Muslims in Kashmir. It's all being stirred into a poisonous brew and administered intravenously, straight into our bloodstream.

At the heart of it all is a moral question. Does any government have the right to take away people's liberty with military force?

India needs azadi from Kashmir just as muchif not morethan Kashmir needs azadi from India.


----------



## metalfalcon

*[mod edit]*

She will get this kind of Response From Indians and GoI. Because she exposed the truth and tried to take Indians out of that bollywood Dream World that Kashmiris Love India and Only Foreigners (Pakistanis) are Cause of all the troubles of Kashmir.


----------



## kenchabhai

OLD ARTICLE SUPERSEDED BY THE OVERWHELMING RESPONSE TO ELECTIONS.


----------



## srijeesh

metalfalcon said:


> She will get this kind of Response From Indians and GoI. Because she exposed the truth and tried to take Indians out of that bollywood Dream World that Kashmiris Love India and Only Foreigners (Pakistanis) are Cause of all the troubles of Kashmir.



small info: this article was before elections when she was predicting doomsday scenario for india in kashmir, but she was proved to be a big fool by the response of kashmiris in the elections and by the victory of pro-delhi parties.

so, this article loses its relevance.

the angry response was not for exposing truth, but making such sensational statements for grabbing attention. pathetic attempt by arundhati roy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Captain03

*srijeesh* and *kenchabhai*, u guys havent read the full story
its not about the elections [which were fixed anyway or a pro-indian party would have never won, also the *many voters stated just because they voted doesn't mean they dont want freedom from india*] its about india's negligence of the kashmiri people's aspirations and their inhuman acts against them.

evidence that voters still want azaadi

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7732643.stm

*One voter, Ali Mohammad, told the BBC: "We support azaadi (independence from India), but elections are important for the day-to-day administration. We need a government." *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Captain03

Also here's another article that supports that the voters still want azadi:
Al Jazeera English - Focus - Kashmir's new-found pragmatism

some words worth noting from the article:

*Analysts say high voter turnout in the recent elections does not mean Kashmiris have abandoned separatist aspirations*

*"The election result does not signal the death of the separatist movement. It is a milestone, certainly, but it would be too simplistic to say it marks the start of a new era," said Inder Malhotra, a New Delhi political analyst.*

*Wajahat Habibullah, a former civil servant in Kashmir, agrees, saying that voters were operating on two levels.

"The yearning for azadi is still powerful but elections are not a contradiction. The two co-exist in people's minds."*

*In Srinagar, a pro-separatist bastion, Ramzan Jaleel, who works as a cook on one of Kashmir's famous houseboats, saw nothing contradictory about his desire for independence and voting in Indian-sponsored elections.

Just a few months ago, he had been out on the streets in large pro-azadi demonstrations. Then he took part in elections, implying a tacit acceptance of Indian rule and democracy. 

"No, no, I don't accept rule by New Delhi. I will never abandon the dream of azadi. But I am also a citizen. I have basic needs for myself and my family. Will the separatists provide those? Only the government can, so I voted," Jaleel said. *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## srijeesh

Captain03 said:


> *srijeesh* and *kenchabhai*, u guys havent read the full story
> its not about the elections [which were fixed anyway or a pro-indian party would have never won, also the *many voters stated just because they voted doesn't mean they dont want freedom from india*] its about india's negligence of the kashmiri people's aspirations and their inhuman acts against them.
> 
> evidence that voters still want azaadi
> 
> BBC NEWS | South Asia | Unusual rush of voters in Kashmir
> 
> *One voter, Ali Mohammad, told the BBC: "We support azaadi (independence from India), but elections are important for the day-to-day administration. We need a government." *



the elections were free and fair, this was accepted world wide including UN, unlike election in PaOK.

of course, there are STILL lot of kashmiris who may desire azadi, but there has been a remarkable change in the attitude. they are now willing to participate in indian democracy and choose their govt. so, it is proven that when insurgancy and crossborder terrorism are not present, kashmiris are willing to participate in indian democracy. this is a very encouraging situation for india and discouraging for its detractors.
and the fact that ppl chose pro-delhi parties makes the indian view stronger that kashmiris need development and nothing else.


----------



## srijeesh

Captain03 said:


> Also here's another article that supports that
> 
> "No, no, I don't accept rule by New Delhi. I will never abandon the dream of azadi. But I am also a citizen. I have basic needs for myself and my family. Will the separatists provide those? Only the government can, so I voted," Jaleel said. [/b]



this is exactly wat india wants. the ppl to realise that separatists are useless when it comes to providing ppl, this can be done only by govt. and this realisation is dawning on them. matter of few more years.


----------



## metalfalcon

srijeesh said:


> this is exactly wat india wants. the ppl to realise that separatists are useless when it comes to providing ppl, this can be done only by govt. and this realisation is dawning on them. matter of few more years.



Read it again "He said he will never drop the demand for Azaadi"


----------



## srijeesh

metalfalcon said:


> Read it again "He said he will never drop the demand for Azaadi"



he has accepted that he is a citizen and has recognised that only participating in election is beneficial to him and not boycotting the elections as advised by separatists.
isnt that enough for now.
has for 'demand for azadi', india is happy as long as they keep it with in their heart and work with their head.


----------



## UnitedPak

srijeesh said:


> he has accepted that he is a citizen and has recognised that only participating in election is beneficial to him and not boycotting the elections as advised by separatists.
> isnt that enough for now.
> has for 'demand for azadi', india is happy as long as they keep it with in their heart and work with their head.



So suffer in silence as opposed to out loud?


----------



## srijeesh

UnitedPak said:


> So suffer in silence as opposed to out loud?



they have suffered till now due to terrorism not allowing them to assert their rights in elections. this time they were allowed and they gave the decision. the govt formed is pro-delhi. that speaks for itslef.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

srijeesh said:


> they have suffered till now due to terrorism not allowing them to assert their rights in elections. this time they were allowed and they gave the decision. the govt formed is pro-delhi. that speaks for itslef.



Violence was a result of the Indian occupation and violation of her commitments to Pakistan, the Kashmiris and the international community in teh United Nations and of the Instrument of Partition.

I agree that the Kashmiris shoudl choose peaceful political protest instead of violence, but India should also choose to honor its agreements and obligations and allow a referendum, or is India allowed to commit whatever illegal and immoral crime it wants just so it can hold onto territory? The latter is how criminals and rogue states behave.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## srijeesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Violence was a result of the Indian occupation and violation of her commitments to Pakistan, the Kashmiris and the international community in teh United Nations and of the Instrument of Partition.
> 
> *I agree that the Kashmiris shoudl choose peaceful political protest instead of violence,* but India should also choose to honor its agreements and obligations and allow a referendum, or is India allowed to commit whatever illegal and immoral crime it wants just so it can hold onto territory? The latter is how criminals and rogue states behave.



yes, protests should be peaceful and not violent, but there was no protest in elections. they chose pro-delhi parties and completely rejected the separatists' call for boycott. so one shouldnt view those elections as violence.

the rest of the post is your opinion and I dont share it. agreements that have no relevance to the situations on ground cant be expected to be followed. and the world has moved on from that situation also. the most recent statement of US saying the kashmir is internal matter of india and not sending envoy there was a good reminder to all concerned.


----------



## bushwhacker91

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Violence was a result of the Indian occupation and violation of her commitments to Pakistan, the Kashmiris and the international community in teh United Nations and of the Instrument of Partition.
> 
> I agree that the Kashmiris shoudl choose peaceful political protest instead of violence, but India should also choose to honor its agreements and obligations and allow a referendum, or is India allowed to commit whatever illegal and immoral crime it wants just so it can hold onto territory? The latter is how criminals and rogue states behave.



*What "commitments" does India have to Pakistan?*
UN asked for a plebiscite and not a referendum. Both are bizzarly different. And it also said in 2005 that *UN resolution on Kashmir was not binding on India*.

I think instead of asking India to fulfill its commitments, Pakistan should show India as well the world on how much it really cares about terror, by destroying the 40+ terror trainind camps in ***.



> India allowed to commit whatever illegal and immoral crime it wants just so it can hold onto territory



Atleast we dont sponsor killing of our own Muslim brothers in the name of Islam, by sending in armed rebels.



> So suffer in silence as opposed to out loud?


Had Kashmiri's been suffering, and not been granted freedom of speech, you wouldn't have seen the *highest voter turnout in Kashmir in 60 years*. Most of them know that Indian side of Kashmir is far more developed than Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

*Take a look at what Supreme court of Pakistan had to say about Pakistan occupied Kashmir*.
the Supreme Court of Pakistan delivered a stinging broadside of Islamabads oppressive, undemocratic and colonial subjugation of the Northern Areas of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, pronouncing *it was not understandable on what basis the people of Northern Areas can be denied the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution* i.e. right to equality before law, right to reside and move freely, right to vote, right to be governed by their chosen representatives, right to form political parties, right to assemble peacefully, right to freedom of speech and expression, right to habeas corpus and against illegal detention, right to acquire, hold and dispose property, and the right to have access to an appellate court of justice for the enforcement of all other rights guaranteed under the latest constitution of the country (since independence, Pakistan has devised and binned three written constitutions and the standing fourth one was drawn up in 1985).


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

srijeesh said:


> the rest of the post is your opinion and I dont share it. agreements that have no relevance to the situations on ground cant be expected to be followed. and the world has moved on from that situation also. the most recent statement of US saying the kashmir is internal matter of india and not sending envoy there was a good reminder to all concerned.





bushwhacker91 said:


> *What "commitments" does India have to Pakistan?*
> UN asked for a plebiscite and not a referendum. Both are bizzarly different. And it also said in 2005 that *UN resolution on Kashmir was not binding on India*.
> 
> I think instead of asking India to fulfill its commitments, Pakistan should show India as well the world on how much it really cares about terror, by destroying the 40+ terror trainind camps in ***.
> 
> Atleast we dont sponsor killing of our own Muslim brothers in the name of Islam, by sending in armed rebels.



The vast majority of the Kashmirir camps in Pakistan are not 'terrorist camps', they are Freedom Fighters, and the right to fight an occupation is recognized by the world community, so long as innocents are not targeted. When groups like LeT have stepped completely out of line like they allegedly did in Mumbai, we acted against them and shut down their camps. However attacks on Indian occupation forces are not 'terrorism' and completely legitemate, since India is in occupation of the territory in violation of bilateral and international commitments.

On those commitments, call it a plebiscite - the fact is that India, Pakistan and the British agreed in the Instrument of Partition that any disputed accession would be resolved through a plebisicte, and this was explicitly stated in the case of the Kashmir accession. This constitutes a bilateral agreement with Pakistan (or trilateral if you include the British). The international commitments and obligations came about when India accepted in the UNSC, multiple times, the fact that Kashmir was both disputed and to be resolved via a referendum. 

India's PM Nehru made several public statements to this effect that he would honor these commitments and a plebiscite would be held, unfortunately, Pakistan believed him and the result was apparent a few years later, when Nehru completely back stabbed Pakistan and unilaterally violated those commitments.

The UNSC resolutions and those commitments are just as valid today, becasue the reality of the situation is that the region remains disputed and under Indian occupation, and to resolve that situation the only fair way is to conduct a plebisicte, in some shape or form.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Contrarian

Hehe, justify the action all you want guys, but the blatant facts are-the Kashmiri's defied boycott calls of the election called by the Hurriyat leaders. And the Hurriyat leaders were ALL united this time! And this was RIGHT after the Amarnath land row when emotions were charged up.

And compare this with yesteryears, when boycott calls were always succesfull when the Hurriyat leaders were all in different camps/factions, and things had been very peacefull for a long while before the elections.

I'll say something has definitely turned a corner in Kashmir. You can decide your reasons for what happened, but its pretty visible to me!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheLord

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Violence was a result of the Indian occupation and violation of her commitments to Pakistan, the Kashmiris and the international community in teh United Nations and of the Instrument of Partition.



Repeating the same phrase doesn't make it the truth.* Pakistan occupied the independent Kashmir.* Instrumentation of accession is not related here. *Kashmir decided to remain independent. Pakistan invaded the Kashmir. We were there to throw out the occupying Pakistanis. Still Pakistan is occupying some part of it.*

We made a blunder by bringing the UN in to this. That doesn't mean we have to repeat it. The UN resolution is non binding.


----------



## dabong1

srijeesh said:


> yes, protests should be peaceful and not violent, but there was no protest in elections. they chose pro-delhi parties and completely rejected the separatists' call for boycott. so one shouldnt view those elections as violence..



Every single kashmiri that was asked by the international media if there vote was a vote for india was rejected outright by kashmiris.......all agreed that the elections where nothing more then a vote for getting the water and electric sorted out.

You can fool yourselfs into thinking that the kashmiris love india but the kashmiris reject india.



srijeesh said:


> the rest of the post is your opinion and I dont share it. agreements that have no relevance to the situations on ground cant be expected to be followed. and the world has moved on from that situation also. the most recent statement of US saying the kashmir is internal matter of india and not sending envoy there was a good reminder to all concerned.



Pakistan is forfilling its obligations to the peace plan laid out by clinton a decade ago.
Stop cross border movement of fighter.......pakistan has done that.
Elections in IOK take place with no violence....pakistan obliged.

Its your turn to move but now you have the mumbai excuse........it will not last and your going to have to make your move now......otherwise the US will be sending a special envoy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TheLord

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The vast majority of the Kashmirir camps in Pakistan are not 'terrorist camps', they are Freedom Fighters,



If they are freedom fighters, then should have been fighting the Pakistan tribes men and the PA, who invaded the independent Kashmir. Here they are joining hands the occupying forces to fight the liberators. Hence they are traitors and oppressors.


----------



## dabong1

malaymishra123 said:


> Hehe, justify the action all you want guys, but the blatant facts are-the Kashmiri's defied boycott calls of the election called by the Hurriyat leaders. And the Hurriyat leaders were ALL united this time! And this was RIGHT after the Amarnath land row when emotions were charged up.
> 
> And compare this with yesteryears, when boycott calls were always succesfull when the Hurriyat leaders were all in different camps/factions, and things had been very peacefull for a long while before the elections.
> 
> I'll say something has definitely turned a corner in Kashmir. You can decide your reasons for what happened, but its pretty visible to me!



Its all part of the clinton plan........pakistan has so far has played ball and followed the plan......its now your turn but the mumbai excuse.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

malaymishra123 said:


> Hehe, justify the action all you want guys, but the blatant facts are-the Kashmiri's defied boycott calls of the election called by the Hurriyat leaders. And the Hurriyat leaders were ALL united this time! And this was RIGHT after the Amarnath land row when emotions were charged up.
> 
> And compare this with yesteryears, when boycott calls were always succesfull when the Hurriyat leaders were all in different camps/factions, and things had been very peacefull for a long while before the elections.
> 
> I'll say something has definitely turned a corner in Kashmir. You can decide your reasons for what happened, but its pretty visible to me!



We'll buy all of that when India has the cajones to conduct a plebiscite per its commitments - shouldn't be an issue since 'a corner has been turned'. We have been hearing this BS for a decade now, "Kashmiris don't care for Pakistan, look at the development in IK vs AK' however, despite all of these fanciful claims, no effort to actually put your money where your mouth is and let the Kashmiris decide.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

TheLord said:


> If they are freedom fighters, then should have been fighting the Pakistan tribes men and the PA, who invaded the independent Kashmir. Here they are joining hands the occupying forces to fight the liberators. Hence they are traitors and oppressors.



Actually they supported the Tribesmen - see Owen Bennet Jones's book _Pakistan_, and Shuja Nawaz's _Crossed Swords_, for extremely detailed accounts of what transpired.

In fact the reason the Tribesmen went into Kashmir was becasue of the Maharajah's atrocities against the people of kashmir, especially in the Poonch district, which resulted in an uprising that he tried to quell with brutal tactics against civillians. This resulted in thousands of refugees from Kashmri pouring into Pakistan, and along with the Sikh Massacres on th trains bringing Muslims from India to Pakistan, it proved to be the spark that set the fire for the Tribal intervention.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## srijeesh

dabong1 said:


> Every single kashmiri that was asked by the international media if there vote was a vote for india was rejected outright by kashmiris.......all agreed that the elections where nothing more then a vote for getting the water and electric sorted out.
> 
> You can fool yourselfs into thinking that the kashmiris love india but the kashmiris reject india.
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan is forfilling its obligations to the peace plan laid out by clinton a decade ago.
> Stop cross border movement of fighter.......pakistan has done that.
> Elections in IOK take place with no violence....pakistan obliged.
> 
> Its your turn to move but now you have the mumbai excuse........it will not last and your going to have to make your move now......otherwise the US will be sending a special envoy




wat someone says before a camera is not important, but where they cast the vote in the secrecy. they have chosen a govt and CM who is as indian as anyone else.

pakistan has not stopped crossborder terrorism,PaOK is used as a launching pad for incursions into indian territory. 
if US wants to send special envoy they are free to do so, but that doesnt change india's stand. but that seems more like your hope than US' intention.


----------



## Contrarian

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> We'll buy all of that when India has the cajones to conduct a plebiscite per its commitments - shouldn't be an issue since 'a corner has been turned'. We have been hearing this BS for a decade now, "Kashmiris don't care for Pakistan, look at the development in IK vs AK' however, despite all of these fanciful claims, no effort to actually put your money where your mouth is and let the Kashmiris decide.



Sorry, no plebicite, not now not ever. Regardless of whether the corner has been turned or whether its back to the beginning. There will never be a plebicite. Im not a spokesman for GoI-but even you can bet that what i say will happen-or to be more precise, never happen.

Yet, i cant but smile on the issue. Regardless of everything, Kashmiri's defied the call of a united Hurriyat-which according to Pakistan is the TRUEST representative of Kashmiri's! That has to count for something Agno!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

bushwhacker91 said:


> [
> 
> 
> 
> QUOTE=AgNoStIc MuSliM;297796]The vast majority of the Kashmirir camps in Pakistan are not 'terrorist camps', they are Freedom Fighters, and the right to fight an occupation is recognized by the world community, so long as innocents are not targeted. When groups like LeT have stepped completely out of line like they allegedly did in Mumbai, we acted against them and shut down their camps. However attacks on Indian occupation forces are not 'terrorism' and completely legitemate, since India is in occupation of the territory in violation of bilateral and international commitments.
> 
> 
> Don't justify terror. LeT was no holy soul, before 26/11.They have been involved in all major terror incidents in India in the last decade.What makes you think that sending is 4-5 terrorists is gonna make India give up Kashmir?.
> When was the last time IA was directly attacked by any of your "freedom fighters"?And don't mention international commitments to India, when you are still following the policy of "*bleeding India by a thousand cuts*".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am not justifying terror, if I was I would be arguing in favor of not banning the LeT and not taking down their camps - I am however arguing in favor of the legitemate right of a people to struggle against occupation and occupation forces.
> 
> As for the rest of the terrorism in India, that is all your own problem, nothing to do with us or the legitimatize freedom movement.
> 
> By the way, we do not allow duplicate ID's *Dave007*, quit trolling.
Click to expand...


----------



## srijeesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The vast majority of the Kashmirir camps in Pakistan are not 'terrorist camps', they are Freedom Fighters, and the right to fight an occupation is recognized by the world community, so long as innocents are not targeted. When groups like LeT have stepped completely out of line like they allegedly did in Mumbai, we acted against them and shut down their camps. However attacks on Indian occupation forces are not 'terrorism' and completely legitemate, since India is in occupation of the territory in violation of bilateral and international commitments.
> 
> On those commitments, call it a plebiscite - the fact is that India, Pakistan and the British agreed in the Instrument of Partition that any disputed accession would be resolved through a plebisicte, and this was explicitly stated in the case of the Kashmir accession. This constitutes a bilateral agreement with Pakistan (or trilateral if you include the British). The international commitments and obligations came about when India accepted in the UNSC, multiple times, the fact that Kashmir was both disputed and to be resolved via a referendum.
> 
> India's PM Nehru made several public statements to this effect that he would honor these commitments and a plebiscite would be held, unfortunately, Pakistan believed him and the result was apparent a few years later, when Nehru completely back stabbed Pakistan and unilaterally violated those commitments.
> 
> The UNSC resolutions and those commitments are just as valid today, becasue the reality of the situation is that the region remains disputed and under Indian occupation, and to resolve that situation the only fair way is to conduct a plebisicte, in some shape or form.



you are trying to justify terrorists by justifying the supposed 'cause'. this is just hogwash.


history.

history.

UN resolutions are no longer relevent. india doesnt share pak's view that kashmir is disputed. anyway, UN resolutions are not binding.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

malaymishra123 said:


> Sorry, no plebicite, not now not ever. Regardless of whether the corner has been turned or whether its back to the beginning. There will never be a plebicite. Im not a spokesman for GoI-but even you can bet that what i say will happen-or to be more precise, never happen.
> 
> Yet, i cant but smile on the issue. Regardless of everything, Kashmiri's defied the call of a united Hurriyat-which according to Pakistan is the TRUEST representative of Kashmiri's! That has to count for something Agno!



Not at all - since they also expressed the same desire for Freedom simultaneously. 

You know their loyalties do not lie with India, that is the sole reason for India violating her bilateral and international commitments, otherwise India woudl love to hold a plebiscite and throw the result in Pakistan's face, a complete negation of Pakistan's position.

That India would rather do something illegal and immoral is reflective of that knowledge, regardless of how much you try and paint the Kashmiris as 'accepting India'.

You and most Indians know the reality of Kashmiri sentiment Malay, regardless of how much you try and obfuscate,


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

srijeesh said:


> you are trying to justify terrorists by justifying the supposed 'cause'. this is just hogwash.
> 
> 
> history.
> 
> history.
> 
> UN resolutions are no longer relevent. india doesnt share pak's view that kashmir is disputed. anyway, UN resolutions are not binding.



You havn't answered a single point I made, or refuted it, just ranted with one liners.

Keep this up and you will get banned for trolling.

If you cannot respond with facts and supporting arguments, then just don't post.


----------



## Contrarian

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Not at all - since they also expressed the same desire for Freedom simultaneously.
> 
> You know their loyalties do not lie with India, that is the sole reason for India violating her bilateral and international commitments, otherwise India woudl love to hold a plebiscite and throw the result in Pakistan's face, a complete negation of Pakistan's position.
> 
> That India would rather do something illegal and immoral is reflective of that knowledge, regardless of how much you try and paint the Kashmiris as 'accepting India'.
> 
> You and most Indians know the reality of Kashmiri sentiment Malay, regardless of how much you try and obfuscate,



Just tell me, WHERE have i ever denied the fact that most Kashmiri's would not vote for India.

I have ALWAYS said, that the majority would definitely vote against India. But i have ALSO said, that with time, the percentage of such people will decrease and keep decreasing as long as India is able to provide the right climate. And it is what India is trying.


----------



## srijeesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> You havn't answered a single point I made, or refuted it, just ranted with one liners.
> 
> Keep this up and you will get banned for trolling.
> 
> If you cannot respond with facts and supporting arguments, then just don't post.



wat was there to be refuted? when you went on and on with narrating the past events, then I just reminded that it was history. nothing to refute.

when you said that terrorists in kashmir are 'freedom fighters', I thought you were justifying their acts just because they are acting with an excuse.

when you mentioned that UN resolutions are valid, I thought they were no longer relevent and said the same. AFAIK, UN resolutions on kashmir are not binding. if I am wrong, do correct me, but threatening ban is not the right approach.


----------



## dabong1

bushwhacker91 said:


> Don't justify terror. LeT was no holy soul, before 26/11.They have been involved in all major terror incidents in India in the last decade.]".



Did you guys not blame LeT for all the bombing that where done by your own soldiers?
Lt Col Shrikant Purohit, who was arrested in connection with the Malegaon blast, was also involved with 2007 Samjhauta blast.....and how many other blasts was he involved in?




bushwhacker91 said:


> What makes you think that sending is 4-5 terrorists is gonna make India give up Kashmir?.]".



A kashmiri version of hezbollah-hamas is what the near future holds if the indians dont get out of kashmir.......a few terrorist bought your major city to its knees,what would a proper attack on the india security-govt forces do?
Pakistan did not send the terrorist to attack mumbai!




bushwhacker91 said:


> When was the last time IA was directly attacked by any of your "freedom fighters"?And don't mention international commitments to India, when you are still following the policy of "*bleeding India by a thousand cuts*".



If we really wanted to bleed india by a thousand cuts we would be arming every freedom movement in india.
We would use the "knock out punch" policy rather then a "thousand cuts" if we wanted to dfeat india.


----------



## Contrarian

The ATS has said that he was NOT involved in the Samjhauta blast. The earlier statement was that Purohit MIGHT be involved, that they would investigate that aspect. They have since cleared that he was NOT.

You read the accusations, and then conveniently forget if there has been a clarification.


----------



## srijeesh

dabong1 said:


> *If we really wanted to bleed india by a thousand cuts we would be arming every freedom movement in india.*
> We would use the "knock out punch" policy rather then a "thousand cuts" if we wanted to dfeat india.



why do you assume that this is not happening already. an ULFA member who was caught revealed that ULFA had close relation with ISI and they were supplied weapons by the spy agency.


----------



## dabong1

srijeesh said:


> wat someone says before a camera is not important, but where they cast the vote in the secrecy. they have chosen a govt and CM who is as indian as anyone else..



If your that sure of kashmiris love for india why not have a UN vote....



srijeesh said:


> pakistan has not stopped crossborder terrorism,PaOK is used as a launching pad for incursions into indian territory. .



Your own govt says that LoC movement is down to a trickle.
You seem to forget that the kashmiris see no border...its a indian invention.




srijeesh said:


> if US wants to send special envoy they are free to do so, but that doesnt change india's stand. but that seems more like your hope than US' intention.



We will see in the near future who is correct


----------



## dabong1

srijeesh said:


> why do you assume that this is not happening already. an ULFA member who was caught revealed that ULFA had close relation with ISI and they were supplied weapons by the spy agency.



Well done ISI


----------



## dabong1

malaymishra123 said:


> The ATS has said that he was NOT involved in the Samjhauta blast. The earlier statement was that Purohit MIGHT be involved, that they would investigate that aspect. They have since cleared that he was NOT.
> 
> You read the accusations, and then conveniently forget if there has been a clarification.



By the end of the investigations Purohit and co will be totally innocent of all crimes........i just hope pakistan follows indians lead when it comes to the mumbai attackers.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

srijeesh said:


> wat was there to be refuted? when you went on and on with narrating the past events, then I just reminded that it was history. nothing to refute.



Any agreement made in teh past is 'history'. DO you think the Iranians or any other nation that signed the NPT can get away with 'oh its in the past and is history'. Of course not - agreements and commitments need to be upheld, otherwise you see the same happen that you woudl on an individual level in a society - anarchy and chaos, with people taking the law into their own hands since no one abides by their commitments.

That is why I said that you posted no refutation.



> when you said that terrorists in kashmir are 'freedom fighters', I thought you were justifying their acts just because they are acting with an excuse.


Its no excuse - the UN and international community recognizes Kashmir as disputed, and India has violated UN resolutions on the issue as well as the bilateral commitment with Pakistan - it is therefore illegally occupying it.



> when you mentioned that UN resolutions are valid, I thought they were no longer relevent and said the same. AFAIK, UN resolutions on kashmir are not binding. if I am wrong, do correct me, but threatening ban is not the right approach.


The resolutions are not 'enforceable', however, India came to an agreement in the instrument of partition and in the UN that a plebiscite was to be held.

Therefore there was an agreement and commitment to pursue this path, and was publicly acknowledged by Nehru several times.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

malaymishra123 said:


> Just tell me, WHERE have i ever denied the fact that most Kashmiri's would not vote for India.
> 
> I have ALWAYS said, that the majority would definitely vote against India. But i have ALSO said, that with time, the percentage of such people will decrease and keep decreasing as long as India is able to provide the right climate. And it is what India is trying.



That is contrary to what you were implying in you earlier post when you said that "Regardless of everything, Kashmiri's defied the call of a united Hurriyat-which according to Pakistan is the TRUEST representative of Kashmiri's!"

But anyway, any day that Indians continue to accept that their position on Kashmir is illegal, counter to the wishes of the Kashmiris, and solely to further Indian expansionism by hook or crook, is good, since at least the truth is being acknowledged.

Perhaps future generations will not be so utterly morally and ethically bankrupt.


----------



## srijeesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Any agreement made in teh past is 'history'. DO you think the Iranians or any other nation that signed the NPT can get away with 'oh its in the past and is history'. Of course not - agreements and commitments need to be upheld, otherwise you see the same happen that you woudl on an individual level in a society - anarchy and chaos, with people taking the law into their own hands since no one abides by their commitments.
> 
> That is why I said that you posted no refutation.
> 
> 
> Its no excuse - the UN and international community recognizes Kashmir as disputed, and India has violated UN resolutions on the issue as well as the bilateral commitment with Pakistan - it is therefore illegally occupying it.
> 
> 
> The resolutions are not 'enforceable', however, India came to an agreement in the instrument of partition and in the UN that a plebiscite was to be held.
> 
> Therefore there was an agreement and commitment to pursue this path, and was publicly acknowledged by Nehru several times.



I see no reason to refute a fact. india accepted UN resolutions since it was a different situation then. now the situation has changed a lot. UN resolution were not binding, so india can refuse to abide by them.

Has UN recognised the 'freedom fighters' as well?
if you justify terrorism, then you cant expect india to bow to that pressure and accept your view. once pakistan has started supporting terrorist in the name of 'freedom fighters' doesnt it lose a moral stand to then ask india for plebiscite?


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

srijeesh said:


> I see no reason to refute a fact. india accepted UN resolutions since it was a different situation then. now the situation has changed a lot. UN resolution were not binding, so india can refuse to abide by them.
> 
> Has UN recognised the 'freedom fighters' as well?
> if you justify terrorism, then you cant expect india to bow to that pressure and accept your view. once pakistan has started supporting terrorist in the name of 'freedom fighters' doesnt it lose a moral stand to then ask india for plebiscite?



Again, if nations go around willfully violating agreements and commitments, it leads to anarchy. India initiated the UNSC debate, and endorsed and accepted the UNSC resolutions and recomendations, as did Pakistan. India also endorsed and accepted the Conditions of the Instrument of Partition, that stated that a disputed accession woudl be resolved in y resort ot a plebiscite.

So we have multiple clear instances of India's acceptance of a plebiscite in international and bilateral forums. None of these agreements or commitments had a time line. To not implement these is a violation of India's commitment and of those agreements, and as I said, that leads to anarchy. And yes, the UN and the international community do recognize the right of a people to struggle against occupation - the majority of the Kashmiri Freedom Fighters are not terrorists.

This thread is being merged with the existing Kashmir thread, since we are going over the same arguments. 

Please read through the rest of the old thread before posting any further srijeesh.


----------



## srijeesh

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Please read through the rest of the old thread before posting any further srijeesh.



after going through some of the pages of the thread, it is clear that there is no point in arguing any further. you have your opinions and I have mine. 
lets agree to disagree.


----------



## Captain03

srijeesh said:


> *the elections were free and fair, this was accepted world wide including UN,* unlike election in PaOK.



since when has the indians cared about what the u.n. thinks?
if that was the case the kashmiris would be free right now.



> *of course, there are STILL lot of kashmiris who may desire azadi, but there has been a remarkable change in the attitude. they are now willing to participate in indian democracy and choose their govt. so, it is proven that when insurgancy and crossborder terrorism are not present, kashmiris are willing to participate in indian democracy.* this is a very encouraging situation for india and discouraging for its detractors.
> *and the fact that ppl chose pro-delhi parties makes the indian view stronger that kashmiris need development and nothing else.*



cross-border?
its a disputed territory the people have the right to move wherever they want
and the only change in the attitude is that the kashmiri people have understood what kind of movements develop worldy support for their fight and what kind of movements the indian government cant do much about but to hold curfews.

and the fact that a pro-delhi party was elected makes it pretty easy to understand and believe the election was fixed


----------



## Captain03

srijeesh said:


> this is exactly wat india wants. the ppl to realise that separatists are useless when it comes to providing ppl, this can be done only by govt. and this realisation is dawning on them. matter of few more years.




unfortunately india and indians cant and probably wont understand what the kashmiris want


----------



## kenchabhai

Captain03 said:


> unfortunately india and indians cant and probably wont understand what the kashmiris want



janab aisi baatein ko dil afsurda na karnay day!!


----------



## Contrarian

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> That is contrary to what you were implying in you earlier post when you said that "Regardless of everything, Kashmiri's defied the call of a united Hurriyat-which according to Pakistan is the TRUEST representative of Kashmiri's!"


It implies that there is a growing number of people who are willing to lay down their demand to secede. It implies that the forumla is right to an extent. It also means that maybe 50 years down the line, the majority of the people will want to stay with India.

I said, its a change from what happened in the past, a slap on the face of Hurriyat-who Pakistan backs as the true representative of Kashmiri's and who are separatists and a win for National Conference, which is a mainstream political party. There is a lot you can understand by reading these elections, you seem to be stuck to just one position. You cant see the changing of views in Kashmir.

Now after this post, you will again quote me and start saying why doesnt India gofor plebicite then, which in essence will mean that you have not understood till date what i have tried to mention about Kashmir. I reiterate-its a change in progress, it is not completed, but its certainly visible.



> But anyway, any day that Indians continue to accept that their position on Kashmir is illegal, counter to the wishes of the Kashmiris, and solely to further Indian expansionism by hook or crook, is good, since at least the truth is being acknowledged.
> 
> Perhaps future generations will not be so utterly morally and ethically bankrupt.


Stop trying to force your words in other's mouths. I have NOT said that I agree to the notion that India's position on Kashmir is illegal. I said the majority might and most likely will not vote to stay with India in case of a vote. That doesnt make Kashmir any less Indian, or our position in Kashmir any less legal. Kashmir is Indian, legally, since we have signed the IoA with the Raja of Kashmir. Whether the populace agree's or not, has not been considered when commenting on the legality of things. That we agreed to take it to UN for plebicite does NOT make India's position illegal, and finally-what Nehru decided at UN for a plebicite , did NOT include a time frame, so India is not bound by any time frame either, we may take our own sweet time.


----------



## Captain03

kenchabhai said:


> janab aisi baatein ko dil afsurda na karnay day!!



english yaar


----------



## UnitedPak

*Kashmir settlement to help ease Afghan issue: British MPs
*



> By M. Ziauddin
> 
> 
> LONDON, Feb 6: As Pakistan was commemorating Kashmir Solidarity Day on Thursday, inside the House of Commons parliamentarians from across the political divide debated the issues confronting Pakistan, Afghanistan and India with particular reference to the Kashmir dispute.
> 
> Prominent among the speakers were Sir Gerald Kaufman, Mohammad Sarwar, Denis MacShane, Adam Holloway and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence Quentin Davies.
> 
> They said tensions between India and Pakistan should be eased to facilitate resolution of the Kashmir dispute which they believed would lead to stabilising Afghanistan.
> 
> Those who attended the debate included Foreign Secretary David Miliband and Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague.
> 
> *Sir Gerald said: We must do all we can to make it a top priority to solve the worlds oldest unresolved dispute of Jammu and Kashmir, adding that Britain needed to do much more to put it high on the international agenda.*
> 
> He dismissed the Indian criticism of Mr Milibands remarks about Kashmir as unacceptable and warned that not paying serious attention to Kashmir resolution would be a prime strategic error.
> 
> He viewed that a Kashmir settlement was imperative owing to all the strategic reasons for which Britain is in Afghanistan.
> 
> He said that resolution of the Kashmir dispute would also eliminate the risk of unnecessary military confrontation between the two nuclear-armed countries, apart from reducing what he called the waste of resources on military spending by them.
> 
> Mr Sarwar said British government should help Pakistan and India in resolving the conflict, underscoring that the settlement was also an essential part of the roadmap to a stabilised Afghanistan. He expressed the hope that Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Foreign Secretary Miliband and US President Barack Obama would work with the governments of the region to build a stable and peaceful South Asia.
> 
> Denis MacShane pointed to the atrocities being committed by Indian troops in occupied Kashmir as well as Indias militaristic and jingoistic postures towards Pakistan, and asked his government to persuade India to de-escalate tension.
> 
> He said it was time the British politicians stopped shying away from discussing Kashmir.
> 
> Adam Holloway of the Conservative Party said that Britain should help reduce tension between India and Pakistan as this would let Pakistan focus on counter-insurgency engagement in its tribal areas.
> 
> Later, some of these parliamentarians also spoke at the Pakistan High Commission where a function on the Kashmir Solidarity Day had been organised.
> 
> They urged India to resume urgently composite dialogue with Pakistan so that the Kashmir dispute could be resolved amicably and the relations between the two neighbours were normalised.
> 
> Kashmiri leaders based in the UK also made speeches on the occasion.
> 
> *It is learnt that Sir Kaufman in a letter written recently to the president of Azad Jammu and Kashmir has reaffirmed his support for the Kashmir cause.*
> 
> Martin Salter represented the All-Party Parliamentary Group and read out a message from the Chair of the Group, Margaret Moran, MP.
> 
> *In her message, Ms Morgan said that she had consistently supported the view that the only sustainable solution to the crisis is self-determination for the Kashmiri people.*



Kashmir settlement to help ease Afghan issue: British MPs -DAWN - Top Stories; February 07, 2009


----------



## hembo

duhastmish said:


> sir
> there is no solution to Kashmir, .......
> ......
> people of Kashmir don't want Pakistan , they don't want India, they don't want independent state , they just want to progress and have a happy life, which they deserve!!!!!



I have quoted the above as I've found the above one very touching and real. People of kashmir do deserve peace, progress and happiness. For that matter, all humankind deserves the same and this fighting and bickering, no matter based on what (teritory, religion, culture, race), will only take us down. Another touching fact I have come across was a pakistani muslim member using a Albert Einstein (a Jew) quote (on world war IV predicted to be fought with stones) as his signature.

After going through this interesting and neverending debates, I would just like to summarize my view as below:

1. Both side agree to the UN plebiside with the pre-condition that all forms of terrorism must be stopped immediately and well before the voting procedure.

2. Allow UN troups/ observer to ensure 100&#37; peace and subsequent fair voting process. Both side may agree to properly identify and divide provinces like northern area, azad kashmir, kashmir valey, Jammu, Ladakh and chinese occupied kashmir.

3. Respect each provinces' decision to either stay with India or Pakistan. Independent kashmir should not be a option as it is not viable for obvious reasons.


----------



## Omar1984

Pak, India were close to agreement on Kashmir: Kasuri  

NEW DELHI, Feb. 19 (APP): Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri, Former Foreign Minister said Pakistan and India were close to agreement on Kashmir through back-channel diplomacy. 

In an interview with Karan Thapar on India Tonight on CNBC TV18, Kasuri said both the countries made substantial progress on four parts of Kashmir solution including demilitarization, regionalization, joint mechanism and self-government. 

Referring to demilitarization, he said both countries believed agreement can not be reached without providing comfort to Kashmiris. But schedules of withdrawal of forces had not been agreed but the principle was that it would provide relief to Kashmiris. 

Without divulging the details, he said regionalisation was the second part of the whole settlement. 

When asked whether both sides were working out how they would give self-governance to their respective people or was there an agreed form that both sides had to follow, Kasuri said You know, to be very honest, I dont want to mislead your audience, I think we were more or less working on similar sort of things on both sides. 

If you want more understanding, I can tell you we even privately discussed when, hopefully when the whole thing was done, neither side would proclaim victory. Because if you did that, it would be destructive of the whole spirit of the agreement, Kasuri further said. 

When asked about joint mechanism which was being worked out, he said there would be representatives from our side of Kashmir, this side of Kashmir, and Pakistanis and Indians. They were supposed to look after certain subjects. 

When asked to elaborate, he said where Indians and Pakistanis would be present, and so would people from both parts of Kashmir, because that is how Joint Mechanism would work. 

In this mechanism, he said both countries had substantial understanding. 

To a question, he further said Pakistan wanted Kashmiris to be involved. 

We wanted Kashmiris to be involved, and India was not that keen, so we arrived at this modus vivendi that your Kashmiris would travel to Pakistan, our Kashmiris would travel here and meet your leaders and your Kashmiris meet our leaders in an indirect form. We would have preferred a direct Kashmiri Participation, he said. 

He said these back channels talks were held all over the world. 

Ill tell you what happened. Certain suggestions were floated by Pakistan, and then representatives met. Tariq Aziz remained from our side throughout. Actually you know, the whole thing started with Brijesh Mishra. Although the concrete non-papers did not start then. The process started with him. But I must pay a compliment to both the governments. Both PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee and PM Manmohan Singh they both helped the process, he said. 

He said the talks started with Brijesh Mishra, but not many details. Then Dikshit took over. Unfortunately Dikshit died then Lambha took over. 

To another question, he said It is sheer bad luck. Sheer bad luck. I can tell you. We hoped somewhere in 2006 that the Indian PM would come and I think there were 5 state elections, including UP. So perhaps the government thought it would be more advisable to go afterwards. 

So we said OK fine. Can you believe it, before we could invite him, CJ Chaudhry was removed in Pakistan. So first it was Indian elections or state elections, then the CJ. When we thought we would call him, the entire national attention was diverted to the CJ affair. 

When asked whether politics in both these countries at one time or another made it impossible for the understandings to reach, he said You know, in our case it was misfortune, not politics, the removal of the CJ. 

When asked, many commentators in papers in India, including Omar Abdullah, the current Chief Minister of Held Kashmir who specifically said this in an interview with him the agreement could not be reached because at the crucial moment the Indian government backed off. Maybe it lost courage or conviction, Kasuri said he would not confirm or deny it as it is not appropriate for him to comment on the conduct of the government of India. 

When asked on other outstanding issues such as Sir Creek and Siachen, he said both countries were also going to sign agreement on Sir Creek. 

Referring to issue of Sir Creek, he said there was almost an agreement on it. 

It was ready. Joint survey, Joint maps. Only political will was required. If the PM of India had come when we thought he would, we would have actually signed it, and that would have created the right atmosphere for resolution of other disputes, particularly the issue of J&K. We needed the right atmosphere, he said. 

Referring to issue of Siachen, he said there was a lot of understanding. In fact both sides had worked out certain schedules of disengagement whereby Indian and Pakistani concerns would be met. 

When asked whether this was something you felt the Indians were willing to stand up for and abide by, he said that was my impression because I was told at a very high level by an Indian official. 

So even though on the Siachen issue we may not have been close to an agreement ready for signing as was the case with Sir Creek, nonetheless there was a very close measure of understanding.., he said. 

Kasuri further said I would say among sections of the Govt of India, no govt speaks with one voice, there was agreement, and given time, they would have convinced other members of the Indian establishment. 

He said both countries had agreed that peace process was irreversible. 

They announced publicly that peace process is irreversible, he said.

Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan&#039;s Premier NEWS Agency ) - Pak, India were close to agreement on Kashmir: Kasuri


----------



## dabong1

India grapples with the Obama era
By M K Bhadrakumar 

The past week offered a reality check. The visit by the newly appointed US Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, to the region underscored that Islamabad's support for the US war strategy in Afghanistan has become critical. The war is at a crucial stage and salvaging it appears increasingly difficult. 

More to the point, given the overall fragility of the political situation in Pakistan, a stage is reached beyond which the US cannot "pressure" Pakistan. Therefore, in a change of approach, the US will have no choice but to work with Pakistan. In the coming period, as Holbrooke gradually opens the political track leading to an Afghan settlement, need of Pakistan's cooperation increases further. 

Meanwhile, the revelation that the US Predator drones operate out of Pakistani bases underlines how closely Washington and Islamabad have been working. The US's acquiescence in the release of AQ Khan revealed the great latitude towards Pakistan's concerns. The Indian strategists who fancied that New Delhi was Washington's preferred partner in South Asia are stunned. Clearly, India is nowhere near as valuable an ally as Pakistan for the US for the present. 

Looking ahead, Obama's decision on Wednesday approving a troop buildup in Afghanistan constitutes a defining moment. He has put his presidency on the firing line. From this week onward, Obama's war has begun. The war can well consume his presidency. Either he succeeds, or he gets mired in the war. Yet, the new US strategy is still in the making. Delhi takes note that it is at such a crucial juncture that the Pakistani army chief, General Parvez Kayani, has been invited to go across to Washington for consultations. 

The message is clear: Washington will be in no mood to antagonize its Pakistani partner and Delhi is expected to keep tensions under check in its relations with Islamabad. 

Kashmir beckons 
New Delhi pulled out all the stops when rumors surfaced that Holbrooke's mandate might include the Kashmir problem. Obama paid heed to Indian sensitivities. But at a price. It compels India to curtail its own excessive instincts in recent years to seek US intervention in keeping India-Pakistan tensions in check. 

In short, New Delhi will have to pay much greater attention to its bilateral track with Pakistan. And, of course, Pakistan will expect India to be far more flexible. Rightly or wrongly, Pakistan harbors a feeling that India took unilateral advantage from the relative four-year calm in their relationship without conceding anything in return. 

In a sensational interview with India's top television personality, Karan Thapar, on Thursday night, Pakistan's former foreign minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri confirmed what many in New Delhi suspected, namely, that through back channel diplomacy, Islamabad and New Delhi had reached a broad understanding on contentious issues such as Sir Creek, Siachen and Kashmir as far back as two years ago. 

The Indian prime minister was expected to visit Pakistan to conclude some of the agreements but the Indian side apparently began developing cold feet and it is "sheer bad luck", as Kasuri put it, that the momentum dissipated. 

To quote Kasuri, "If the Prime Minister of India had come when we [Pakistan] thought he would, we would have actually signed it, and that would have created the right atmosphere for resolution of other disputes, particularly the issue of J&K [Jammu and Kashmir]. We needed the right atmosphere." 

In other words, there is always a lurking danger that at some point, Holbrooke may barge into the Kashmir problem by way of addressing the core issues of regional security. The Bush administration had been kept constantly briefed by New Delhi on its back-channel discussions with Islamabad regarding Kashmir. Retracting from any commitments given to Pakistan becomes problematic at this stage. 

*At the same time, the Indian government has done nothing so far to sensitize domestic public opinion that such highly delicate discussions involving joint India-Pakistan governance of the Kashmir region have reached an advanced stage.* 

Thus, in a manner of speaking, with Holbrooke's arrival in the region this past week, the clock began ticking on the Kashmir issue. Pakistan will incrementally mount pressure that Obama must insist on India moving forward on a settlement of the Kashmir problem in the overall interests of peace and regional stability. 

And New Delhi will remain watchful. Holbrooke's visit to New Delhi on Monday was kept low-key. The Indian media fawned on any mid-level official calling from the Bush administration, but Holbrooke was tucked away as if under quarantine. And no wonder; there could be many among New Delhi's elite who feel nostalgic for the tranquility and predictability of the Bush era. 

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the same time, the Indian government has done nothing so far to sensitize domestic public opinion that such highly delicate discussions involving joint India-Pakistan governance of the Kashmir region have reached an advanced stage.


The point was discussed a bit back..http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/19471-settle-kashmir-get-reward-7.html

1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.

2.All three flags flown on public buildings.

3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.

4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.

5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towrds the sikh refugees to be resettled.

6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.

7.Merge the two police forces.

8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.

9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment

10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.

11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir parliment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

> In a sensational interview with India's top television personality, Karan Thapar, on Thursday night, Pakistan's former foreign minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri confirmed what many in New Delhi suspected, namely, that through back channel diplomacy, Islamabad and New Delhi had reached a broad understanding on contentious issues such as Sir Creek, Siachen and Kashmir as far back as two years ago.
> 
> The Indian prime minister was expected to visit Pakistan to conclude some of the agreements but the Indian side apparently began developing cold feet and it is "sheer bad luck", as Kasuri put it, that the momentum dissipated.
> 
> To quote Kasuri, "If the Prime Minister of India had come when we [Pakistan] thought he would, we would have actually signed it, and that would have created the right atmosphere for resolution of other disputes, particularly the issue of J&K [Jammu and Kashmir]. We needed the right atmosphere."



And once again, we see that the GoI just cannot act responsibly or in good faith to resolve the disputes that have bedeviled Indo-Pak realtions since 1947.

Nehru violated that trust in the fifties, and even now the GoI just cannot take that final step to conflict resolution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## metalfalcon

> The point was discussed a bit back..Settle Kashmir and Get the Reward!!!
> 
> 1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.
> 
> 2.All three flags flown on public buildings.
> 
> 3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.
> 
> 4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.
> 
> 5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towrds the sikh refugees to be resettled.
> 
> 6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.
> 
> 7.Merge the two police forces.
> 
> 8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.
> 
> 9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment
> 
> 10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.
> 
> 11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir parliment.



Very Interesting Points, But again Indian won't Like it. Pakistan is Ever ready for Kashmir and Kashmiri People.


----------



## RedBaron

Very interesting points...I would be interested in other precedents in history where such power-sharing has been successful. I suspect there are not many, because they are hard to structure, hard to administer. Just look at how complex the workings of the usual Indian or Pakistani State or provincial gov't is. Now this complexity will increase manifold if joint governance has to be implemented for Kashmir. Very difficult to implement, not practical, no precedence in history.

Another problem is both Pakistan and India have fragile democracies. In Pakistan it's due to Army influence, in India it's due to the nature of recent gov'ts which are coalition gov'ts. It's very hard for GoI to allow drastic concessions with nothing in return, it will be suicide for the party (or parties) involved. They will be labelled as the "party that lost Kashmir". 

Far easier is agreeing to the free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border, and increased commerce. Anything beyond that is not practical at this stage...


----------



## macintosh

India, Pakistan were close to signing an accord on Kashmir: Report 

Washington, Feb 22: Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf were close to signing an accord to end the decades-old conflict over Kashmir after three years of secret talks but failed to achieve the vital breakthrough, media reports here said. 

The peace initiative is described in an article by investigative journalist Steve Coll. Writing in the New Yorker magazine, Coll writes that the two sides had "come to semicolons" in their negotiations when the effort lost steam, the Washington Post said on Sunday. 

"The negotiations, which began in 2004, produced the outlines of an accord that would have allowed a gradual demilitarisation of the disputed Himalayan province, a flash point in relations between the rivals since 1947. 

"The effort stalled in 2007, and the prospects for a settlement were further undermined by deadly terrorist attacks on Mumbai in November," the Post said, quoting the New Yorker report. 

The attempt ultimately failed, not because of substantive differences, according to Coll, but because declining political fortunes left Musharraf without the clout he needed to sell the agreement at home. 

Although Musharraf fought for the deal - as did Manmohan Singh - he became so weakened politically that he "couldn't sell himself", let alone a surprise peace deal with Pakistan's longtime rival, Coll notes, quoting senior Pakistani and Indian officials. 

Musharraf resigned as president in August 2008. 

Coll, a former Washington Post managing editor who won a Pulitzer Prize in 2005 for his book "Ghost Wars", writes that the resolution of the Kashmir dispute was the cornerstone of a broad agreement that would have represented a "paradigm shift" in relations between India and Pakistan: a moving away from decades of hostility to acceptance and peaceful trade. 

The Post reports that under the plan, the Kashmir conflict would have been resolved through the creation of an autonomous region in which local residents could move freely and conduct trade on both sides of the territorial boundary. 

Over time, the border would become irrelevant, and declining violence would allow a gradual withdrawal of troops that now face one another across the mountain passes. 

"It was huge - I think it would have changed the basic nature of the problem," the New Yorker article quoted a senior Indian official as saying. "You would have then had the freedom to remake Indo-Pakistani relations." 

According to Coll's account, the secret negotiations consisted of about two dozen meetings in hotel rooms in various overseas locations. 

The sessions revolved around developing a document known as a 'non-paper', diplomatic term for a negotiated text that bears no names or signatures and can "serve as a deniable but detailed basis for a deal," the New Yorker article says. 

The US and British governments were aware of the talks and offered low-key support and advice but otherwise elected to let India and Pakistan settle their disputes unaided, Coll says. 

"Ultimately, any peace settlement would have to attract support in both countries' Parliaments; if it were seen as a product of American or British meddling, its prospects would be dim," Coll writes. 

The article portrays Musharraf as an enthusiastic supporter of the deal who succeeded in winning converts among Pakistan's sceptical military leadership. Yet, just as the two sides were beginning to consider how to sell the plan domestically, Musharraf was compelled to seek a delay. 

In March 2007, as New Delhi and Islamabad were discussing plans for a historic summit, Musharraf became embroiled in a controversy with his country's Supreme Court. He eventually sacked the chief justice, triggering weeks of protests by lawyers and activists. 

What was thought to be a temporary setback soon proved to be far more serious. "Rather than recovering, the General slipped into a political death spiral," culminating in his resignation, Coll said. 

India-Pakistan ties - and hopes for resuming the peace initiative - began a downward slide after Musharraf left office. In Kashmir, anti-India fighters began an aggressive campaign of public demonstrations and terrorist attacks that seemed designed, Coll writes, to send a message: "Musharraf is gone, but the Kashmir war is alive." 

The Post notes that in recent weeks, there have been signs of a modest thaw in India-Pakistan relations. 

Indian and Pakistani spy agencies have been cooperating secretly in India's investigation of the November 26 Mumbai terrorist attacks, sharing highly sensitive intelligence, with the CIA serving as arbiter and mediator, the Post said. 

Yet, in the emotionally charged aftermath of the attacks, Pakistan's new civilian-led government may not find it easy to return to negotiations on Kashmir, even if it wishes to, Coll said. 

"The military is completely on board at top levels -- with a paradigm shift, to see India as an opportunity, to change domestic attitudes," a senior Pakistani official was quoted as saying. But, he reportedly added, "The public mood is out of sync."


----------



## dabong1

RedBaron said:


> Very interesting points...I would be interested in other precedents in history where such power-sharing has been successful. I suspect there are not many, because they are hard to structure, hard to administer. Just look at how complex the workings of the usual Indian or Pakistani State or provincial gov't is. Now this complexity will increase manifold if joint governance has to be implemented for Kashmir. Very difficult to implement, not practical, no precedence in history....



The excuses can go on and on but with transparent negotiations between all the parties all problems can be solved.
Northern ireland being a good example and the devolution of scotland another where ideas could be copied to solve tricky problems.
The old west germany is another example of a country that was run by three nations.




RedBaron said:


> Another problem is both Pakistan and India have fragile democracies. In Pakistan it's due to Army influence, in India it's due to the nature of recent gov'ts which are coalition gov'ts. It's very hard for GoI to allow drastic concessions with nothing in return, it will be suicide for the party (or parties) involved....



A roadmap was laid out by clinton in which the pakistanis would first stop cross border movement and the indians would respond by opening road routes and increase of exhange of people ect and then joint control.
The kashmir "peace plan" has come to a halt wth indians not moving to the next phase in the plan and wanting to concerntrate on non kashmir issues like trade.
Pakistan has stopped the fighters crossing the LoC .....which is a major concession and in return they got a bus which is not good enough.




RedBaron said:


> They will be labelled as the "party that lost Kashmir". ...



Or they could be known as the party "that bought of peace and prosperity"



RedBaron said:


> Far easier is agreeing to the free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border, and increased commerce. Anything beyond that is not practical at this stage...



Your not even moving on the "free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border" with the excuse that they are all terrorist and ISI agents in disguise.
As i said from the start we can pull a hundred and one excuses not to do anything but we will be stuck in stalemate bleeding each other.
Before i came on this forum there was no way i would accept a joint governance plan for kashmir,it had to be part of pakistan and that was it.......but after reading the concerns of indians on the issue and there fears i have come to the conclusion that a joint set up running kashmir is the best option for a stable future.
Try to listen to my concerns as a pakistani and incorprate them into your thinking when we try to discuss coming to sort of settlement on the kashmir issue.

*1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.*

This will give power to the pak-indo govts to keep a check on kashmir and will increase understanding and cooperation between the two nations.
You might not want a pakistani as the president of "indian" kashmir for a year but do not forget that the "pakistani" kashmiris will have to be under a indian president also for a year.

*2.All three flags flown on public buildings.*

A nice fudging of the issue with the indian flag flying high in muzzafrabad alongside the pak and kashmir flag and vice versa the pakistani flag flying high in srinagar alongside the indo-kashmir flag.
At least when the army men on either side of the border said that there nations flag will be flying high on the other side they will be proved correct but not in they way the thought.


*3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.

4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.

6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.

9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment

10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.

11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir*

All the above are to do with letting indians know that issue of "secular" india and the fear that every other state in india will want to independent if the kashmiris get there way is put to rest.
The kashmiris hold indian passports,take part in indian state elections ect should be enough for the indians to keep thinking off them as "indian kashmiris".


*5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towards the sikh refugees to be resettled.*

We could use this issue to show the goodwill between the two nations and give a boost to the final settlement.


*7.Merge the two police forces.*

A way for the indians to keep a track on whats going on pak kashmir and vice versa......it will build trust as each can make sure that kashmir is not being used to undermine either nation.

*8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.*

Very easy to do.



We can either get on with it and move away from a fixed mindset and solve problems or carry on the way we have.
The pakistan govt i can assure you will sooner or later let the kashmiris re activate the training camps in AJK and start crossing the LoC if there is no movement on kashmir.....its not a threat but history telling us what will happen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RedBaron

dabong1 said:


> Northern ireland being a good example and the devolution of scotland another where ideas could be copied to solve tricky problems.
> The old west germany is another example of a country that was run by three nations.


- Kashmir is a tri-partite issue: Kashmir, Pakistan, India. N. Ireland and Scotland were both bilateral.
- The divisions are much deeper and older due to both nations being divided along religious lines.
- German joint governance by Allied forces was limited, and was a result of WWII. Berlin remained a divided city and Germany remained a divided country till unification. 
- I don't believe international borders changed in Scotland, N. Ireland.
I'm not saying a solution is impossible. Just that it will take longer, and it will need *stable *governments on both sides to work together.



dabong1 said:


> A roadmap was laid out by clinton in which the pakistanis would first stop cross border movement and the indians would respond by opening road routes and increase of exhange of people ect and then joint control.
> The kashmir "peace plan" has come to a halt wth indians not moving to the next phase in the plan and wanting to concerntrate on non kashmir issues like trade.


Was something signed, or was it a non-paper? Must have been before Kargil/coup/parliament attacks. Has there been even 5 years of peaceful stability without a crisis recently?



dabong1 said:


> Pakistan has stopped the fighters crossing the LoC .....which is a major concession and in return they got a bus which is not good enough.


Pakistan has no control over the fighters now as the Mumbai attacks prove. These guys openly trained, planned and executed the attack under GoP noses.
The bus...well you have to start somewhere, one cant throw open the borders from day 1. 



dabong1 said:


> Your not even moving on the "free movement of Kashmiris from either side of the border" *with the excuse that they are all terrorist and ISI agents in disguise.*


Is this the official GoI position?



dabong1 said:


> *The pakistan govt i can assure you will sooner or later let the kashmiris re activate the training camps in AJK and start crossing the LoC* if there is no movement on kashmir.....its not a threat but history telling us what will happen.


However you word it, this is a threat...and threats don't work. Its obvious training camps still exist in some shape or form, else Mumbai would not have happened. GoP has been running these camps for the last 20 years, if it wishes to continue the same route, GoI will just have to respond in a manner it sees fit.



dabong1 said:


> As i said from the start we can pull a hundred and one excuses not to do anything but we will be stuck in stalemate bleeding each other.
> Before i came on this forum there was no way i would accept a joint governance plan for kashmir,it had to be part of pakistan and that was it.......but after reading the concerns of indians on the issue and there fears i have come to the conclusion that a joint set up running kashmir is the best option for a stable future.
> Try to listen to my concerns as a pakistani and incorprate them into your thinking when we try to discuss coming to sort of settlement on the kashmir issue.


The opinions I've expressed are just mine, I can't and won't claim to represent Indian majority. I'm not against peace in Kashmir. Back in 2005, I would have carefully listened if GoI tried to "sell" me the roadmap that Kasuri discussed. I may even have voted for it.

Now, barely two months ago, I watched my beloved city held hostage by these mad-men who came from Pakistan. They planned, trained and jump-started their plan from LeT/JuD/LeJ (or whatever they call it today) camps in Pakistan. The cafes and hotels they attacked and killed people in cold blood were the very places I frequented as recently as last fall. So suddenly, this issue is now personal. Till the perpetrators of this attack (Lakhvi and Co.) are executed, and jail-time won't cut it, I'm asking my gov't to stand firm and not compromise. If GoI (Cong or the next one) talks peace before these guys are executed, I'm all for impeaching them. But again, that's just my personal view.


----------



## dabong1

RedBaron said:


> - Kashmir is a tri-partite issue: Kashmir, Pakistan, India. N. Ireland and Scotland were both bilateral...



Northern reland was the same with the british,irish and northern irish people involved in a dispute which needed three peoples to come to some sort of agreement.



RedBaron said:


> - - The divisions are much deeper and older due to both nations being divided along religious lines....



If you check you will find that the irish have been fighting the war against the british govt for hundreds of years and there "division was much deeper and older due to both nations being divided along religious lines"......why do you think millions of irish went to the US,the poatoe famine,the first slaves sent to work the plantations where irish ect.



RedBaron said:


> - - German joint governance by Allied forces was limited, and was a result of WWII. Berlin remained a divided city and Germany remained a divided country till unification.



But they where able to have joint governance being the point.



RedBaron said:


> - - I don't believe international borders changed in Scotland, N. Ireland..



If the right soultion can be found we dont have to change the border in kashmir.......make the border as irrelevant as internal EU borders.



RedBaron said:


> - I'm not saying a solution is impossible. Just that it will take longer, and it will need *stable *governments on both sides to work together..






RedBaron said:


> - Was something signed, or was it a non-paper? Must have been before Kargil/coup/parliament attacks. Has there been even 5years of peaceful stability without a crisis recently?..



Pakistan never signed anything with india saying it would stop cross border movement........as a pakistani i do find it starnge that everytime india has to move on the core issue something happens in india...terrorist attack ect



RedBaron said:


> - Pakistan has no control over the fighters now as the Mumbai attacks prove. These guys openly trained, planned and executed the attack under GoP noses...



Theres thousands of trained fighter that can called up and sent into kashmir in a matter of weeks if the Pak govt wanted.
When ever the indian army does something bad its also "a few rotton apples"....well use the same logic on the fighters........the majority follow orders but you will get a few that will do terrorist attacks the same way col prohbit does not represent the whole indian army.



RedBaron said:


> - The bus...well you have to start somewhere, one cant throw open the borders from day 1. ...



Maybe if pakistan had kept up the military pressure in kashmir with the fighters crossing in there hundreds and sent bus instead you would have taken that as bigger symbol of pakistan wanting peace?





RedBaron said:


> - However you word it, this is a threat...and threats don't work. Its obvious training camps still exist in some shape or form, else Mumbai would not have happened. GoP has been running these camps for the last 20 years, if it wishes to continue the same route, GoI will just have to respond in a manner it sees fit....



And we carry on the we have.




RedBaron said:


> - The opinions I've expressed are just mine, I can't and won't claim to represent Indian majority. I'm not against peace in Kashmir. Back in 2005, I would have carefully listened if GoI tried to "sell" me the roadmap that Kasuri discussed. I may even have voted for it.....







RedBaron said:


> - Now, barely two months ago, I watched my beloved city held hostage by these mad-men who came from Pakistan. They planned, trained and jump-started their plan from LeT/JuD/LeJ (or whatever they call it today) camps in Pakistan. The cafes and hotels they attacked and killed people in cold blood were the very places I frequented as recently as last fall. So suddenly, this issue is now personal. Till the perpetrators of this attack (Lakhvi and Co.) are executed, and jail-time won't cut it, I'm asking my gov't to stand firm and not compromise. If GoI (Cong or the next one) talks peace before these guys are executed, I'm all for impeaching them. But again, that's just my personal view.



I agree that these terrorist must be bought to justice and hanged but if no resoultion on kashmir is found these groups will always exist.
With kashmir solved will there be any need for LeT/JuD/LeJ to exist?

Just one more point.....its sad what happened in mumbai but the kashmirs have been living under the same conditions fear and bombings for decades.


----------



## RedBaron

dabong1 said:


> If the right soultion can be found we dont have to change the border in kashmir.......*make the border as irrelevant as internal EU borders.*


I heard this statement before, maybe from PM Singh...I love the idea because I've seen how beautifully it works during my frequent EU travels. 

Maybe some day Pakistani tourists can shop in Srinagar and I can plan a hike to K2 base camp, always loved K2. Everyone gains...

Provided all the i's are dotted and t's crossed to prevent any future back-tracking on the IB issue, and AFTER Mumbai perpetrators are toast, I may very well vote for such a plan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*India granted a lifeline after IHK polls: Omar*

* IHK CM says quick progress in Kashmir almost impossible in present scenario 
* New Delhi mistaken that Kashmir issue has dried down 
* Favours reviving non-paper Indo-Pak deal

NEW DELHI: India has been granted a lifeline after most Kashmiris voted in the landmark elections but the government must avoid complacency and intransigence if it is to bring peace to the region, Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) newly elected Chief Minister Omar Abdullah told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday. 

Terming this opportunity enormous, Abdullah said that a quick progress in the disputed Kashmir region would be almost impossible considering the prevailing economic crunch, a general election and the diplomatic aftermath of the Novembers Mumbai attacks. There is a bad timing and we should not underestimate the extent of the challenges we face, he added. 

The fact that the two-decade-old insurgency has waned should not be taken as an excuse to sit back, said Abdullah. He said New Delhi made a mistake of convincing itself that the Kashmir issue had dried down with a decrease in violence despite increase in terrorists. New Delhi has really been handed a lifeline through this election and they need to capitalise on that, said Abdullah.

Abdullah, 38, emerged as chief minister in the disputed region in January after his National Conference Party and Indias ruling Congress Party defied a separatist boycott to win the election and forge a coalition government. Many Kashmiris hoped that his victory could help end the conflict that had provoked two of the three Indo-Pak wars. 

Non-paper Indo-Pak deal: Abdullah felt there were signs of political will in New Delhi and hoped that secret talks between India and Pakistan that nearly led to a deal on Kashmir in 2007 could be revived. The deal, which was called a non-paper a diplomatic understanding that both sides need not sign, fell through and both sides have blamed each other for it. This non-paper was being circulated. It was autonomy, devolution and self-government. It basically meant that the central unit would have a little less control. Wed like to see this non-paper revived, he said..

Abdullah said it was almost impossible in his new job description not to offend either Kashmir or the rest of India, and his comments reflect his efforts to tread a fine line between the two. He criticised the killing of two Muslim youngsters on the weekend, which sparked street protests, in an incident blamed on the army, calling it a huge setback. He also blamed the Indian government for delays in granting visa to separatists leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooqs Kashmiri-origin American wife. 

Abdullah said the new state government was trying to get arrest orders issued last year against separatists rescinded. Any further move would come after general elections due by May, when he might talk to separatist parties for the first time since last years protests, he said.

To be honest with you I havent sent out any (feelers) and I dont think we will be sending out any until once weve got this parliament election out of the way, Abdullah added. reuters

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## maqbool

This has been taken from a BBC article that ran a couple of years ago.
Link is here:
BBC NEWS

Seems like Option 5 in which both India and Pakistan give up Kashmir, keep some (Gilgit, Baltistan for Pakistan, Jammu and Ladakh for India) and the pure Kashmiris get what they want (they better like it after all we've been through ;-))

Problem solved !


----------



## asq

if you are a good human you make peace.
if you are rotten you make excuses not peace
If you believe in justice, opportunities you cease
if disappointed you try to rid those with fixation decease
God only bless those souls who work diligently for peace.


----------



## Thebignag

Plebiscite - Is the key word. Pakistan has been rooting for Plebiscite since the UN resolution. In the last 60 years, India has been running scared of plebiscite, as JK is Muslim majority. As things stands today, the above scenario, may just turn on its head and India may actually root for plebiscite and Pakistan running scare.

Contrasts cant be starker, as things stands today. India, the largest secular democracy with the second largest Muslim population in the world and amongst the fasted growing economy offers better quality of life than any of Indias immediate neighbors. The younger generation, more modern and worldly wise, would prefer to live in a society, where they can exercise choice. Choose their government, choose their education, choose their professions and choose their religion and practice the same. Choose a way of life they want to live and need not live in fear of their life because they CHOOSE.

The power of To Choose is taken for granted in India. Many a time, we do not realize this power we exercise every day of our lives, in India. Indian Kashmiris, too exercise this power everyday of their lives. 

They are also aware that Indian security forces do not carry out Bomb Blasts in busy markets or go on random shooting at public places. Kashmiris are also aware that violence is not one sided. If one side is Indian Army, there should be the other side. They are also aware, that the other angle of violence, are carried out by as Pakistan says non-state actors, based, supported and protected by Pakistan. As Pakistani state policy. In spite of this long insurgency, Indian Kashmir is more developed than Pakisthani Kashmir. 

As things stands today in Pakistan, dont be surprise, if Kashrimis, exercise the power, they have got used to, in India, to choose. And choose a country with a bigger Muslim population, a country that guarantees practise of religion of choice and they way one chooses to practise, a country with sound education system, a country with government chosen by them, a country with functional judiciary system, a country with higher economic activity and growth, a country with vibrant free media, a country with stable democracy - India. 

Personally I am all for Plebiscite in Kashmir on both side of LOC


----------



## asq

Thebignag said:


> Plebiscite - Is the key word. Pakistan has been rooting for Plebiscite since the UN resolution. In the last 60 years, India has been running scared of plebiscite, as JK is Muslim majority. As things stands today, the above scenario, may just turn on its head and India may actually root for plebiscite and Pakistan running scare.
> 
> Contrasts cant be starker, as things stands today. India, the largest secular democracy with the second largest Muslim population in the world and amongst the fasted growing economy offers better quality of life than any of Indias immediate neighbors. The younger generation, more modern and worldly wise, would prefer to live in a society, where they can exercise choice. Choose their government, choose their education, choose their professions and choose their religion and practice the same. Choose a way of life they want to live and need not live in fear of their life because they CHOOSE.
> 
> The power of To Choose is taken for granted in India. Many a time, we do not realize this power we exercise every day of our lives, in India. Indian Kashmiris, too exercise this power everyday of their lives.
> 
> They are also aware that Indian security forces do not carry out Bomb Blasts in busy markets or go on random shooting at public places. Kashmiris are also aware that violence is not one sided. If one side is Indian Army, there should be the other side. They are also aware, that the other angle of violence, are carried out by as Pakistan says non-state actors, based, supported and protected by Pakistan. As Pakistani state policy. In spite of this long insurgency, Indian Kashmir is more developed than Pakisthani Kashmir.
> 
> As things stands today in Pakistan, dont be surprise, if Kashrimis, exercise the power, they have got used to, in India, to choose. And choose a country with a bigger Muslim population, a country that guarantees practise of religion of choice and they way one chooses to practise, a country with sound education system, a country with government chosen by them, a country with functional judiciary system, a country with higher economic activity and growth, a country with vibrant free media, a country with stable democracy - India.
> 
> Personally I am all for Plebiscite in Kashmir on both side of LOC



Without an Indian hindu there I have talked to many Muslims from India, they say it when no Hindus is there that they live in hell as Muslims in India, also don't tell me about quantity of Muslims, tell me about quality of life they have, many young Muslims are killed for speaking Urdu and are kept from jobs by discrimination, but than India is a racist country. What can one expect, it has its one dolits who are treated worse than animals as animals have respect but not people in India.


----------



## shrivatsa

asq said:


> Without an Indian hindu there I have talked to many Muslims from India, they say it when no Hindus is there that they live in hell as Muslims in India, also don't tell me about quantity of Muslims, tell me about quality of life they have, many young Muslims are killed for speaking Urdu and are kept from jobs by discrimination, but than India is a racist country. What can one expect, it has its one dolits who are treated worse than animals as animals have respect but not people in India.



how true,did u explain to them that how pakistan is heaven for muslims,where shias and sunnis are leaving so peacfully without fear of evil hindus except on some ocasions where bomb may explode killing few but thats acceptable because you are killed by your own muslim brothern not by hindus and calling urdu speaking people muhajir is not racist,and how sharia (talibani) law is spreding making pakistan truly islamic nation.and there is no dicrimination between muhajirs,phaktuns,sindhis and all.


----------



## asq

shrivatsa said:


> how true,did u explain to them that how pakistan is heaven for muslims,where shias and sunnis are leaving so peacfully without fear of evil hindus except on some ocasions where bomb may explode killing few but thats acceptable because you are killed by your own muslim brothern not by hindus and calling urdu speaking people muhajir is not racist,and how sharia (talibani) law is spreding making Pakistan truly Islamic nation.and there is no dicrimination between muhajirs,phaktuns,sindhis and all.



Nothing is compared with destruction of Babri mosque and and thousand more destroyed mosque, nothing is as serious as killing in Gujarat, nothings is as serious as no jobs for Muslims, specially in Army, u tell me there are 20&#37; Muslims in India what percentage is in the Army, not even 2%.

So do not go comparing Muslims in Pakistan with Muslims in India, Let me tell u the truth is that we the middle of the road Muslims condemn the attack in Pakistan on any group of people, do you.

Have u ever or any of u ever condemn killing of innocent in kashmiris, but you jump on Pakistan for these problems we have, India is to be blamed for all this as it being party continues killings of kashmiris creates monsters in Pakistan who's friends and family has been killed and raped ( by the way they raped 70 years old woman) by Indian Army and they in turn get raving mad and attack India, why don't you stop all that killing and come to term about atrocities in kashmir and do the justice for kashmiris.

http://kashmir-truth-be-told.blogspot.com/2009/02/13-days-to-justice.html


----------



## Gabbar

> thousand more destroyed mosque



*Whed did this happen? asq please provide some links to this or stop trolling.*


----------



## asq

Gabbar said:


> *Whed did this happen? asq please provide some links to this or stop trolling.*



Since the independence lots of Mosques have been demolished and abandoned due threats by your extremists, but do not evade the question i asked, what percentage of Muslims in Indian Army. And in the Goi jobs.

Donot pick and choose either answer all or say nothing.

Only asking questions and not giving answer to the other quiries, ignoring the question that go against you guys.


----------



## shrivatsa

asq said:


> Nothing is compared with destruction of Babri mosque and and thousand more destroyed mosque, nothing is as serious as killing in Gujarat, nothings is as serious as no jobs for Muslims, specially in Army, u tell me there are 20% Muslims in India what percentage is in the Army, not even 2%.
> 
> So do not go comparing Muslims in Pakistan with Muslims in India, Let me tell u the truth is that we the middle of the road Muslims condemn the attack in Pakistan on any group of people, do you.
> 
> Have u ever or any of u ever condemn killing of innocent in kashmiris, but you jump on Pakistan for these problems we have, India is to be blamed for all this as it being party continues killings of kashmiris creates monsters in Pakistan who's friends and family has been killed and raped ( by the way they raped 70 years old woman) by Indian Army and they in turn get raving mad and attack India, why don't you stop all that killing and come to term about atrocities in kashmir and do the justice for kashmiris.
> 
> Kashmir Truth Be Told Blog: 13 days to justice - They have done it before



yes i condemn killing of innocent civilians but not terrorists.in last week alone two mosques have been bombed killing more then 100 civilians by terrorists in Pakistan.Yes babri was a mistake but again Muslims themselves in Pakistan have destroyed more mosques.You talk about Kashmir do you know how Kashmir pandits were killed by your freedom fighters.have you condemned these killings.
Kashmir Information Network (KIN): A Paradise Turned into Hell


----------



## Thebignag

asq said:


> Without an Indian hindu there I have talked to many Muslims from India, they say it when no Hindus is there that they live in hell as Muslims in India, also don't tell me about quantity of Muslims, tell me about quality of life they have, many young Muslims are killed for speaking Urdu and are kept from jobs by discrimination, but than India is a racist country. What can one expect, it has its one dolits who are treated worse than animals as animals have respect but not people in India.



*Perception is reality* But, it need not be the truth. Many Indian will tell you that they live in Hell and want a better life. This feeling is not religious specific. A Christian or a Muslim or a Hindu in the same social strata, economic activity and income level will have similar observation. 

An Indian, who has migrated to west or an economic migrant to a country with higher level of income and better governance, irrespective of their religious orientations, will tell you that. Nothing extraordinary about a Muslim telling you that. 

Never ever I have come across an incident when some one is killed because he speaks Urdu!! Its ridiculous. Urdu is not religion specific language. Urdu evolved in the Bazzars of this subcontinent with the advent of Mughals. 

Dalits life being miserable  There is some truth. Even with Governments proactive policies, we have not been able to evolve into an egalitarian society. 

But, hey, the CM of the largest state, Uttar Pradesh is a Dalit. Yes they are slowly asserting the just position in Indian society. But, remember, they are guaranteed their rights as equals in the Indian society. 

India do ot have a monolithic society. There are no one thing that is common throughout the country. We are a multi racial, multi cultural, multi religious diverse society. Bound by the idea - Indian-ness. An idea which emulates from the knowledge that we irrespective of our difference in race, religion etc, are sons of a continuous culture which is over 5000 years old. 

A society, which is open to evolve, a people, which accepted and assimilated amongst their own, the Jews from Iraq, the Parsis from Iran, The Christians from Syria and the Muslims. 

As you mention, you had spoken to Indian Muslims, alone, in the absence of Hindus, next time you have a change ask them if they can choose their representative in the government, without fear or enticement. If they can carry a Tazia procession in India, without the fear of being attacked by Hindus or Muslims. If they face fair competitions from other religious groups to get admission to Indias premier educational institute. Ask, if they are profiled as Hindus or Muslims, anywhere and if any of them has face the same, anytime in their life. Ask If they have to mention their religion for any business of the state. 

My friend!  Perception is Reality, but need not be the truth If you are strong enough, then ask and ask loudly in Pakistani society  India and Pakistan were born at the same time of the same people then why does India have had successful democratic Government in the last 60 years with peacefull transfer of power, through elections and the opposite in Pakistan? 

Why does more Muslims being killed by Muslims in Pakistan than the total numbers of Indian citizen being killed? 

Why have, assault rifles become toys for all and sundry in a civil society where as in India a top Cine star has to go to jail, just to have acquired one? Do not put the blame on others. 

*If you are paying the price than you are responsible for not stopping it *

*The enemy is within. Not India.*


----------



## asq

Thebignag said:


> &#8220;*Perception is reality*&#8221; But, it need not be the truth. Many Indian will tell you that they live in Hell and want a better life. This feeling is not religious specific. A Christian or a Muslim or a Hindu in the same social strata, economic activity and income level will have similar observation.
> 
> An Indian, who has migrated to west or an economic migrant to a country with higher level of income and better governance, irrespective of their religious orientations, will tell you that. Nothing extraordinary about a Muslim telling you that.
> 
> Never ever I have come across an incident when some one is killed because he speaks Urdu!! It&#8217;s ridiculous. Urdu is not religion specific language. Urdu evolved in the Bazzars of this subcontinent with the advent of Mughals.
> 
> Dalit&#8217;s life being miserable &#8211; There is some truth. Even with Government&#8217;s proactive policies, we have not been able to evolve into an egalitarian society.
> 
> But, hey, the CM of the largest state, Uttar Pradesh is a Dalit. Yes they are slowly asserting the just position in Indian society. But, remember, they are guaranteed their rights as equals in the Indian society.
> 
> India do ot have a monolithic society. There are no &#8220;one thing&#8221; that is common throughout the country. We are a multi racial, multi cultural, multi religious diverse society. Bound by the idea - &#8220;Indian-ness&#8221;. An idea which emulates from the knowledge that we irrespective of our difference in race, religion etc, are sons of a continuous culture which is over 5000 years old.
> 
> A society, which is open to evolve, a people, which accepted and assimilated amongst their own, the Jews from Iraq, the Parsis from Iran, The Christians from Syria and the Muslims.
> 
> As you mention, you had spoken to Indian Muslims, alone, in the absence of Hindus, next time you have a change ask them if they can choose their representative in the government, without fear or enticement. If they can carry a &#8220;Tazia&#8221; procession in India, without the fear of being attacked by Hindus or Muslims. If they face fair competitions from other religious groups to get admission to India&#8217;s premier educational institute. Ask, if they are profiled as Hindus or Muslims, anywhere and if any of them has face the same, anytime in their life. Ask If they have to mention their religion for any business of the state&#8230;.
> 
> My friend! &#8220; Perception is Reality, but need not be the truth&#8221; If you are strong enough, then ask and ask loudly in Pakistani society &#8211; India and Pakistan were born at the same time of the same people then why does India have had successful democratic Government in the last 60 years with peacefull transfer of power, through elections and the opposite in Pakistan?
> 
> Why does more Muslims being killed by Muslims in Pakistan than the total numbers of Indian citizen being killed?
> 
> Why have, assault rifles become toys for all and sundry in a civil society where as in India a top Cine star has to go to jail, just to have acquired one? Do not put the blame on others.
> 
> *If you are paying the price than you are responsible for not stopping it&#8230; *
> 
> *The enemy is within. Not India.*



One of your Chanel I saw the reporter saying that one Muslim Kid was killed and they went to his home, his father was very subdued, talking very humbly not furious, humbly, I got the impression that now he is scared if he talked aggressively eveb though his kid was killed. I wish i had copied it kept it, but y u guys donot beliefve anyway, cause u just want to argue.

as i said that i have talked to many Muslims from Indian privately they say the same thing, living in hell, and u guys do not believe me, so there u go, there is no peace because of u guys never accepting that u makes blunders, u did by taking Kashmir, u did by taking Hyderabad forcibly, junagarh and many Punjab areas, it was a conspiracy set to undermines Muslims, and how it happened is that Mr. Nehru had extra marital affair with the wife of the viceroy, it is a common knowledge. Making a country by hook or by crook, mostly by crook. 

Now u say it was a mistake to destroy Babri mosque, it has been 10 years, what have u done about it, just talk, very clever.

In every discussion u guys talk a storm, but have not shown in actions, just lots of talk.
On the other hand Pakistanis are ever so willing to accept the problem and try to look into it. All the problems stem from Kashmir and acting for west to fight in Afghanistan against Russian invasion as asked by our allies. Indian society evolves into killing innocents, U talk about Indian evolving, on other breath u guys say India is the oldest civilization of about 10,000 years, Tell me during the rule of Muslims did they kill Hindus, i know u will say yes, how come than there are more Hindus than Muslims in India today, if what u say is right, look at North America, there were millions of Indians in it, but by 18th century they were only saveral hundred thousand, not like India where there are more Hindus than Muslims.

first we were asked to fight Russian using Religious overtones to get people fighting nonbelievers, than those who fought called Mujaheddin at the time were than called Taliban and they fought Russians, than they became enemies and the ones they fought Northern Alliance was chosen to be the leaders in Afghanistan, how would those Mujaheddin feel if u use them and than leave them to the mercy of those they fought for u. 

even than Pakistan agreed to go after them for what we were led to believe they did, no evidence presented, just asked to go after those who fought Russians for u. And like good friends we did what we were asked to do, In doing so we created animosity from those who felt they been used and than thrown to the wolves.

there are also American made videos questioning the 9/!1, Now we are here in 2009 and are hoping that a just solutions to all these problems is found and implemented not by force, but by negotiations, since war has never solved any problem, only discussions have. 
Those elements who refuse to take part in discussion will than be dealt with as per the decisions of those discussing the solution. 

This is true both for Kashmir, for Middle east and for Afghanistan.

May Almighty god help humans to understand and act civilized humans. Ameen

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=9&#37;2F11+videos&emb=0#

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=9/11+videos&emb=0#


----------



## Thebignag

asq said:


> _One of your Chanel I saw the reporter saying that one Muslim Kid was killed and they went to his home, his father was very subdued, talking very humbly not furious, humbly, I got the impression that now he is scared if he talked aggressively eveb though his kid was killed. I wish i had copied it kept it, but y u guys donot beliefve anyway, cause u just want to argue._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dear ASQ,
> 
> I went through your comments. There are many histories and many truths. I will not be able to convince you either way. But, it will be prudent to recognize the current facts and happenings, as it is. For whatever reason and howsoever it may be justified, the fact remains that Non-State Actors have been used by Pakistan against Soviets in Afghanistan and subsequently in Kashmir, which still goes on.
> 
> Whether one prefers to call these elements freedom fighter of terrorist is immaterial at this moment. The fact remains that these elements are armed with sophisticated weaponry and targets unarmed civilians. Earlier, the heat was faced by only India, and today Pakistan too is in their target.
> 
> Today India is in a better position than Pakistan because, they are not our citizen and only thing India needs to do is guard its boarders. But, for Pakistan, they exist in the society.
> 
> Blame game can go on, my friend, but, the fact remains that they are changing your country and your way of life.
> 
> They are shooting, bombing and beheading your compatriots into toeing their line  a way of life which leads to stone age.
> 
> All we need to be is prudent. Blame India, Blame US, blame, whosoever you want to. But the fact remains that these are your citizen. The fact remains that they are killing your compatriots. The fact remains that they are heavily armed. The fat remains that they are stealing your country right before your eyes, while the blame game continue.
> 
> Be Prudent, my friend. Recognize the threat that is staring at you, right in front. Ameen.


----------



## asq

Thebignag said:


> asq said:
> 
> 
> 
> _One of your Chanel I saw the reporter saying that one Muslim Kid was killed and they went to his home, his father was very subdued, talking very humbly not furious, humbly, I got the impression that now he is scared if he talked aggressively eveb though his kid was killed. I wish i had copied it kept it, but y u guys donot beliefve anyway, cause u just want to argue._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dear ASQ,
> 
> I went through your comments. There are many histories and many truths. I will not be able to convince you either way. But, it will be prudent to recognize the current facts and happenings, as it is. For whatever reason and howsoever it may be justified, the fact remains that &#8220;Non-State Actors&#8221; have been used by Pakistan against Soviets in Afghanistan and subsequently in Kashmir, which still goes on.
> 
> Whether one prefers to call these elements freedom fighter of terrorist is immaterial at this moment. The fact remains that these elements are armed with sophisticated weaponry and targets unarmed civilians. Earlier, the heat was faced by only India, and today Pakistan too is in their target.
> 
> Today India is in a better position than Pakistan because, they are not our citizen and only thing India needs to do is guard it&#8217;s boarders. But, for Pakistan, they exist in the society.
> 
> Blame game can go on, my friend, but, the fact remains that they are changing your country and your way of life.
> 
> They are shooting, bombing and beheading your compatriots into toeing their line &#8211; a way of life which leads to stone age.
> 
> All we need to be is prudent. Blame India, Blame US, blame, whosoever you want to. But the fact remains that these are your citizen. The fact remains that they are killing your compatriots. The fact remains that they are heavily armed. The fat remains that they are stealing your country right before your eyes, while the blame game continue.
> 
> Be Prudent, my friend. Recognize the threat that is staring at you, right in front. Ameen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So stop interfering into Pakistan and stop drone attacks and stop Indians Raw from interfering in North and in Baluchistan, listen to the grievances of Kashmiris, and U.N. should listen to the grievances of Palestinians. In the international court and U.N. the divisions/resolutions are passed, implement them, Only country like Indian and Israel does not implement those, why is that these two countries claim the democracy as if they own it but they do not own to the laws of the world.
> 
> We said that we will take care of the threat, but you donot listen, do your part honestly and we will do ours, we have been doing it by killing 10,000 of these e,lements and in doind so 5000 of our soldiers have become Shaheeds, My friend, please, please please please please please honestly do your part and stop interfring and listen to the facts and believe it when we tell you we are doing it. so stop beating around the bush and listen carefully. Do the honest thing if u want peace than listen we know what to do, but stop interfering and apply U.N. resolutions both on u and Israel and all other, if some does not aplly these resolutions, than those country's membership should be canceled from U.N.
> 
> Let me mention here, when something happens in Pakistan, it is blown out of proportion, but if same thing happens in Indian it is covered up.
> 
> Watch two videos, one from Pakistan which has been shown in every paper in the world, but one from India is not. WHY. THERE IS SYSTEMIC CONSPIRACY GOING ON, i ASK ALL U TO STOP IT. IT IS APPARENT THAT BOTH VIDEOS ARE SICKENING, BUT PAKISTANI VIDEOS IS SHOWN ALL OVER THE WORLD. WHY???????????????
> 
> The only difference is that in your country it is done officially as it is the case in kashmir and in Pakistan some bad elements are doing it.We will stop them, but u do your duty and stop it in kasshmir, apply un resolutions and act like a big brother and not like big wolf.
> 
> In India.
> 
> iOeisUNwsTU[/media] - police in India mercilessly beat six-year-old girl (In Hindi/Urdu)
> 
> 
> In Pakistan.
> 
> Video: radicals beat girl, 17, in Islamic stronghold of Swat, Pakistan - Times Online
Click to expand...


----------



## Xeric

i have already given these options back in '08.

See if that can also facilitate the discussion. They have more details as regards to the options available. But they are only five.

Atleast it would bring the discussion back to the topic 

P.S.And i hope Bezerk will not mind . Thnx Bez for giving another chance to discuss such and important issue.

Here's the link.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/154781-post93.html



enigma947 said:


> I think the following are the options available to us to get the Kashmir Issue solved...you may like to add more..
> 
> *OPTIONS FOR THE SOLUTION OF KASHMIR PROBLEM*
> The options for solution, discussed in succeeding paragraphs, offer ample food for thought to the concerned parties. They are not absolute in nature and will generate varying responses from different quarters. However, these should be seriously viewed as one of them would eventually become the reality.
> 
> 
> *# Option 1 &#8211; Plebiscite Option*. Accession of entire Kashmir to India or Pakistan through the right of self determination by the Kashmiris on both sides of LOC, as stipulated in UN resolutions.
> 
> a.	*Consequences for Pakistan*
> > Sole option recorded with the UN, which had the consent of both India and Pakistan when formulated.
> > Upholds the official position of Pakistan.
> > Will be in line with the partition plan thus fulfilling the aspirations of people of Pakistan and Muslims of Kashmiris.
> > The possible accession of Kashmir to Pakistan can remove her strategic vulnerabilities, besides offering security to the Silk Route between China and Pakistan.
> > Plebiscite proposal is in sympathy with the historic aspects also, as Bengal and Punjab got divided on this basis.
> > Accession of Kashmir will tremendously boost the economy of Pakistan.
> > Will remove the economical and military vulnerabilities of Pakistan forever by putting the rivers flowing through Kashmir under the control of Pakistan.
> > Will help to create a balance of power in the presence of already estb nuclear parity in the region in case Kashmiris opt for Pakistan.
> > Demographic changes in Indian Held Kashmir and use of force by India may tilt the opinion of the majority in favour of India which will further weaken Pakistan. In case of its materialization, it also entails that:-
> > Pakistan will have to loose AJ&K, Baltistan, Gilgit (Northern Areas).
> > Pakistan will be deprived of its only land link &#8211; the Silk Route, to China; her only traditional ally in the region.
> > Pakistan&#8217;s economy and defense will be sooner in shambles by India having the control of all the rivers flowing through Kashmir and Northern Areas.
> > It may also result in large scale communal disturbances and riots destabilizing the whole region.
> > Will establish Indian hegemony in the region beyond doubt.
> > The proposal may require the demilitarization of the whole state: to be placed under UN troops for some time.
> > Plebiscite may also entail certain rehabilitations and border adjustment problems.
> 
> *b. Consequences for India*
> > In the prospect of Kashmir&#8217;s accession to Pakistan India will be deprived of entire state.
> > Indians authorities are firmly of the opinion that giving Kashmir the right of self determination, let alone its accession to Pakistan in the wake of any such exercise, will spark off similar demands from other states of India thus threatening the very integrity of Indian Union.
> > In case India is successful to manipulate the plebiscite, the problem will still not be solved due to resistance of Muslim population.
> > In case of Kashmir going to India, the already disturbed balance of power will tilt in favour of India permanently.
> 
> 
> *# Option 2 - Partition Option.* Division of Kashmir along Muslim /non-Muslim majority areas. In practical terms, it would mean; accession of Northern Areas, Kashmir valley, Azad Kashmir and Muslim majority areas of Jammu with Pakistan and Laddakh and Hindu majority areas of Jammu with India:-
> *a.	Consequence for Pakistan*
> > Pakistan would retain Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas and also acquire additional territory in Kashmir valley, Northern Areas and Jammu district.
> > From defense point of view, it will result into a stronger Pakistan.
> > Pakistan&#8217;s strategic vulnerabilities will also be addressed to a certain extent.
> > Valley and other fertile areas coming to Pakistan will strengthen Pakistan&#8217;s economy.
> > Link with China will be maintained.
> > A sizeable population in Pakistan and Kashmir will oppose it as in reality; it will be a step back from the original position from Pakistan&#8217;s view point.
> > The chances of future escalation between Pakistan and can not be ruled out permanently.
> 
> *b.	Consequences for India*
> > India will have to give a portion of area under her Control to Pakistan and this could result into similar Kind of reaction from Indian population as in case of Kashmir&#8217;s accession to Pakistan as a result of Plebiscite.
> > All the disadvantages of Kashmir&#8217;s accession to Pakistan (in case of plebiscite) are applicable in this Option to a certain extent.
> 
> 
> *# Option 3 - Independent Kashmir Option. *  It envisages an independent and sovereign state consisting of all parts of Jammu & Kashmir. This option is being very vigorously propagated by Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) and has also found favour in some western countries. Implications of this proposal are:-
> 
> *a.	Implications For Pakistan*
> > In case this option is coupled with plebiscite option, it will divide the Muslim votes into three choices; accession to Pakistan, accession to India or Independent Kashmir. Whereas non-Muslim Votes are likely to be caste in India&#8217;s favour. This may ultimately tilt the result of plebiscite in favour of India thus paving the way for Kashmir&#8217;s accession to India.
> > It would further accentuate the strategic vulnerabilities of Pakistan both in economic and military terms.
> > Pakistan will have to give up not only AJ&K but also Northern Areas.
> > Hindu population is likely to start the movement for integration of Hindu majority areas with India.
> > Negates the very basic nature of Indian Independence Act.
> > May be accepted by India as a &#8220;worst case scenario&#8221;.
> > Pakistan will come under greatest pressure, it wills not only have to loose AJ&K and Northern Areas but also the Mangla Dam (situated in areas of AJ&K) and thus the future of the water of Rivers Jhelum and Chenab (flowing from Kashmir) will become uncertain.
> 
> *b.	Implications for India*
> > India will have to loose both Jammu and Laddakh.
> > It may result into similar demands from other former princely states also.
> > The Hindu population in the state will be left without any safeguards.
> 
> *c.	Viability of an Independent Kashmir.* It will also be not out of place to analyse the viability of Independent Kashmir:-
> > Independent Kashmir without solid economic aid from outside is not feasible.
> > Kashmir will be land locked country and it will have to have equal relations with both India and Pakistan. In addition, there is a very strong likelihood of an independent Kashmir becoming a hot bed of International intrigue.
> > In its historical background also, it is divorced from and an affront to the history and realities of the problem.
> > The demographic realities are also diametrically opposed to the idea of independence especially in the absence of a movement for independence in Jammu, Laddakh, Northern Areas of Pakistan and AJ&K.
> 
> 
> *# Option 4 &#8211; Converting LOC Into Border.* Present LOC becoming the international border with some minor adjustments. The idea has been proposed by India many times but rejected by Pakistan. The implications are:-
> *a.	Implications For Pakistan*
> > The proposal ignores the ground realities, since de-facto partition in vogue has been equivocally rejected by the people of Kashmir.
> > Amounts to compromising the principled stand on Kashmir for almost 55 years, besides betrayal to the Kashmiri struggle.
> > It would leave a large Muslim dominated territory in Indian Control. Similarly, Pakistan&#8217;s strategic vulnerabilities will not be addressed.
> > Pakistan&#8217;s economy and defense capability will always be under a constant threat.
> > Kashmir problem will continue to linger on constantly being a threat to the security of the region.
> 
> *b.	Implications For India.*
> India will be at a much advantageous position in case this option materializes as she has the control of more than 65&#37; area of the state besides establishing her hegemonic role in the region beyond doubt.
> 
> 
> *# Option 5 &#8211; Military Option (War With India).* There are certain groups in Pakistan who favour this option. However, it is neither in Pakistan&#8217;s interest nor Kashmiris, that their struggle for self determination should be side tracked by Indo-Pak war. Implications of this option are:-
> > The Kashmir struggle would go in the back ground.
> > It could lead to nuclear confrontation between the two Countries.
> > Pakistan&#8217;s economy does not warrant under taking this option.
> > Indians may prevail due to their long hold in held Kashmir and military might.
> > Pakistan would be condemned internationally for initiating the war. Hence, whatever support we have mustered so far would be lost.
> 
> 
> *Recommended Option*
> 
> The only viable option in light of above study is the &#8220;Plebiscite Option&#8221;. A UN supervised plebiscite in the state to determine the will of Kashmiri people is the only way to decide the question of state&#8217;s final accession. South Asia today stands on the precipice of a nuclear catastrophe. Let the international community assert its will through the UN to find a lasting solution to the dispute.


----------



## ejaz007

*Next US envoy to India may talk about Kashmir*

* Roemer has written that US strategy in Pakistan should be result-oriented

Daily Times Monitor 

LAHORE: US President Barack Obamas ambassadorial pick for New Delhi, Tim Roemer, is likely to bring the Kashmir baggage with him, a Times of India report said on Tuesday. 

Roemer, a think-tank security analyst, appears to have a great deal of familiarity with Pakistan. The danger of this, the report says, is that he may be encouraged to view India through the Islamabad lens. He could also have an uphill task trying to engage with an India that believes it has shrugged off the old hyphenation with Pakistan. 

Given Roemers knowledge of the terrorism problem, Indian diplomats said off the record they were not worried that the new ambassador would blame New Delhi for the break in talks with Pakistan. 

Result-oriented: In 2008 Roemer wrote in The Huffington Post, In regards to Pakistan, the US must embark on an invigorated three-part strategy. First, we must encourage and support the building of sustainable institutions and enhancing the power of Pakistani civil society. Next, we must engage in tougher and smarter diplomacy to enhance our power in the region, especially when it comes to stemming the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)-related technology and weapons proliferation. Lastly, we must impose a more results-oriented system of military aid to ensure that in providing funding, we are not degrading our own efforts in the region.

According to the report, Roemer is known for his views supporting an international diplomatic effort to resolve the Kashmir dispute and resolve regional tensions, but he remains equally concerned about the safety of Islamabads nuclear weapons.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Gabbar

> Since the independence lots of Mosques have been demolished and abandoned due threats by your extremists, but do not evade the question i asked, what percentage of Muslims in Indian Army. And in the Goi jobs.



Do you really want to go back to history? Why only 6 decades, why not the since the time of Moguls? Babur and Aurunzeb destoyed thousands of temples, what about that? Percentage of muslims was already discused.

Click on this link: http://www.defence.pk/forums/current-events-social-issues/20068-iaf-bans-beards-muslims.html



> Donot pick and choose either answer all or say nothing.
> Only asking questions and not giving answer to the other quiries, ignoring the question that go against you guys.



Rest of your post is nothing more than verbal blah... 
Many indian posters have condemed the killing of inocent kashmires. But you guys evern lable terrotists innocent kashmiries, we are not going to condem that. I am glad Indian army is killing those pigs who are crossing the LOC to kill people. Are there bad potatoes in Indian army? Yes, and they should be punished and many have been courtmasheled.


----------



## Gabbar

> Let me mention here, when something happens in Pakistan, it is blown out of proportion, but if same thing happens in Indian it is covered up.



You are compairing few policemens to Taliban? Taliban video was symbolic to parrallel justice system within Pakistan. I have seen in person where a policeman hit a kid. Is it sick? yes but it's not a parralel justice system to Indian constitution.
As far as out of proportion thing is concerned, it would be good question for International media.



> Watch two videos, one from Pakistan which has been shown in every paper in the world, but one from India is not. WHY. THERE IS SYSTEMIC CONSPIRACY GOING ON, i ASK ALL U TO STOP IT. IT IS APPARENT THAT BOTH VIDEOS ARE SICKENING, BUT PAKISTANI VIDEOS IS SHOWN ALL OVER THE WORLD. WHY???????????????



It's not conspiracy mate. News is about ratings and few bad Indian policemen are not going to create same ratings as Taliban. Taliban is in the thick of things as far as War on terrore is concerned, it is obious to get more attention.


----------



## Rajkumar

Dear asq,
let me tell few facts which will clear fog from your mind

1. India will never give up Kashmir no matter how many war need to fought with pakistan or any body and terror trick will not do any good to accomplish this. plebicite will never be allowed untill india get conviced that *majority * is with Indian side. so cry in UN as much you want and even international pressure can't do any good.

2. believe it or not, Pakistan is disintegrating so you need remove the denial mode and do something about it.

3. Indian muslims and other minority know they are part of india and walls religions are falling day by day with economic development so 'gujrat' or 'shrine land' case will reduce grdually and disappear.

4. pakistan and india can prosper together with rapid rate if pak leave their kashmir agenda and concentrate on their economic development. 
imagine pak announces Kashmir as a part of india and stop terror, believe me pak will get help from all over the world especially from india to become a developed nation. and nobody can stop you.

i know lot of members gonna be really angry on me but this is reality which cannot be denied.


----------



## godsavetheworld

ejaz007 said:


> *Next US envoy to India may talk about Kashmir*
> 
> * Roemer has written that US strategy in Pakistan should be result-oriented
> 
> Daily Times Monitor
> 
> LAHORE: US President Barack Obamas ambassadorial pick for New Delhi, Tim Roemer, is likely to bring the Kashmir baggage with him, a Times of India report said on Tuesday.
> 
> Roemer, a think-tank security analyst, appears to have a great deal of familiarity with Pakistan. The danger of this, the report says, is that he may be encouraged to view India through the Islamabad lens. He could also have an uphill task trying to engage with an India that believes it has shrugged off the old hyphenation with Pakistan.
> 
> Given Roemers knowledge of the terrorism problem, Indian diplomats said off the record they were not worried that the new ambassador would blame New Delhi for the break in talks with Pakistan.
> 
> Result-oriented: In 2008 Roemer wrote in The Huffington Post, In regards to Pakistan, the US must embark on an invigorated three-part strategy. First, we must encourage and support the building of sustainable institutions and enhancing the power of Pakistani civil society. Next, we must engage in tougher and smarter diplomacy to enhance our power in the region, especially when it comes to stemming the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)-related technology and weapons proliferation. Lastly, we must impose a more results-oriented system of military aid to ensure that in providing funding, we are not degrading our own efforts in the region.
> 
> According to the report, Roemer is known for his views supporting an international diplomatic effort to resolve the Kashmir dispute and resolve regional tensions, but he remains equally concerned about the safety of Islamabads nuclear weapons.
> 
> Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan



Same thing happened when Holbrooke was chosen as the special envoy. India has made it very clear, its our way or the highway.



> Given Roemers knowledge of the terrorism problem, Indian diplomats said off the record they were not worried that the new ambassador would blame New Delhi for the break in talks with Pakistan.



Well if he really has a great knowledge about terrorism in the subcontinent, he wont ever accuse India. Both Mulford and Roemer come from the same part of the world, representing same governments, and hence the same agenda.


----------



## maverick2009

I think Kashmir issue will resolve itself in time. My reasons are listed below. 

Pakistan to survive as a independent state needs to stabilise its economy and political set up. Reduce the influence of the military and look to develope its economy for the good of 160m pakistanis. Pakistan must come first. Today india is not the main danger to this nation. Its the different religous and political factions within. 

Secondly war is becoming increasingly less likely. India will continue to grow in terms of industrial strength and this will in time increase the relative disparity esp in conventional military power. Just see how quickly the indian navy in particluar will grow in size and power projection in next decade. Nuclear weapons on both sides will prevent a major war.

Unless Pakistan drops USA completely i can see Pakistan being influenced by the USA with various incentives to accept LOC as long term solution to peace in this region. India will have more clout i would be very surprised if USA and UN insisted on a plebicite. You can,t force a independent country to give up Land. 

Finally if india itself starts pour more money into Kashmir for benefit of those citizens surely this too will reduce tension. 

One thing is for certain this dispute will not be resolved by one side gaining the upper hand from CURRENT STATUS QUO. 

Thats why LOC will become the solution in future.


----------



## luoshan

What will happen to Indian muslims if and when Kashmir joins Pakistan?


----------



## luoshan

Isn't this Kashmir issue a result of partition of British India, which is based in the principal of two nation theory proposed by the muslims of the sub-continent?


----------



## Omar1984

luoshan said:


> What will happen to Indian muslims if and when Kashmir joins Pakistan?



Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state india controls and that all the way up north on the border with Pakistan. Kashmiris are not Indians. Indian Muslims (hindustan kay musulmaan) are all over India (hindustan). They decided to stay in India during partition and that is their land and they should stay in India forever. India is not a disputed territory, Kashmir is and is recognized as a disputed territory by the entire world. If Kashmiris themselves decide that they want to stay as part of India, then we will respect their decisions but the only way to truly know is through a referendum.


----------



## luoshan

If Kashmir should belong to Pakistan because it is muslim province, what about the muslims in India? Will they have to leave India when the partition of India is completed 100&#37; by Kashmir joining Pakistan?


----------



## Omar1984

^ Why should they? Indian Muslims have been living in their land for generations, they should stay in their land. They are not Kashmiris.
Kashmir belongs to Kashmiri people only. Only Kashmiri people should decide what they want for their land.
In 1947, Indian Muslims had the choice of coming to Pakistan some did and most stayed in India and that was their choice.


----------



## luoshan

Omar1984 said:


> Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state india controls and that all the way up north on the border with Pakistan. Kashmiris are not Indians. Indian Muslims (hindustan kay musulmaan) are all over India (hindustan). They decided to stay in India during partition and that is their land and they should stay in India forever. India is not a disputed territory, Kashmir is and is recognized as a disputed territory by the entire world. If Kashmiris themselves decide that they want to stay as part of India, then we will respect their decisions but the only way to truly know is through a referendum.



If muslims of the sub-continent have got their right to a separate country based on their religion, why should not the non-muslims of the sub-continent have the right to have muslim free country?
Weren't todays Pakistani's Hindustani muslims before 1947?
Was not the nation of Pakistan formed as a nation for all the muslims of the sub-continent, and the rest of India a nation of non-muslims of the sub-continent?


----------



## Omar1984

^ You cant force an entire group of people to leave their homes. Even today many Sikhs/Hindus live in Pakistan. Our land is ours we've been living in our land for generations only a minority of Muslims came from India to Pakistan during partition, most decided to stay in India and we have no problem with that.

Kashmir is different because no one asked the people of Kashmir what they want for their own land thats why its recognized by the international community as a disputed territory. This is not about Indian Muslims because Indian Muslims are a different group of people from Kashmiris. Thye've decided long time ago they dont want to be part of Pakistan so they dont concern us. We have to hear from Kashmiris what they want for their own land. Kashmir belongs to Kashmiri people.


----------



## Zob

*Pakistan to survive as a independent state needs to stabilise its economy and political set up. Reduce the influence of the military and look to develope its economy for the good of 160m pakistanis. Pakistan must come first. Today india is not the main danger to this nation. Its the different religous and political factions within. *

WELL FOR US KASHMIR IS OUR INTEGRAL PART....so yes pakistan comes first for us....secondly well we are suffering because we have spent $34billion and in return got $11billion for our efforts so yes ofcourse economically we are unstable....but this should be adressed by the world because they need to THANK US for FIGHTING THERE WAR.....

*Secondly war is becoming increasingly less likely. India will continue to grow in terms of industrial strength and this will in time increase the relative disparity esp in conventional military power. Just see how quickly the indian navy in particluar will grow in size and power projection in next decade. Nuclear weapons on both sides will prevent a major war.*

TRUE CONVENTIONALLY india is way way ahead of us but like we said we just want a detterant and we think of NUCLEAR technological terms we don't believe so much on spending billions on getting new aircraft carriers.....we think in terms of missile technology and in that we are way way ahead of INDIA....and hopefully will stay that way. 

*Unless Pakistan drops USA completely i can see Pakistan being influenced by the USA with various incentives to accept LOC as long term solution to peace in this region. India will have more clout i would be very surprised if USA and UN insisted on a plebicite. You can,t force a independent country to give up Land. 

Finally if india itself starts pour more money into Kashmir for benefit of those citizens surely this too will reduce tension. *

Well YOUGOSALAVIA was forced to give up LAND...so wrong there buddy...and the day we take the so called "incentives" instead of kashmir i am sorry but our army will be stoned because what is the use of an army when the whole issue is KASHMIR and if we give up KASHMIR then seriously what will the army do....replace our police???


----------



## Nihat

> Well YOUGOSALAVIA was forced to give up LAND...



There is a bit of difference between Yougosalavia and India , LTTE wanted seperate land , Tibet wants autonomy , Palastine wants 2 state policy , Chechneya revolted too. Question is , what did they get.

If all type of people start demanding right to self determination then the world will be like little gem shaped countries scattered all over.


----------



## niaz

After listening to N different solutions in the last 62 years, I have come to the conclusion:

1. Pakistan doesnt have to power to physically capture Kashmir and India is not going to gift Kashmir to us.

2. Therefore the way forward is what Musharraf suggested. Make the travel between the two parts of Kashmir very easy, such as between US and Canada. This would make the border irrelevant for the Kashmiris.

Frankly IMO there is no other way forward


----------



## Zob

well we don't take KASHMIR back then india will always blackmail us with water...and if we don't plan on getting KASHMIR we don't need the ARMY....i am sorry i won't let pakistan become NEPAL.... my belief is that if india and pakistan both want to dominate ASIA and rise and become big kashmir should be given autonomy and UN forces should be placed in it.....make it independant country....something of the type like SWITZERLAND!!


----------



## luoshan

Zob said:


> well we don't take KASHMIR back then india will always blackmail us with water...and if we don't plan on getting KASHMIR we don't need the ARMY....i am sorry i won't let pakistan become NEPAL.... my belief is that if india and pakistan both want to dominate ASIA and rise and become big kashmir should be given autonomy and UN forces should be placed in it.....make it independant country....something of the type like SWITZERLAND!!



So, is this issue all about ensuring Pakistan's water security? and not about aspirations of the Kashmiri's as claimed by Paksitanis...
What is the guarantee that an independent Kashmir will ensure Pakistans water security?


----------



## Zob

exactly we don't care if KASHMIRis block our water....atleast it is not a INDIA PAKISTAN WAR....but when INDIA does it creates friction between both the countries....i thought this argument was about INDIA and pakistan and what should be done for the betterment of both....india and pakistan should drop there claim for kashmir and withdraw or kashmir should go how in 1947 states chose or were handed out to india....based on demographics


----------



## Rabbit.Rabbit

niaz said:


> After listening to N different solutions in the last 62 years, I have come to the conclusion:
> 
> 1. Pakistan doesnt have to power to physically capture Kashmir and India is not going to gift Kashmir to us.
> 
> 2. Therefore the way forward is what Musharraf suggested. Make the travel between the two parts of Kashmir very easy, such as between US and Canada. This would make the border irrelevant for the Kashmiris.
> 
> Frankly IMO there is no other way forward



The borders can be softened only if the insurgency ends. In any case, what is the advantage of soft borders? 
The only tangible advantage is trade, but with the completion of rail links, even that will be gone.


----------



## Gabbar

*Why are Kashmiris heading to the polls? *

Kashmiri leaders under house arrest I must, at the outset, admit that I have never been to Kashmir. I have watched it keenly with a journalist&#8217;s eye from distant Mumbai for over 14 years. Every time I think about it &#8211; as a newspaperman and as an Indian &#8211; the same questions keep popping up in my head. Will peace ever return to Kashmir? Does Kashmir have the option to be anything other than a state that&#8217;s part of, yet at odds with, the Indian democratic mix?

Until a year and a half ago, the answer would probably have been &#8216;no&#8217;. While Kashmir has had duly elected state governments for a while now, nobody considered the situation on the ground to be anything like the rest of India.

But something seems to have changed. In a marked departure from the high of separatism, the state assembly elections last year saw voters flock to the polling booths. Three million of Jammu and Kashmir&#8217;s 4.8 million voters exercised their franchise &#8212; a 62 per cent turnout compared to 44 per cent the previous time. And suddenly, the issues of the moment didn&#8217;t seem detached from those in the rest of the country. As in other parts of India, bad roads, poor governance, education and jobs seemed to be the magnets that pulled people to voting stations.

The state assembly election was hard-fought, replete with the mud-slinging, aggression and hypocrisy that are so much a part of Indian politics. But that too seemed welcome in far-off Mumbai because it seemed familiar, resembling any other Indian assembly election. Kashmir began to have fewer degrees of separation from India.

Recently, my colleague in Delhi, Monalisa Arthur, travelled to Kashmir for a pre-parliamentary-election series commissioned by the Hindustan Times. She asked Kashmiris what led to the sudden change in their thinking.

She writes: &#8216;It&#8217;s a baffling U-turn few Kashmiris have been able to explain, or understand.&#8230; Growing aspirations mean youngsters, though still politically conscious, are increasingly aware of what they have lost in terms of economic and career development over the last two decades. The large voter turnout in November is seen by some as a move by the youth to try and find a place in Indian polity. &#8216;The agitation was a people&#8217;s movement. The elections &#8230; well, it was time for change. Plus, our generation connects with our young leader [Omar Abdullah],&#8217; says Hashim, sipping cappuccino at Coffee Arabica.

&#8216;Nazir Bhat (27) scoffs from across the table. &#8216;It is the Kashmiri character,&#8217; says the young businessman.... &#8216;We are opportunists; we go with whatever is most advantageous for us at that moment.&#8217;&#8217;

Which viewpoint is correct? What if both are? After all, everyone has a different motivation to vote. Some of us want a safer economic future, others want a person from their community in a position of power, and still others look for those who can provide security. Whatever the motivation, participation in the election is a vote for the democracy you live in. And Kashmir voted&#8212;not at gunpoint, but because it wanted to.

Take, for example, Uri, just 20 kilometres from the Line of Control, which has borne the brunt of the standoff between Indian and Pakistani forces. The mountainous area was one of the early routes for infiltration. Last November, 80 per cent of its electorate voted. That&#8217;s phenomenally high in a country where a 50 per cent turnout is considered healthy. The turnout even made the Kashmir state&#8217;s high average of 62 per cent seem low in comparison.

Interestingly, during her tour of Kashmir, Arthur discovered the same voter motivations that are witnessed across India. &#8216;The battle now is against poor governance in Kashmir&#8217;s high-security border areas, often ignored by political parties and deprived of schools, jobs and any signpost of progress in a state that has purportedly spent at least Rs 50,000 crore of taxpayer money on development over the last two decades of insurgency.&#8230; Young jobless men sit in the town market all day, doing nothing. Roads are pockmarked with huge puddles of dirty water.&#8230; Three hydropower projects feed the national grid, but residents get only five or six hours of electricity per day,&#8217; she wrote.

The fact that such matters now dominate Kashmiri politics is a huge step toward real integration with the Indian mainstream. Voter priorities in the state indicate that the focus may be slowly shifting from the militancy-separatism debate to local issues that affect people&#8217;s daily lives.

Sajjad Ghani Lone&#8217;s decision to contest the elections could be symptomatic of this mood. Lone is the son of slain Hurriyat leader Abdul Ghani Lone and a known separatist. That he&#8217;s chosen to participate in the Indian electoral process could be an indicator of the way Kashmir is thinking. It could, of course, be plain opportunism as well. Either way, India is looking forward to May 16, when votes for Kashmir&#8217;s six Lok Sabha (lower house of parliament) seats will be counted. There could be a message in the ballot.

_Ashraf Engineer is Associate Editor at the Hindustan Times, Mumbai. Hindustan Times has eight editions across India. He can be reached at ashraf.engineer@gmail.com. He also writes a blog, www.mumbaiinsomniac.wordpress.com._

DAWN.COM | World | Kashmir at the polls

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zob




----------



## Zob

i guess they want to follow MUJIB's example of win and then ask for seperation not sit at home and ask for seperation!!!


----------



## Gabbar

*Learn from Lone: Abdullah to Hurriyat*

Srinagar: National Conference on Thursday asked Hurriyat Conference leaders boycotting the polls to emulate Sajad Gani Lone, who joined the electoral process, to help relieve the people of Jammu and Kashmir of "exploitative elements."

"Hurriyat leaders should follow the foot steps of Sajjad as positive politics will help relieve the poor people of the state of exploitative elements," party chief Farooq Abdullah told an election rallies at Surasyar and Raithan, 32 kms from here in Budgam district of Srinagar Lok Sabha constituency.

Sajad, the chairman of breakaway faction of People's Conference, had parted ways with the separatist camp and jumped into the election fray. He is seeking election 
to the Lok Sabha from Baramulla constituency going to polls in the last phase on May 13.

Abdullah, party nominee from Srinagar seat where polls would be held on May 7, said "Sajjad has understood that the last two decades of uncertain situation has thrown the people into a cesspool of misfortune."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## luoshan

*Commission Names 13 Countries as Religious Freedom Violators *

By Dan Robinson 
Washington
01 May 2009

The latest annual report by the independent U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom names 13 countries as serious violators of religious freedom. The commission expresses concern about increasing extremism in many countries, including sharp criticism for Pakistan, saying extremism poses a particular threat to religious freedom.

The 13 countries named as Countries of Particular Concern (CPC) in this year's report are Burma, North Korea, China, Vietnam, Eritrea, Nigeria, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..

On Pakistan, {USCIRF Head Felice} Gaer said while government leaders "acquiesced" to the rule of Taliban-associated extremists in some regions, members of civil society, particularly women, have courageously objected.

Commission member Elizabeth Prodromou says the situation in Pakistan, a CPC country since 2002, has worsened because of the "largely unchecked growth" of Taliban-associated extremist groups:

"Pakistan's central government in Islamabad has ceded effective control of more and more of the country to these Taliban-associated extremist groups, notably of course, in the Swat Valley and its neighboring districts. At the same time, sectarian and religiously motivated violence continues apace. Particularly acute are violations against Shia Muslims, Amhadis, Christians, Hindus and Sikhs," she said. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..


VOA News

*Pakistan, for the seventh year in a row, named as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC) by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).*


----------



## luoshan

Omar1984 said:


> ^ You cant force an entire group of people to leave their homes. Even today many Sikhs/Hindus live in Pakistan. Our land is ours we've been living in our land for generations only a minority of Muslims came from India to Pakistan during partition, most decided to stay in India and we have no problem with that.
> 
> Kashmir is different because no one asked the people of Kashmir what they want for their own land thats why its recognized by the international community as a disputed territory. This is not about Indian Muslims because Indian Muslims are a different group of people from Kashmiris. Thye've decided long time ago they dont want to be part of Pakistan so they dont concern us. We have to hear from Kashmiris what they want for their own land. Kashmir belongs to Kashmiri people.



Any solution to the problem, which is acceptable to Pakistan involves Pakistan gaining territory in J&K at the cost of India. Now, why would India want to accept such a loosing proposition, especially when its in stronger position than it ever was in last 60 years? What can Pakistan offer to India in return?
From India's point of view, continuing the present status quo is its best option. Presently, there is nothing Pakistan/Kashmir can do militarily,politically or diplomatically (Pakistan has tried all these before) to force India to give up any territory under its control. After all that has happened in the last 60 years, its foolish to expect that India will give away Kashmir to Pakistan for nothing in exchange. That leaves Pakistan with only option of barter, exchange of Indian controlled territory for something India wants.
Communal harmony is what India wants at present to achieve its developmental goals and aspirations of being a global economic and political power. Almost 14% (~150 million) of Indian population is Muslim. As per the 'two nation theory' (the basis for creation of Pakistan) Muslims and Non-Muslims cannot co-exist harmoniously as one nation. Pakistan was created as a safe sanctuary for all Muslims on the Indian sub-continent. Even then a large chunk of south-Asia's Muslim population decided to stay back in Secular India instead of migrating to the newly formed 'Islamic republic of Pakistan', thus rejecting the two nation theory. Now, this population of Muslims in India is contributing to a large extent to the occasional communal disharmony in the country, which is not good for India's international image or growth prospects. Pakistan could offer India to take this Indian Muslim population in exchange for gaining territories in J&K. Also, If Pakistan so desires India should take the non-Muslim population of Pakistan. This solution has many benefits, like:

1. This would be acceptable to even the most right wing Hindutva elements in India. Most Indians distrust the sovereign affiliations of the Indian Muslims. They would bear to loose Kashmir to get rid of Muslims from India.

2. Pakistan will get something it wanted since its creation. The issue which has been devouring a major chuck of Pakistan's resources (economic, military, political & diplomatic) will be resolved once and for all. Peace with India will reduce the role of Pakistan's military in domestic affairs and can bring real democracy to Pakistan.

3. With the addition of Indian Muslims, Pakistan will become the largest Muslim nation of the world. This will give Pakistan a larger say in the international arena and may be the leadership of the Islamic world. 

4. Data shows that Indian Muslims are slightly better educated than their Pakistani brethren. This will contribute to Pakistan's growth and development. Also, Pakistan will gain a rich, diverse and talented population of movie stars, sportsmen, scientists, artists, poets etc. Just imagine what a person like Dr. A.P.J Adul Kalam, the father of India's strategic defense programs can do to Pakistan. 
Indian Muslims are all over the country and have very diverse and cosmopolitan nature. They could contribute in reducing the sectarian and inter-provincial problems in Pakistan. The dominance of one province (Punjab) in Pakistan will be over.

5. Pakistanis believe that Indian Muslims are subjected genocide, discrimination and misery at the hands of the Hindus. The migration of these suffering Muslim lot to Pakistan will solve their problems.

6. With all the Muslims of India (including Kashmiri Muslims) moving into Islamic Republic of Pakistan (by gaining territory and population migration), The 'two nation theory' as proposed by the founders of Pakistan will be finally implemented 100%. Finally there will be two seperate nations in the sub-continent, one for muslims and other for the non-muslims, exactly as envisaged by the founders of Pakistan.

So in my opinion, the two nation theory which caused the problem of Kashmir, can also be applied to arrive at the solution.
Just my 2 cents


----------



## luoshan

Omar1984 said:


> Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state india controls and that all the way up north on the border with Pakistan. Kashmiris are not Indians. Indian Muslims (hindustan kay musulmaan) are all over India (hindustan). They decided to stay in India during partition and that is their land and they should stay in India forever. India is not a disputed territory, Kashmir is and is recognized as a disputed territory by the entire world. If Kashmiris themselves decide that they want to stay as part of India, then we will respect their decisions but the only way to truly know is through a referendum.



Ever wonder why the Indian Muslims are silent about the issue of Kashmir? They start demonstrations/riots for any and every, real and imaginary atrocity against Islam/Muslims anywhere in the world. But I have never seen, heard or read about Indian Muslims speaking or doing something about the so called atrocities committed Hindus on their Kashmiri brethren. 
Is it because they see through Pakistan's game? Or, is it because if they support the Kashmiri Muslims, the two nation theory will come to bite them in their backsides?
why isn't there much support for the Kashmiri Muslims even in the global Islamic world. Kashmir issue doesn't even a small part of the coverage that Palestine issue gets, even though comparatively Kashmir's territory and population is much larger.


----------



## Nemesis

Honestly the only viable solution is to turn the L.O.C into a soft border. With both parts of Kashmir having some sort of autonomy - a constitution separate from both India and Pakistan. Kashmiris will be free to elect their own rulers, frame their own laws, etc. However, their security will be managed by both India (JnK) and Pakistan(P.O.K). Something similar to Monaco.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Zob

*Burma, North Korea, China, Vietnam, Eritrea, Nigeria, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan*


LUSHOUN....tell me something is this a list of countries we hate by the US...or countries we lost to....i don't see afghanistan in it...well atleast not yet...and what happened to cuba i guess the leader...as for LIBYA...i guess they called their peace with the US....


----------



## Zob

*Now, this population of Muslims in India is contributing to a large extent to the occasional communal disharmony in the country, which is not good for India's international image or growth prospects. Pakistan could offer India to take this Indian Muslim population in exchange for gaining territories in J&K.*

LUSHOUN....are you from the RSS by any chance....???

*1. This would be acceptable to even the most right wing Hindutva elements in India. Most Indians distrust the sovereign affiliations of the Indian Muslims. They would bear to loose Kashmir to get rid of Muslims from India.*

I am getting convinced....


4*. Data shows that Indian Muslims are slightly better educated than their Pakistani brethren. This will contribute to Pakistan's growth and development. Also, Pakistan will gain a rich, diverse and talented population of movie stars, sportsmen, scientists, artists, poets etc. Just imagine what a person like Dr. A.P.J Adul Kalam, the father of India's strategic defense programs can do to Pakistan. Indian Muslims are all over the country and have very diverse and cosmopolitan nature. They could contribute in reducing the sectarian and inter-provincial problems in Pakistan. The dominance of one province (Punjab) in Pakistan will be over*

YES a JEW MADE OUR BOMB....ofcourse!!!


----------



## luoshan

Omar1984 said:


> Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state india controls and that all the way up north on the border with Pakistan. Kashmiris are not Indians. Indian Muslims (hindustan kay musulmaan) are all over India (hindustan). *They decided to stay in India during partition and that is their land and they should stay in India forever.* India is not a disputed territory, Kashmir is and is recognized as a disputed territory by the entire world. If Kashmiris themselves decide that they want to stay as part of India, then we will respect their decisions but the only way to truly know is through a referendum.



No one asked whether the Muslims were welcomed to stay in secular India during partition. It was just taken for granted. Muslims of south-Asia demanded and got a exclusive country for themselves. The Kashmiri Muslims are asking for the same. The non-Muslims of south-Asia don't have a similar choice. 
If and when a plebiscite is done in Kashmir, a similar plebiscite/referendum should also be done all over India on whether Muslims should be allowed to continue to stay in India, and Pakistan should be made a party to the outcome of this plebiscite.
Like the south-Asian Muslims have a right to live in their exclusive Islamic nations, non-Muslims also should be given the right to live in non-Muslim nation. This is only fair thing to do. The two nation theory should not be allowed to be one sided, which is favoring only the Muslims in their demands. The presence of the large population of Muslims in India is anathema to the two nation theory.
The solution to the Kashmir problem lies in the implementation of the two nation theory 100%.


----------



## luoshan

Zob said:


> *
> LUSHOUN....are you from the RSS by any chance....???
> 
> I am getting convinced.....*
> Zob...
> Does it matter whether I'm a member or RSS or you are a member of Taliban? I suppose this forum is to discuss issues and not to discuss about each other.
> btw... I'm not even a Hindu, leave alone be a member of RSS
> 
> 4*. YES a JEW MADE OUR BOMB....ofcourse!!!*


*.*

I didn't understand this part of your response. Care to explain?


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

luoshan said:


> No one asked whether the Muslims were welcomed to stay in secular India during partition. It was just taken for granted. Muslims of south-Asia demanded and got a exclusive country for themselves. The Kashmiri Muslims are asking for the same. The non-Muslims of south-Asia don't have a similar choice.
> If and when a plebiscite is done in Kashmir, a similar plebiscite/referendum should also be done all over India on whether Muslims should be allowed to continue to stay in India, and Pakistan should be made a party to the outcome of this plebiscite.
> Like the south-Asian Muslims have a right to live in their exclusive Islamic nations, non-Muslims also should be given the right to live in non-Muslim nation. This is only fair thing to do. The two nation theory should not be allowed to be one sided, which is favoring only the Muslims in their demands. The presence of the large population of Muslims in India is anathema to the two nation theory.
> The solution to the Kashmir problem lies in the implementation of the two nation theory 100&#37;.



That's a flawed argument - the Muslims in the territories comprising Pakistan and what is today Bangladesh determined their destiny was as a separate nation - that had nothing to do with whether non-Muslims could or could not live in Pakistan. Jinnah's quotes on the status of on-Muslims and their rights in Pakistan is testament to that.

So if you want to hold a plebiscite in all of India, go ahead, but Pakistan has no obligation to participate in it since the partition process of British India is over, except in Jammu & Kashmir.

So if you want to conduct a plebiscite and give the remaining Muslims the choice of another independent nation out of today's India, go ahead, that is your internal issue.


----------



## saiko

luoshan said:


> What can Pakistan offer to India in return?
> From India's point of view, continuing the present status quo is its best option. Presently, there is nothing Pakistan/Kashmir can do militarily,politically or diplomatically (Pakistan has tried all these before) to force India to give up any territory under its control. After all that has happened in the last 60 years, its foolish to expect that India will give away Kashmir to Pakistan for nothing in exchange.



This post pretty much sums up the entire problem. What Pakistan wants or needs is irrelevent. This is about self-determination for the Kashmiri people. India has blocked an internationally monitored referendum forever - it makes a mockery of Indian attempts to boast about its democratic process.


----------



## luoshan

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> That's a flawed argument - the Muslims in the territories comprising Pakistan and what is today Bangladesh determined their destiny was as a separate nation - that had nothing to do with whether non-Muslims could or could not live in Pakistan. Jinnah's quotes on the status of on-Muslims and their rights in Pakistan is testament to that.



My argument is very sound and is based on the 'two nation theory' espoused by the Muslims of south-Asia themselves. No one forced this on them. What Pakistan/Bangladesh wish to do with their non-Muslim population is their prerogative. The very logic of creation of Pakistan (and Bangladesh) is that Muslims cannot co-exist with non-Muslims (as per 2 nations principle). 



> So if you want to hold a plebiscite in all of India, go ahead, but Pakistan has no obligation to participate in it since the partition process of British India is over, except in Jammu & Kashmir.



The very logic of Pakistan being party to the Kashmiri plebiscite, if any, also holds good when applied to the whole of India. The partition is incomplete without deciding the fate of J&K and Indian Muslims. 



> So if you want to conduct a plebiscite and give the remaining Muslims the choice of another independent nation out of today's India, go ahead, that is your internal issue.



Independent Muslim nation(s) have already been already given to the muslims of South-Asia, exactly as demanded by Muslims. It is for the Muslims of South-Asia to decide how to fit into these nations (plus Kashmir as an independent nation or as part of Pakistan).
The bottom line is that the Muslims of South-Asia cannot have their cake and expect to eat others' piece too..


----------



## luoshan

saiko said:


> This post pretty much sums up the entire problem. What Pakistan wants or needs is irrelevent. This is about self-determination for the Kashmiri people. India has blocked an internationally monitored referendum forever - it makes a mockery of Indian attempts to boast about its democratic process.



If Pakistan is irrelevant to the Kashmir Dispute, what is all this noise all about? The Issue then is only between the people of Kashmir and Indian federation. Pakistan has no locus-standi in this issue.
Please read your history. Pakistan is partially responsible for the UN sponsored plebiscite not taking place (by not de-miltarising the Kashmir under its control). Pakistan has relinquished any demand for Kashmir plebiscite by forcing a military solution (and failing) in 1965 by initiating the war.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

luoshan said:


> The very logic of creation of Pakistan (and Bangladesh) is that Muslims cannot co-exist with non-Muslims (as per 2 nations principle).


Wrong - the idea behind Pakistan was to provide a homeland for the Muslims of the territories comprising Pakistan, and any others who wished to move there, where Muslims could live as they saw fit and control their affairs independent of a non-Muslim majority.

There is a difference between not being able to coexist with non-Muslims (which is an idea debunked by reading through Jinnah's quotes) and not trusting a non-Muslim majority to address Muslim grievances and/or allow Muslims to govern themselves as they saw fit.



> The very logic of Pakistan being party to the Kashmiri plebiscite, if any, also holds good when applied to the whole of India. The partition is incomplete without deciding the fate of J&K and Indian Muslims.



The Indian Muslims had their chance when partition occurred, to move to Pakistan, and millions did move (and many still migrate to Pakistan through legal channels), but the process of partition is now over, except for in Jammu&Kashmir, where the people were not given the right to determine which nation they wished their territory and themselves to be a part of - a right recognized by India, Pakistan and the world community in the UNSC.



> Independent Muslim nation(s) have already been already given to the muslims of South-Asia, exactly as demanded by Muslims. It is for the Muslims of South-Asia to decide how to fit into these nations (plus Kashmir as an independent nation or as part of Pakistan).
> The bottom line is that the Muslims of South-Asia cannot have their cake and expect to eat others' piece too..


There are Muslims of Pakistan, Muslims of Jammu & Kashmir and Muslims of India - the first category have their nation, the second have had their rights denied them, and the third are India's problem (or not).

If the Indian Muslims cannot fit in India, they can apply for citizenship in Pakistan through official channels, as any other foreign national, but the chance to emigrate en masse was over once the process of partition was over.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## zubair723

As PAKISTANIS & MUSLIMS we will only be able to move in any direction when we will stop 'expecting' from UN & others. Our QUAID was a visionary & a man of great wisdom. He clearly stated KASHMIR as the 'JUGULAR Artery'. We cannot compromise on it and sit with eyes shut & assume HINDUS will be nice. Why are they trying to stop our water resources, to cut this 'Jugular Artery'. And we still try to ssume that US, UN will not let them!!!. 
On the other hand the day they loose KASHMIR, there 'MAHABHARAT' is over. Shattered into BLOCK A BHARAT, BLOCK C BHARAT etc. So its do or die for them & same for us. No other solution is possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## godsavetheworld

zubair723 said:


> As PAKISTANIS & MUSLIMS we will only be able to move in any direction when we will stop 'expecting' from UN & others. Our QUAID was a visionary & a man of great wisdom. He clearly stated KASHMIR as the 'JUGULAR Artery'. We cannot compromise on it and sit with eyes shut & assume HINDUS will be nice. Why are they trying to stop our water resources, to cut this 'Jugular Artery'. And we still try to ssume that US, UN will not let them!!!.
> On the other hand the day they loose KASHMIR, there 'MAHABHARAT' is over. Shattered into BLOCK A BHARAT, BLOCK C BHARAT etc. So its do or die for them & same for us. No other solution is possible.



And yet you couldnt keep up with your pep-talk in the last 3 Kashmir wars.


----------



## zubair723

godsavetheworld said:


> And yet you couldnt keep up with your pep-talk in the last 3 Kashmir wars.



No one is dead yet 
Who dies its yet to be determined. Its not going to be over till its over. No 2 suns in the sky, there never has been 2 powers in the sub-continent. Either it will be PAKISTAN or INDIA.


----------



## PeacefulIndian

zubair723 said:


> No one is dead yet
> Who dies its yet to be determined. Its not going to be over till its over. *No 2 suns in the sky, there never has been 2 powers in the sub-continent. Either it will be PAKISTAN or INDIA.*



So isn't the competition already over?


----------



## Zob

godsavetheworld said:


> And yet you couldnt keep up with your pep-talk in the last 3 Kashmir wars.



hmmm 1948...INDIA went to UN....1965 STALEMATE....1971 pakistan CIVIL WAR india came in...we haven't forgotten that....so yes....this in itself is a victory for pakistan keeping a 6 times larger enemy occupied....for more than 60 years...!!!


----------



## Zob

*So isn't the competition already over? *

lol well this is a victory that india even thinks of us worthy of competition.....given our size and india's......


----------



## saiko

luoshan said:


> If Pakistan is irrelevant to the Kashmir Dispute, what is all this noise all about? The Issue then is only between the people of Kashmir and Indian federation. Pakistan has no locus-standi in this issue.
> Please read your history. Pakistan is partially responsible for the UN sponsored plebiscite not taking place (by not de-miltarising the Kashmir under its control). Pakistan has relinquished any demand for Kashmir plebiscite by forcing a military solution (and failing) in 1965 by initiating the war.



Clearly Pakistan hopes that the people of Kashmir choose to ascend to Pakistan so that's Pakistan's interest in the affair.

But you're basing all of your opposition to the referendum on the actions of Pakistan which is missing the point completely. I can not be more clear about that. Pointing out actions of the Pakistani government are a cop out. 

It's sad - we see it in Israel and now in India - the oppressed become the oppressors and it's done under the facade of democracy.


----------



## zubair723

PeacefulIndian said:


> So isn't the competition already over?



Guess we want you to feel confident & like always hoard lot of wealth. In the end we would come again from NORTH-WEST to take it.


----------



## luoshan

playbyrule said:


> If anything, your size was your strong point. Look at countries of your size in Asia who also got independent around same time.
> 
> You never have any legacy to keep you bogged down. You had clean slate to start with.



Bang on play by rule.
For a while Pakistan was expected to be the Asian economic tiger, much like the south-east Asian nations. It had a near homogeneous population and less diverse culture. The 50's and 60's saw tremendous growth in the country, thanks to its alignment with the western block. But this growth was mostly artificial and superficial since it mostly depended on foreign aid. On the other hand India was considered a basket case and the collapse of the Indian federation was considered imminent. This was due to the abject poverty and backwardness of the people, diverse and non-homogeneous population, internal contradictions in the form of religious, racial, regional and caste differences. However India survived and grew stronger in its fight for survival. While Pakistan was lavishing on external aids, India went on the path of self-reliance and building of institutions (democracy, federal state structure, land reforms, secularism, socialism, social empowerment etc.) Today the situation is exactly turned 180 degrees.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

* Kashmir leader notes Pakistan role in curbing violence*​
Friday, 08 May, 2009 | 02:54 PM PST |

Kashmir's chief minister Omar Abdullah speaks to supports during an election camping rally in Ganderbal, 25 km east of Srinagar. -Reuters File Photo

SRINAGAR: The chief minister of Indian Kashmir, Omar Abdullah, has acknowledged Pakistan's contribution to the 'remarkable' drop in violence in the volatile region in recent years.

A 20-year Muslim insurgency against Indian rule in the divided region has claimed more than 47,000 lives, but peace talks initiated between India and Pakistan in 2004 resulted in a sharp fall in violence levels.

'I would call it remarkable,' Abdullah told AFP in an interview this week at his high-security residence in the Kashmiri summer capital Srinagar.

'It would be impossible for levels of violence to be where they are if there wasn't some amount of influence being brought to bear from Pakistan,' Abdullah said.

'I tend to believe that we have reached this point because perhaps Pakistan has also realised it is not in their interest to have these levels of violence, which leads to the alienation of the people here,' he added.

India and Pakistan's territorial dispute over Kashmir has sparked two wars between the nuclear-armed South Asian rivals. Islamabad denies Indian charges that it trains and arms the insurgents operating in Indian Kashmir.

Abdullah's comments came against the backdrop of New Delhi's refusal to restart peace talks in the wake of the attacks on Mumbai in November last year that were blamed on a Pakistani-based militant group.


----------



## maverick2009

IF Kashmir is THE ARTERY or JUGGLAR VEIN of India the loss of which will lead to the death of India wen its shattered into peices like a deck of cards wat hope is there to a solution. 

The Americans and the UN will sit on the fence and say make LOC the permanent border. 

I can,t see any light at the end of the Tunnel.


----------



## asq

About all the arguments by Indians about Kashmir, this one will settle their arguments as this will show them the truth based on the desires of the people of Kashmir. A survey by an Independence source. Accept it and let kashmir go if you believe in Democracy rights and about boasting of BIGGEST Democracy of the world. "Put you money where your mouth is". or else stop callinf yourself the Biggest Demiocracy of the world.

Indian and Pakistani Publics Show Flexibility on Kashmir - World Public Opinion


----------



## ali.abbas00001

No 7 is the best One


----------



## dabong1

ali.abbas00001 said:


> No 7 is the best One



Scenario 2 sounds better.......kashmir joins pakistan


----------



## Patriot

dabong1 said:


> Scenario 2 sounds better.......kashmir joins pakistan


No, i think Independent Kashmir is best option for Kashmiris.Both Azad as well as IOK should become Independent.


----------



## indiankiller

If thats true then by doing such things, they are waisting there valuable time in something that makes you feel good but dont forget terror has only one face applicable for both Pak and India


----------



## indiankiller

Omar1984 said:


> hahaha we give the people of Azad Kashmir their freedom, no one sends troops into Azad Kashmir and forces them to do anything. Pakistan is not like India, and I'm glad the people of Azad Kashmir are making Indians worry



If thats true then by doing such things, they are wasting there valuable time in something that can make you feel good but dont forget terror has only one face applicable for both Pak and India


----------



## ejaz007

*US adopts Pakistans stance on Kashmir*

<>i* Burns asks India to understand Pakistans problems 
* Pushes Pakistan over Mumbai attacks 

By Iftikhar Gilani 

NEW DELHI: The US said on Thursday that it wants the Kashmir issue resolved in line with the aspirations of the people of Kashmir  a statement that reflects Pakistans stance on the long-standing dispute. 

Addressing a press conference after meeting Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns  on a three-day visit to India  stunned reporters by saying that the Kashmir issue had to be settled in line with the aspirations of Kashmiris. It remains our view that a resolution of that issue has to take into account wishes of the Kashmiri people, he said. 

Burns said the US would continue to push the Pakistani government to act against terrorists, as they are source of instability for the entire world. 

However, Burns also asked New Delhi not to underestimate the seriousness of and difficulties faced by Islamabad in its effort to contain extremists and terrorists. 

While Burns emphasised the need for Indo-Pak dialogue, he indicated that the US would let the two countries work out things on their own. The US has always welcomed dialogue ... but it is also obvious the pace and scope is something for the Indian and Pakistani leadership to decide. How and when to approach that dialogue is for them to decide, he said. 

Burns also asked the international community to help internally displaced Pakistanis, as the issue needed significant international response. 

He also announced that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would visit India in the second half of July. 

Burns said the US would continue to ask the Pakistani government to act immediately and effectively on Indian concerns to investigate and bring to justice the perpetrators of Mumbai terror attacks.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Golden tigers

i personally think 7 was the best.


----------



## dabong1

Patriot said:


> No, i think Independent Kashmir is best option for Kashmiris.Both Azad as well as IOK should become Independent.



I dont think azad kashmir would be to eager to split from pakistan.......better for us to merge with pakistan and let the indians have jammu the rest can go Independent or have joint control.


----------



## Jako

dabong1 said:


> I dont think azad kashmir would be to eager to split from pakistan.......better for us to merge with pakistan and let the indians have jammu the rest can go Independent or have joint control.



you live in pak occupied kashmir???


----------



## EjazR

I am surprised how the Two Nation theory (validity of which is a seperate debate altogether and not related to this thread) is being bought about to resolve Kashmir. I am sure everyone would agree that Kashmiri seperatism was not a boiling issue until 90s and human rights abuses by the Indian army there. This is one of the reason why the local population never supported operation gibraltor and became the reason for its subsequent failure. Moreover, Kashmiris overwhelming (separatists included) prefer living together with Hindus and Buddhists in a single unified entity and this is shown time and time again in different opinion polls and political statements.

Anyways, what I wanted to contribute to this thread is some interesting material forwarded to me by a Kashmiri student(also happens to be a distant cousin of mine) who took part in a conflict resolution poll in 2008-2009 conducted by Colin Irwin a well known name in conflict resolution around the world and played an important part in the Irish peace process. What I believe is that majority of us likes to uphold is genuine interests of the Kashmiri people, be they muslims or non-muslims, Indians or Pakistanis. There are a significant few who would like to polarize the situation and prefer to look after their own interests (i.e. Indian or Pakistani) at the detriment of the Kashmirs but that need not be the case. and then with an open mind read through the reports.
Bear in mind that these interviews were conducted in the aftermath of Amarnath yatra controversy and the mumbai attacks so that would have influenced some of the responses.

The best thing I like about this report is how it has not only tried to identify the problems but presented solutions to the people to "vote" on. They have also took pains to diffenretiate between Hindu Muslim and Buddhist opinions as well as opinions between Kashmir Jammu and Ladakh, with another subset for PaK.

The methodology of how the poll was conducted and how statistical quality was maintained is also provided. I will not provide my own opinions but would prefer everyone to read these with an open mind.

Pakistan Administered Kashmir information included report IaK vs Pak

Full report focussing only on IaK


Regarding the US mandated plebiscite, it seems that the resolution allows for only two options: join India or Pakistan. Independance is not on the table. So this following through with the UN mandated plebeciste would not solve the problem apparently. I will post some exceprts of the report later on that are significant but here is some fromt he website

Peace polls, an effective approach in helping resolve conflict



> Remarkably, when it came to the critical issues of the constitution the top priority (from a list of 29) was 'J and K should be a secular state' at 68% 'essential or desirable'. And although it will come as no surprise that 63% of Muslims in the Kashmir Valley reject the constitutional status quo of remaining with India as 'totally unacceptable' 69% of that same population also considered a merger with Pakistan to be 'totally unacceptable'. So a UN plebiscite that is limited to these two options (a priority for Muslims at 71% 'essential or desirable') can not solve the problem of Kashmir. The only way forward is negotiation and that is what the people want. Not the corrupt street politics of sectarian division and communal strife.


----------



## dabong1

Jako said:


> you live in pak occupied kashmir???



No....i live in liberated kashmir.


----------



## dabong1

EjazR said:


> I am surprised how the Two Nation theory (validity of which is a seperate debate altogether and not related to this thread) is being bought about to resolve Kashmir. I am sure everyone would agree that Kashmiri seperatism was not a boiling issue until 90s and human rights abuses by the Indian army there. This is one of the reason why the local population never supported operation gibraltor and became the reason for its subsequent failure. Moreover, Kashmiris overwhelming (separatists included) prefer living together with Hindus and Buddhists in a single unified entity and this is shown time and time again in different opinion polls and political statements.
> 
> Anyways, what I wanted to contribute to this thread is some interesting material forwarded to me by a Kashmiri student(also happens to be a distant cousin) who took part in a conflict resolution poll in 2008-2009 conducted by Colin Irwin a well known name in conflict resolution around the world and played an important part in the Irish peace process. What I believe is that majority of us likes to uphold is genuine interests of the Kashmiri people, be they muslims or non-muslims, Indians or Pakistanis. There are a significant few who would like to polarize the situation and prefer to look after their own interests (i.e. Indian or Pakistani) at the detriment of the Kashmirs but that need not be the case. and then with an open mind read through the reports.
> Bear in mind that these interviews were conducted in the aftermath of Amarnath yatra controversy and the mumbai attacks so that would have influenced some of the responses.
> 
> The best thing I like about this report is how it has not only tried to identify the problems but presented solutions to the people to "vote" on. They have also took pains to diffenretiate between Hindu Muslim and Buddhist opinions as well as opinions between Kashmir Jammu and Ladakh, with another subset for PaK.
> 
> The methodology of how the poll was conducted and how statistical quality was maintained is also provided. I will not provide my own opinions but would prefer everyone to read these with an open mind.
> 
> Pakistan Administered Kashmir information included report IaK vs Pak
> 
> Full report focussing only on IaK
> 
> 
> Regarding the US mandated plebiscite, it seems that the resolution allows for only two options: join India or Pakistan. Independance is not on the table. So this following through with the UN mandated plebeciste would not solve the problem apparently. I will post some exceprts of the report later on that are significant but here is some fromt he website
> 
> Peace polls, an effective approach in helping resolve conflict



Can not open the first two documents......plz go to the link below and tell me if thats what your talikng about.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...0-future-kashmir-7-possible-solutions-24.html


----------



## peacecracker

Future of Kashmir is peaceful co-existance and secular nature.I don't think the majority of kashmiris at present scenario prefer secularity of the region.that is where lies the problem.From 1990's Radical Teachings got Dominance in that Part of India.If Kashmir is in China or (....) ,The revolts would have got CRUSHED.Indians are good at heart that Our Government Still Spends Funds for the Lost Sheep.

Most Indians expect,as we are secular ,so they(others) also will be secular -which is Not So True elsewhere.India is still a good choice for kashmiris to live if they want to have a better future.India's Religious Majority-Hindus were and are Very Tolerant-which shall not be considered a weakness.


----------



## EjazR

dabong1 said:


> Can not open the first two documents......plz go to the link below and tell me if thats what your talikng about.
> 
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...0-future-kashmir-7-possible-solutions-24.html




Not sure which post you were referring too. If you cannot open the documents from the direct links you can go directly to the website here and select Kashmir: http://www.peacepolls.org/. The reports are hyperlinked there. If needed I can upload the reports as well so that you can download it directly.

The reports has nothing to do with official GoI or GoP positions. Personally I hope both governments take a look at the grievances expressed in these reports and tackle these issues in order of importance to the Kashmiri people. Also I wanted to mention that adequate representation to Kashmiri pandits currently living in camps was also included so rest assured their overall representation is reflected in the report as well.

As mentioned earlier these were conducted in late 2008 early 2009 in Indian administered Kasmir and around march-april 2009 in Pakistan administered Kashmir. Five options were given to participants on how to "rate" their acceptance of a point.

These options ranged from *Essential * (This is absolutely necessary for me) to Desirable, Acceptable, Tolerable, and *Unacceptable* (The other end of the spectrum, this is absolutely unacceptable for me)


----------



## EjazR

peacecracker said:


> Future of Kashmir is peaceful co-existance and secular nature.*I don't think the majority of kashmiris at present scenario prefer secularity of the region.*that is where lies the problem.


That is what YOU think, and what the right-wing elements on boths sides of the communal divide would love to be true but it is not. If you had gone through the link and reports that I posted earlier that presents what KASHMIRIS THINK, you will see overwhelmingly muslims (including in the valley) support a secular and pluralist society at around 70&#37; stating it as "essential" and what pandits to return to the valley.




> From 1990's Radical Teachings got Dominance in that Part of India.If Kashmir is in China or (....) ,The revolts would have got CRUSHED.Indians are good at heart that Our Government Still Spends Funds for the Lost Sheep.



THAT my friend is the difference between us and the Chinese. The IA and more to an extent the CPRF; although doing a difficult job; abused human rights which was/is unacceptable. Indians cherish human rights and that is how GoI should solve this issue - through consensus and value for human rights.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## peacecracker

@EjazR:If what you are telling is True(70&#37; kashmiris supporting secular..) ,then fine.
BUT - I don't think the truth can be altered.From 1990s to Present Scenario ,There is a great brain-wash happened(and Happening still) which prevents many kashmiri muslims to be in sync with National Stream.

But ,as you said ,I had my talks with few kashiris doing business in other parts of India.most of them are very friendly and Identifies as Indian.they are reluctant and seems not interested(not speaking at all!) at all on the issues of brain-washing by Mullahs.


----------



## brahmastra

dabong1 said:


> No....i live in liberated kashmir.



And where exactly is this "liberated kashmir" ?


----------



## brahmastra

Kashmir belongs To INDIA.. Funny Proof 

An ingenious example of speech and politics occurred recently in the United Nations Assembly that made the world community smile.

A representative from India began: 'Before beginning my talk I want to tellyou something about Rishi Kashyap of Kashmir, after whom Kashmir is named.

When he struck a rock and it brought forth water, he thought, 'What a good opportunity to have a bath.'

He removed his clothes, put them aside on the rock and entered the water.

When he got out and wanted to dress, his clothes had vanished. A Pakistani had stolen them.'

The Pakistani representative jumped up furiously and shouted, 'What are you talking about? The Pakistanis weren't there then.'

The Indian representative smiled and said, 'And now that we have made that clear, I will begin my speech.'

And they say Kashmir belongs to them...


lolz.......................................................................................

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EjazR

peacecracker said:


> @EjazR:*If what you are telling is True*(70&#37; kashmiris supporting secular..) ,then fine.
> BUT - I don't think the truth can be altered.From 1990s to Present Scenario ,There is a great brain-wash happened(and Happening still) which prevents many kashmiri muslims to be in sync with National Stream.



Its not what I think or what I am telling, its what the opinion poll conducted by an independant group - The people of J&K are saying. 
So we have to get out of this hype that the media creates. There are many myths that have to be broken and the Indian media has'nt done a good job in this regard.

Also just because there is madrassha running in J&K that does'nt mean that they are fanatics. This is another myth -that all mullas are crazies- that has to be demolished.
Again please read the reports to continue meaningful discussion.

@brahmastra: I hope you edit your post as jokes/diatribes such as these don't help.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dabong1

brahmastra said:


> And where exactly is this "liberated kashmir" ?



Well you see it as pakistani occupied kashmir while i see it as liberated kashmir......better off if we both refer to it as "Indian administered kashmir" and "Pakistan administered Kashmir" or we can stick to our rigid stances and go round and round.


----------



## dabong1

EjazR said:


> Not sure which post you were referring too.



1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.

This will give power to the pak-indo govts to keep a check on kashmir and will increase understanding and cooperation between the two nations.
You might not want a pakistani as the president of "indian" kashmir for a year but do not forget that the "pakistani" kashmiris will have to be under a indian president also for a year.

2.All three flags flown on public buildings.

A nice fudging of the issue with the indian flag flying high in muzzafrabad alongside the pak and kashmir flag and vice versa the pakistani flag flying high in srinagar alongside the indo-kashmir flag.
At least when the army men on either side of the border said that there nations flag will be flying high on the other side they will be proved correct but not in they way the thought.


3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.

4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.

6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.

9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment

10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.

11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir

All the above are to do with letting indians know that issue of "secular" india and the fear that every other state in india will want to independent if the kashmiris get there way is put to rest.
The kashmiris hold indian passports,take part in indian state elections ect should be enough for the indians to keep thinking off them as "indian kashmiris".


5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towards the sikh refugees to be resettled.

We could use this issue to show the goodwill between the two nations and give a boost to the final settlement.


7.Merge the two police forces.

A way for the indians to keep a track on whats going on pak kashmir and vice versa......it will build trust as each can make sure that kashmir is not being used to undermine either nation.

8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.

Very easy to do.


----------



## dabong1

brahmastra said:


> Kashmir belongs To INDIA.. Funny Proof
> 
> An ingenious example of speech and politics occurred recently in the United Nations Assembly that made the world community smile.
> 
> A representative from India began: 'Before beginning my talk I want to tellyou something about Rishi Kashyap of Kashmir, after whom Kashmir is named.
> 
> When he struck a rock and it brought forth water, he thought, 'What a good opportunity to have a bath.'
> 
> He removed his clothes, put them aside on the rock and entered the water.
> 
> When he got out and wanted to dress, his clothes had vanished. A Pakistani had stolen them.'
> 
> The Pakistani representative jumped up furiously and shouted, 'What are you talking about? The Pakistanis weren't there then.'
> 
> The Indian representative smiled and said, 'And now that we have made that clear, I will begin my speech.'
> 
> And they say Kashmir belongs to them...
> 
> 
> lolz.......................................................................................



Whats funnier is that they should have asked the indian if there was a country called the Republic of India back then.

Kashmir belong to the kashmiris........if the choose to merge with pakistan good but if the choose to merge with india we also have no problem.....are you willing to risk on a free vote in kashmir?


----------



## waqasjj

I think kashmir future should be what Kashmiris want.Am i right?


----------



## duhastmish

*Obama refuses mediation on Kashmir*

*Ruling out any American mediation on Kashmir issue*, US President Barack Obama has said dialogue is the best way to reduce tension between India and Pakistan.

"I believe that *there are opportunities*, maybe* not starting with Kashmir *but starting with other issues, that Pakistan and India can be in a dialogue together and over time to try to reduce tensions and find areas of common interest," Obama told Pakistan's Dawn TV in an interview.

The answer from Obama came in response to a question as why his Administration has been silent on Kashmir, after he initially mentioned it.

"Well, I don't think that we have been silent on the fact that India is a great friend of the United States and Pakistan is a great friend of the United States, and it always grieves us to see friends fighting. And we can't dictate to Pakistan or India how they should resolve their differences, but we know that *both countries would prosper if those differences are resolved*," Obama said.

Categorically ruling out any mediation between India and Pakistan, Obama said: "*We want to be helpful in that process, but I don't think it's appropriate for us to be the mediators in that process. I think that this is something that the Pakistanis and Indians can take leadership on."*

When asked, if has asked India to resume dialogue with Pakistan, Obama said: "Well, what we have said is that we think that all of South Asia would benefit by reduced tensions between India and Pakistan."

Obama had recently sent a letter to the Prime Minister, which was delivered by the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, William Burns.

"I think that dialogue is the best way to reduce tensions. And so, you know, we're hopeful that Prime Minister Singh and President Zardari -- they recently had an opportunity to meet briefly. It wasn't an extensive conversation but it was the start of what may end up being more productive conversations in the future," Obama underlined.


----------



## EjazR

Its one of the biggest ironies that most Pakistanis believe that in case of a free and fair plebiscite J&K would choose to join Pakistan. Just a refresher on the UN resolutions: It requires the plebeciste on the entire princely state of J&K including the areas under Pakistan Kashmir and the Gilgit-Batilistan area in Pakistan as well as the aksai chin and karakoram valley under China. If the plebecite is decided in India's favor, will Pakistan and China give up their regions, infact will they even allow free and fair campaigning and elections? I think no matter what we say the answer from the establishment will be a categorical no. Particularly to ceding territories. Another important point is that the UN resolution DOES NOT allow for independence. It allows only Pakistan or India. The independence clause was explicitly removed on insistence from Pakistan representatives in UN.

Also not only did the Hindu Raja sign instrument of accession to India, but Sheikh Abdulla - leader of the National conference which was fighting for self determination and had the broadest support among the J&K population supported the accession.

Now coming today, what do the Kashmiris want? Well ofcourse we have to look at both PaK and IaK. Based on the opinion polls (the report that I posted earlier) India would win a plebiscite hands down. So I think GoI (based on these opinion polls) would agree to a plebiscite. But will Pakistan and China willingly give up their territories, I don't think so. Will the plebiscite be free from intimidation and violence from terrorist outfits, again highly unlikely.

Quote from the peacepolls.org report on the poll results from Indian Kashmir:


> *No one wants to &#8216;Join Pakistan&#8217; (table 13). Even 71&#37; of Muslims consider this option &#8216;unacceptable&#8217; (69% in the Kashmir Valley). They could have chosen &#8216;tolerable&#8217; but they didn&#8217;t*........But the *UN resolutions for a plebiscite are limited to these two options &#8211; India or Pakistan*. Clearly the Muslims of J & K do not understand this issue or have been mislead. _(thanks to JKLF)_



On the poll results from Pakistan administered Kashmir it says


> The first preference for the people of PaK is to stay with Pakistan at 43% &#8216;essential&#8217;, 15% &#8216;desirable&#8217;, 30% &#8216;acceptable&#8217;, 8% &#8216;tolerable&#8217; and 3%
> &#8216;unacceptable&#8217; (Table 2). In time they might be persuaded to join an
> independent Kashmir, as they do not rigorously reject this prospect either at
> only 6% &#8216;unacceptable&#8217;. But then they do not rigorously reject any of the
> options on offer (Table 2) except perhaps for joining with India (25%
> &#8216;unacceptable&#8217 unlike *their brothers in IaK who so strongly reject joining with Pakistan (71% &#8216;unacceptable&#8217*. Even on this option, however, the *people of PaK seem to be split with a significant minority (20% &#8216;essential&#8217; and 18% &#8216;desirable&#8217 open to the prospect of a future with India*.



So hopefully some myths have been cleared. I had this feeling whenever I met and discussed these issues with Kashmirs but these empirical studies conducted by a third party proves my gut feeling that in case of a free and fair plebecite India would win. Even if Independence, Pakistan and India are on the table, India would still win because of vote splitting between Pakistan and Independence. So I don't think plebecite would be in the interest of Pakistan government and would agree to conduct it anyways.


----------



## navtrek

hi, my friend the days of differentiating people on the basis of religion is coming to an end in India. More educated the ppl are lesser will be this differentiation,so why divide ppl living in harmony in the name of religion.


----------



## Joe Shearer

@dabong1

Dear Sir,

Your proposal seems remarkably sane and may not bring out resistance except from fanatics on either side. Have you made this condominium proposal elsewhere before? What has been the reaction? 

Sincerely,

'Joe S.'

PS There are other Pakistani fora where this issue has been debated. Have you seen any of those?

'Joe'


----------



## Rajkumar

EjazR said:


> Its one of the biggest ironies that most Pakistanis believe that in case of a free and fair plebiscite J&K would choose to join Pakistan. Just a refresher on the UN resolutions: It requires the plebeciste on the entire princely state of J&K including the areas taken over by Pakistan and the Gilgit-Batilistan area in Pakistan. If the plebecite is decided in India's favor, will Pakistan and China give up their regions, infact will they even allow free and fair campaigning and elections? I think no matter what we say the answer from the establishment will be a categorical no. Particularly to ceding territories. Another important point is that the UN resolution DOES NOT allow for independence. It allows only Pakistan or India. The independence clause was explicitly removed on insistence from Pakistan representatives in UN.
> 
> Also not only did the Hindu Raja sign instrument of accession to India, but Sheikh Abdulla - leader of the National conference which was fighting for self determination and had the broadest support among the J&K population supported the accession.
> 
> Now coming today, what do the Kashmiris want? Well ofcourse we have to look at both PaK and IaK. Based on the opinion polls (the report that I posted earlier) India would win a plebiscite hands down. So I and I think all Indians indulging the people of J&K would agree to a plebiscite. But will Pakistan and China willingly give up their territories, I don't think so. Will they be free from intimidation and violence from terrorist outfits, again highly unlikely.
> 
> Quote from the peacepolls.org report on the poll results from Indian Kashmir:
> 
> 
> On the poll results from Pakistan administered Kashmir it says
> 
> 
> So hopefully some myths have been cleared. I had this feeling whenever I met and discussed these issues with Kashmirs but these empirical studies conducted by a third party proves my gut feeling that in case of a free and fair plebecite India would win. Even if Independence, Pakistan and India are on the table, India would still win because of vote splitting between Pakistan and Independence. So I don't think plebecite would be in the interest of Pakistan government and would agree to conduct it anyways.



i am afraid, i am gonna be disagree with you.have you ever been to Kashmir? i don't think its right time for plebiscite. i have seen tension and mistrust between security forces and people. 1989 is not very old times man,its not easy to forget atrocities done by security forces but from 2001 people are clam and provided freedom of opinion. its is not enough. removal of forces by center is wisest move of GOI coz pak is busy in tribal areas.now we need of earn good will of kashmiri people by providing economic support.

amendment in constitution is required regarding special status of Kashmir.permission of sell and buy of real state should be allowed for non kashmiris,thus there will be boost in kashmiri economy and interaction between people will increase considerably which is quite necessary to add Kashmiri people in main stream India.


----------



## EjazR

Rajkumar said:


> i am afraid, i am gonna be disagree with you.have you ever been to Kashmir? i don't think its right time for plebiscite. i have seen tension and mistrust between security forces and people. 1989 is not very old times man,its not easy to forget atrocities done by security forces but from 2001 people are clam and provided freedom of opinion. its is not enough. removal of forces by center is wisest move of GOI coz pak is busy in tribal areas.now we need of earn good will of kashmiri people by providing economic support.



I agree that having a plebiscite free of terror would be difficult but based on the opinion poll conducted only recently(right after the amarnath yatra controversy Nov2008-Feb2009) the results were still decisively against joining Pakistan. This included 69% of Valley muslims against joining pakistan as well! If the Amarnath issue had not been communalised by the JKLF and the BJP for petty political gain, then it might have been even higher.

So although Kashmiris are not happy with the Indian forces and their atrocities, they hate the militant fighters coming in from PaK much much more as they have also been involved in indiscriminate killing rapes and intimidation. So if they had to choose between India and Pakistan, they would still choose India as a lesser evil. Again this is based on the broad-based opinion poll. Again I suggest people to check out the report in its entirety at www.peacepolls.org.
The problem is that the media on both sides sensationalizes issues. Kashmiris, particularly muslims from the valley are portrayed in some Indian media as pro-pakistan, islamist and militant which is far from the truth. They see 2000-3000 people in "azadi" protests and forget that there are 9million+ people in the valleys who didnt.
Employment and corrupt administration is the number one issue for Kashmiris at the moment, lets see if Omar Abdullah can solve these problems.

I have attached tabled results of the opinion poll that shows 'unacceptable' percentage i.e. the percentage of respondents who would not accept this solution in any way. Very insightful.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GlobalStrategist

Sad but unfortunate fact is that he population of Azad Kashmir has been diluted by migration from other parts of Pakistan. India has disallowed migration to Kashmir. I, as an Indian citizen, cannot buy land in Kashmir. Should india allow migration, calls for autonomy would end--Kashmir would be overrun by UP-ites and Biharis--and the "freedom fighters" would be left exclusively with the title of "terrorists." Unfortunately, India does not have the cajones for such a move. 

Perhaps India should adopt this solution in the future, to further legitimise the LOC as a border? Pakistan already did...


----------



## Contrarian

BJP's manifesto says it would abolish the Article 370 in the Constitution. I vehemently support this move. It would allow people from the rest of India to buy land and settle in Kashmir. That otta bring a little change in J&K dont you think.

Its high time the Congress considers this as well.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

GlobalStrategist said:


> Sad but unfortunate fact is that he population of Azad Kashmir has been diluted by migration from other parts of Pakistan.



Any independent sources to indicate the extent of the dilution, what the impact on the demographics of AK has been, if significant, etc.?


----------



## EjazR

malaymishra123 said:


> BJP's manifesto says it would abolish the Article 370 in the Constitution. I vehemently support this move. It would allow people from the rest of India to buy land and settle in Kashmir. That otta bring a little change in J&K dont you think.
> 
> Its high time the Congress considers this as well.



I don't know what kind of change you want to bring. Article 370 is a non-issue now including for the BJP. (Why didn't it even 'try' to pass this when it was in power for six years) The fact remains that article 370 is one of the reasons why India has been getting a better position on the world stage on kashmir as well as among people of J&K. If in the future people of J&K themselves want to get rid of then there is no harm. Check out this link here that talks about article 370 and how it affects India.

Article 370 is not just the demand of Valley muslims but also for Jammu and Ladakh non-muslims. Maybe its high time BJP consider this as well.


----------



## Munir

Kashmir related and posted by birddog on Keymag... Good reply!

This statement shows how naive, immature and prejudiced you are. I have no love for the terrorist but lets be honest here. Not all terrorist are madrassa educated and not all madrassa educated people are terrorist. In fact most terrorist are not even muslims. Sucide bombing was invented by hindu tamils. India has seen more systematic terrorism and pogroms than any other country and invariably the perpretators are fundamentalist hindus and the victims are innocent minorities either muslims skihs or christians. As recently as 2002, 3000 were massacared in Gujarat. Thousand more sikhs massacred in earlier pogroms. What about state sponsored terrorism. By some reports Indian forces are responsible for upto 60,000 death of innocent civilians in Kashmir. And how is an elected christian religious fanatic any different from a madrassa educated fanatic? Instead of using IEDs he used the military might of his country to invade a country which was not a threat and in process contributed to addtional 500,000 innocent deaths and much more. What about Israel's terrorism against the innocent palestinians. Millions have been killed, maimed and made homeless. The palestinians did not start that conflict. What about hundreds of years of terrorism by europeans. Countries like Belgium and Holland who parade around as the great torch bearer of human rights have the worst track record of terrorism in their colonies. This is not ancient history. This was happening in first half of the last century. In recent years, the root causes of the so called Islamic terrorism lies in the policies and actions of Israel and India and the problem will not go away until they are fixed.

So don't be so holier than thou. A Hindu, or Jewish or Christian fanatic is no different from a muslim fanatic. In fact, if you go by sheer brutality and number of innocents deaths, the contribution by muslim fanatics is much less than their Christian, Jewish or Hindu counterparts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nihat

Sure , I'm no fan of attaching Religion to terrorism either - terror is terror. 

Violence achieves nothing and I find it hard to recall when an armed insurgency last helped a nation achieve independence or any other kind of solution.

Political will is the only way both parties would be satisfied , however if a terrorist fires 1 bullet the IA will fire a 100 and this cycle may well continue for another 50 years and beyond.


----------



## Tefal

best solution is to accept LOC as borders and move on.


----------



## zero

sorry for it's a long thread for me to read all but I would prefer for status quo, resulting end of dispute and hostilities among both the nation, none would desire to loose its land, so I don't find s better solution to it.


----------



## Fracker

Kashmir is a disputed region, and LOC is not international boarder. Since many critics already done, i will point about some points which helped both country in progress.

1. Because of this, India and Pakistan both has concentrated on military more then anything. & now they are among super powers of the world.
2. Because of this, both country also worked on improving (i would say, to become better then other) which helped both countries to achieve what many other countries of the region couldn't achieve. 

BUT, this doesn't mean that we should continue as it is, since what we are losing could be much more then gains. India and pakistan both has loss 1000s of troops, loss piece of lands (bangladesh to pakistan, and some of siya-chin to china), both are losing resources, both are even losing business since both countries has pretty good markets in neighbor but yet their more trade does happen to other countries, central asian resource can easily reach to india. I can go on and on with the benefits. Of course pakistan is losing more then india because of this issue. since pakistan's size is smaller then india. but in term of figures india is losing more then pakistan. But fact remain same, both are losing...

So both country should go for solving this issue, obviously both countries will look for their benefits and as a pakistani, i think the best solution if whole jammu kashmir or chenab river solution. but indian might like azad kashmir with them or LOC as permanent boarder. but if you calculate in terms then LOC, azad kashmir to india, and whole jammu kashmir to pakistan are not accepted to other sides at all. I should also add, indian politics is also against solving this problem since, which ever government losses the land might not able to get up in next election (as per those political parties point of view). 

The best solution i think is kashmir valley & kargil to pakistan. It will be like india is giving all spending and yet enjoying all the resources. again it might also be equal as losing the land, but if they want to solve then this is the last solution which will be acceptable to them. 

In this solution, both countries are scarifying, and still solving the solution. But main problem is, "are they really want to solve this"?


----------



## maverick2009

Nobody is giving up territory. 

It wud be suicide for either country. 

The status quo will be maintained


----------



## dabong1

Joe Shearer said:


> @dabong1
> 
> Dear Sir,
> 
> Your proposal seems remarkably sane and may not bring out resistance except from fanatics on either side. Have you made this condominium proposal elsewhere before? What has been the reaction?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> 'Joe S.'
> 
> PS There are other Pakistani fora where this issue has been debated. Have you seen any of those?
> 
> 'Joe'



Most people have backed the proposal as a fair solution...indian, pakistani and kashmiri.


----------



## Fracker

EjazR said:


> I agree that having a plebiscite free of terror would be difficult but based on the opinion poll conducted only recently(right after the amarnath yatra controversy Nov2008-Feb2009) the results were still decisively against joining Pakistan. This included 69% of Valley muslims against joining pakistan as well! If the Amarnath issue had not been communalised by the JKLF and the BJP for petty political gain, then it might have been even higher.
> 
> So although Kashmiris are not happy with the Indian forces and their atrocities, they hate the militant fighters coming in from PaK much much more as they have also been involved in indiscriminate killing rapes and intimidation. So if they had to choose between India and Pakistan, they would still choose India as a lesser evil. Again this is based on the broad-based opinion poll. Again I suggest people to check out the report in its entirety at www.peacepolls.org.
> The problem is that the media on both sides sensationalizes issues. Kashmiris, particularly muslims from the valley are portrayed in some Indian media as pro-pakistan, islamist and militant which is far from the truth. They see 2000-3000 people in "azadi" protests and forget that there are 9million+ people in the valleys who didnt.
> Employment and corrupt administration is the number one issue for Kashmiris at the moment, lets see if Omar Abdullah can solve these problems.
> 
> I have attached tabled results of the opinion poll that shows 'unacceptable' percentage i.e. the percentage of respondents who would not accept this solution in any way. Very insightful.



ohh man, then why you are scared of polling as your government promised in 1949? do it, and finish the issue. Since you guyz are so much confidence.. If they don't want to be with us, then why should we care? But this will only happen after polling not like that where you have more then 5 lac army in the kashmir and expect they will speak the truth!!


----------



## dabong1

maverick2009 said:


> Nobody is giving up territory.
> 
> It wud be suicide for either country.
> 
> The status quo will be maintained



And we must carry on fighting and being enemies and buy weapons from the west........


----------



## EjazR

Fracker said:


> ohh man, then why you are scared of polling as your government promised in 1949? do it, and finish the issue. Since you guyz are so much confidence.. If they don't want to be with us, then why should we care? But this will only happen after polling not like that where you have more then 5 lac army in the kashmir and expect they will speak the truth!!



Polling is done every five years for state governments and centre governments in Kashmir with the recent polls having 60+% turnout.
Now how many polls have we seen in FANA or Karakoram valley or the part of J&K under China?

The "opinion polls" that were mentioned in my post was not Indian sponsored. It was independent polls done by an Irish peace institute. Infact, the Indian government might not even know about this. And the polls only show that what they really want is independence, not joinging India OR Pakistan. But the percentage of kashmiris against joining Pakistan is greater (by a few percentage points) than joining India. And if Omar Abdulla's government (chosen by the Kashmiris) can prove that he can provide good governance, that might increase as well.

Bottom line is, will Pakistan and China give up their parts of Kashmir if India wins the polls? I don't think so.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ambijat

The out of box solutions given, here:
1) is certainly not the south Asian approach, we do not solve our problems like that;
2) any compromise is arrived only by the mutual exchange;
3) an exchange happens only when there is desire to move on together;
4) desirousness of such a kind be seen in a manner in which there is asymmetric balance of power with ample scope to grow;
5) asymmetric balance of power is realised only by economic power first, military power, next and then the power to bring in peace, the third.
6) the time needed for such conditions is at least 5-7 years from now on;
7) by 2015 the solution is bound to arrive either way.
Things are perceivably moving in the desired direction, let's hope that all comes to final picture that satisfies all and nobody thinks of himself as a loser.
Thanks!


----------



## ouiouiouiouiouioui

has anyone seen the first page og this thread and the last page....

its so funny...that everthing on this world which will never happen has been discussed...except kasmir.....

 .......u know its now about kasmiri people...niether pakistan is insane to fight india in kashmiri people who are not even part of their country presently (indian administered) and same for india...

u know one thing everbody overlooked.....it is not land...its is not kashmiri....it si "WATER"......and given the fact........the most practical solution on this earth except nuking each other is .......changing LOC into internationl border  LOL


----------



## Nihat

First things first , the armed insurgency has to end , because until then India will not budge from the stated position that terrorism is no solution or means to it.

IF that ever happens then Solution no. 1 seems very viable to me although just plain conversion of LoC to IB will not work , it will need modifications.

More autonomy to the entire state from India - economic , infrastructural and political.

Opening up more transit routes to Pakistani Kashmir and easier transit for Kashmiri citizens of both sides.

Joint patrolling along sensitive areas of LoC (24*7) which are used for infiltration , this would reduce the trust deficit on both sides.


----------



## sabir

scenario 8........go back to 1947 (which is the start of problem)....merge India and Pakistan....and then ask Kashmiri people what they want.

Sorry for trolling but this problem doesnt have a solution.


----------



## Omar1984

sabir said:


> scenario 8........go back to 1947 (which is the start of problem)....merge India and Pakistan....and then ask Kashmiri people what they want.
> 
> Sorry for trolling but this problem doesnt have a solution.



Dream on buddy! Pakistan is here to stay. I agree with one part of your nonsense post, *ask the Kashmiri people what they want*.


----------



## sabir

Omar, I am sorry if i offended u by my post. 
yes ! I wl keep on dreaming. Because millions of indian Muslims like me never understood the logic behind the partition....is it feasible to shift millions of muslims to a region and millions of non-muslims to another uprooting them from the places where they were born...of course no body was forced but still.....we were mingled in such a manner. 
One more thing...its my personal opinion....the founder of Pakistan never realised the fact that Pakistan would miss the vast minarel resources of Bihar, Orissa,Madhya Pradesh that could be the back-bone of nation's economy. Even the muslims of undevided India had equal right on these resources.
What we have achieved by the formation of India and Pakistan is in front of our eyes. Some day calculate what we would have gained by remaining united. 
every person has his/her own opinion....so I will keep on dreaming...
Again I beg your perdon if by the term 'Merge' I meant humiliation to Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Thebignag

Thanks Sabir for your comments...


----------



## Omar1984

sabir said:


> Omar, I am sorry if i offended u by my post.
> yes ! I wl keep on dreaming. Because millions of indian Muslims like me never understood the logic behind the partition....is it feasible to shift millions of muslims to a region and millions of non-muslims to another uprooting them from the places where they were born...of course no body was forced but still.....we were mingled in such a manner.
> One more thing...its my personal opinion....the founder of Pakistan never realised the fact that Pakistan would miss the vast minarel resources of Bihar, Orissa,Madhya Pradesh that could be the back-bone of nation's economy. Even the muslims of undevided India had equal right on these resources.
> What we have achieved by the formation of India and Pakistan is in front of our eyes. Some day calculate what we would have gained by remaining united.
> every person has his/her own opinion....so I will keep on dreaming...
> Again I beg your perdon if by the term 'Merge' I meant humiliation to Pakistan.



Most Pakistanis always lived in their own land. We didnt have to shift anywhere but we respect those who risked everything to be part of Pakistan and we pray for the Muslims who were killed by hindus/sikhs when they were trying to enter Pakistan.

No thanks, we dont want to be part of India.


----------



## Thebignag

Sabir, the history you have read and the history Omer's has read, are not the same....... And this is not post 1947, but has been dragged back to 2000 years.....


----------



## Omar1984

Thebignag said:


> Sabir, the history you have read and the history Omer's has read, are not the same....... And this is not post 1947, but has been dragged back to 2000 years.....




What history are you talking about? Check anywhere before partition, what is now Pakistan was and is still is MUSLIM MAJORITY, what is now India was and is still is HINDU MAJORITY.

Most Pakistanis always lived in their own land, the ones who migrated from India are a minority (but we love and respect them for their sacrafices for Pakistan).

Why cant you Indians accept reality which is Pakistan and India are two separate sovereign nations? And why is it that Indians always cry over partition and Pakistanis are happy we separated from India? I thought India was doing so well, wouldn't it be Pakistan regretting partition? NO, WE ARE HAPPY WE SEAPARATED AND WE ARE HAPPY TO BE PAKISTANIS! WE DONT WANT TO BE PART OF INDIA!


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

the best possible solution would be " Let the Kasmiris decide their future. "

Ofcourse there has to be a mutual understanding and compromise also. ?


----------



## ouiouiouiouiouioui

best possible solution is to create love....solutions will come thereafter


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

> best possible solution is to create love....solutions will come thereafter



Where do you live DisneyLand or the Magical world of Narnia . 

Sory for the comment . But how can you creat love among those who have lost their generations fighting for a cause and continue to lose their loved ones as the day passes.


----------



## Omar1984

ouiouiouiouiouioui said:


> best possible solution is to create love....solutions will come thereafter



Kashmir dispute is the only major problem we have with India.

There would be peace, if only Kashmir dispute is solved.


----------



## King Julien

Omar1984 said:


> Kashmir dispute is the only major problem we have with India.
> 
> There would be peace, if only Kashmir dispute is solved.



you sure?

what about Balochistan


----------



## Omar1984

King Julien said:


> you sure?
> 
> what about Balochistan



You claim Balochistan is part of India too?


----------



## King Julien

Omar1984 said:


> You claim Balochistan is part of India too?





I didn't claim anything...

since you stressed on *peace* after kashmir is resolved; 
you sure, you won't endorse raw funding baloch insurgents propaganda?


----------



## sabir

Omar1984 said:


> Most Pakistanis always lived in their own land. We didnt have to shift anywhere but we respect those who risked everything to be part of Pakistan and we pray for the Muslims who were killed by hindus/sikhs when they were trying to enter Pakistan.
> 
> No thanks, we dont want to be part of India.


why dont u pray also for those hindus and sikhs who were killed during migration. Afterall men who were dead cant be your enemy. and Islam doesnt teach us to be biased. Around 72,20,000 muslims were migrated during partition and estimated combined figure for hindus and sikhs 72,40,000.....Do you want to say these are very small numbers..( number of those who were killed is not mentioned)
any way we are deviating from the topic and soon will get admonished by the moderators.
My personal belief ...Pakistan didnt occupy any part of India as the region (which is now administered by pakistan and 99-100% of populaition were muslims) revolted against the Maharaja of Kashmir who was not very popular before India came to any agreement with him. and people of these area will prefer to stay with Pakistan. Ladakh and jammu will be in India. The Future of kashmir vally should be decided by the Kashmiris..(may be my view is not in line with my Government ...but I have nothing to do with it...i must speak what I believe.)

But again I will irritate you Omar by saying..."Staying United Is The BEST SOLUTION"...


----------



## EjazR

Well I am all for having a referendum in all of J&K which includes IaK, PaK including Balwaristan (FANA) area and those areas under Chinese control like Aksai Chin and Karakoram Hills (btw can any Pakistani member justify why this was given away to China?) 

The only options as per UN resolutions should be India or Pakistan, Independence will not be on the table because it was removed from the resolution on the insistence of Pakistan (yes that's true!). However, if Pakistan agrees, the Independence option can be allowed as well but I doubt it.

Whoever wins entire J&K will go that country. But I guess first China might have to agree to this as it will definitely be losing its territory. You may be surprised which country might win if you go by this independant poll done by an Irish institute in late 2008 early 2009. (www.peacepolls.org)


Besides I have friends and distant relatives in Srinagar so I can say the polls look inline with views held there but then that would be anecdotal so won't bring that up.

At the end of the day, its all about Kashmiris (muslims and non-muslims) having a better quality of life.


----------



## digitaltiger

Sorry if i am derailing the thread but To be honest, kashmir or kasmiri muslims with whom Pakistan show fraternity, is not the issue, its the ego of Pakistan who is being brouht up with one idea in mind that kashmir is the Juguler vein of Pakistan. This ego is killing us both. If you are so concerned about Muslim brotherhood then why no one in Pakistan is saying anything about muslims being killed in China in the name of internal matter and extremism. Why top brass of Pakistan is quiet about it. 

Even if Kasmir merges with Pakistan or become indipendent what will be the future of Pakistan , kashmir solution will make u (and us) a develop nation? (now please dont talk about defence expendeture will come to an hault etc etc). 

why dont we let LOC be IB and move ahead or else this has no end.

thanks


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

poorav2004 said:


> ALL MY PAKISTANTI friends there should be another VERY TERIBLE SITUATION IS GOING to imerge in aazad kashmir so called (***) will be captured by china .... be ware chines will be more dangerous than indian.. cuz later u find *** sliped out of hand to china that will be terrible .. what u all have to say abt that?



can't stop laughing


----------



## arihant

Gin ka Pakistan said:


> can't stop laughing



He might be correct. India was having good relation with Tibet. India share friendship with China, and lost the Aksai Chin. Don't trust anyone. But yes keep going until anything bad seems to happen.


----------



## dabong1

poorav2004 said:


> ALL MY PAKISTANTI friends there should be another VERY TERIBLE SITUATION IS GOING to imerge in aazad kashmir so called (***) will be captured by china .... be ware chines will be more dangerous than indian.. cuz later u find *** sliped out of hand to china that will be terrible .. what u all have to say abt that?



Thankyou for the advice but we will give it a pass

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Gin ka Pakistan said:


> can't stop laughing



Dear Sir,

You are NOT being fair.

Do you mean to tell me _you _don't have these types?

Regards,

'Joe S.'


----------



## SEAL

Future of kashmir is bloody war.
US wants srinagar airbase and other airbases in kashmir to attack China and india in return wants 1Lac troops in Afghanistan to attack Pakistan from behind.


----------



## Jatt Boy

Solution is bound to arrive very soon, current Gen Kashmiri youth is happy.  , so many people have participated in the elections. Jihad is losing support, Insurgents kill 3-year-old boy 

Kashmiris are very peaceful, I h'v met many, heck afghani pashto speaking too, they come to Punjab in winters to sell shawls etc. We bargain alot , now emotional bonding.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

Make LOC the permanent international border.

Lock down the border permanently ..... no matter what the cost, logistics, or technology/manpower involved. I am sure not ONE Indian would cringe at paying a 2&#37; Kashmir Tax as part of his Income tax even for the next 5 years if the government decides to grow some balls and take this step.

Move the Pandits back to their homes.

Those Indian Kashmiris who like waving Pakistani flags and burning the Indian tricolour should be given 6 months to a year max as a last allowable and government sanctioned non-hostile honeymoon period to take care of their affairs and property and holdings before being politely escorted to the other side.

This would be a one-time offer ..... never ever to be repeated. Make your choices, and choose your side now, coz tomorrow the sitting on the fence bullshit with one butt cheek and testicle on either side stops (pardon the graphic description).

Post this period, any such anti-national activity should attract quick, decisive, and terminal state backed reprisals in public, with any such actions declared constitutionally as treason against the state. 

Warning was served, and enough leeway given.

That is the one and only option. The only scenario Indians and the Indian government would be willing to discuss ..... now or in the future.

Should be interesting to see how the "poor oppressed Muslim brothers" are received and treated when they finally come over minus the land .... doodh ka doodh, aur paani ka paani.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## faisal4pro

*There are several viable solutions to the Kashmir dispute:

the main reason of this dispute, which is undisclosed to public yet, is the water issue. If the disputed area given to India then it is sure that india will stop all rivers and build more Dams to destroy Pakistan and vice versa for Pakistan. An independent State of Kashmir is a reasonable solution to the Kashmir issue which will help both India and Pak to develop more rapidly and to reduce expenditure on Army. 

However, as history tells us, Pakistan has got stance in its point to get Kashmir as a whole as India is clearly violating UN resolutions. Indian Occupied Kashmir is a result of army raid not of a resolution of UN. UN wanted people of Kashmir to decide and they decided to go with Pakistan. So i think it is time to hand IOK over to Pakistan to avoid further wars!*


----------



## faisal4pro

vsdoc said:


> Make LOC the permanent international border.
> 
> Lock down the border permanently ..... no matter what the cost, logistics, or technology/manpower involved. I am sure not ONE Indian would cringe at paying a 2&#37; Kashmir Tax as part of his Income tax even for the next 5 years if the government decides to grow some balls and take this step.
> 
> Move the Pandits back to their homes.
> 
> Those Indian Kashmiris who like waving Pakistani flags and burning the Indian tricolour should be given 6 months to a year max as a last allowable and government sanctioned non-hostile honeymoon period to take care of their affairs and property and holdings before being politely escorted to the other side.
> 
> This would be a one-time offer ..... never ever to be repeated. Make your choices, and choose your side now, coz tomorrow the sitting on the fence bullshit with one butt cheek and testicle on either side stops (pardon the graphic description).
> 
> Post this period, any such anti-national activity should attract quick, decisive, and terminal state backed reprisals in public, with any such actions declared constitutionally as treason against the state.
> 
> Warning was served, and enough leeway given.
> 
> That is the one and only option. The only scenario Indians and the Indian government would be willing to discuss ..... now or in the future.
> 
> Should be interesting to see how the "poor oppressed Muslim brothers" are received and treated when they finally come over minus the land .... doodh ka doodh, aur paani ka paani.
> 
> Cheers, Doc


*Y LOC? Y not the border between IOK and India make international border?*


----------



## arihant

faisal4pro said:


> *There are several viable solutions to the Kashmir dispute:
> 
> the main reason of this dispute, which is undisclosed to public yet, is the water issue. If the disputed area given to India then it is sure that india will stop all rivers and build more Dams to destroy Pakistan and vice versa for Pakistan. An independent State of Kashmir is a reasonable solution to the Kashmir issue which will help both India and Pak to develop more rapidly and to reduce expenditure on Army.
> 
> However, as history tells us, Pakistan has got stance in its point to get Kashmir as a whole as India is clearly violating UN resolutions. Indian Occupied Kashmir is a result of army raid not of a resolution of UN. UN wanted people of Kashmir to decide and they decided to go with Pakistan. So i think it is time to hand IOK over to Pakistan to avoid further wars!*



See, if India is violating UN rules, then you should go to UN. You know better rules then start legal proceeding, who is stopping you. India is democratic country and we as Indian wish peace. If Pakistan promise not to provide logistic funds, illegal money transfer, etc.. etc... then surely we are happy to give to permanent water supply. 

Which UN decided to go with Pakistan. Give us 50 years without terrorism and we will develop kashmir as world's best place. It's better to handover *** to India to avoid going into hands of Talibans.

Anyway, we are doing useless argument discuss 1000s of times earlier. Let have a rest.

---------- Post added at 11:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:35 PM ----------




fox said:


> Future of kashmir is bloody war.
> US wants srinagar airbase and other airbases in kashmir to attack China and india in return wants 1Lac troops in Afghanistan to attack Pakistan from behind.



obviously joke. What India wishes is Indian People's want and Indian people want peace.


----------



## faisal4pro

arihant said:


> See, if India is violating UN rules, then you should go to UN. You know better rules then start legal proceeding, who is stopping you. India is democratic country and we as Indian wish peace. If Pakistan promise not to provide logistic funds, illegal money transfer, etc.. etc... then surely we are happy to give to permanent water supply.
> 
> Which UN decided to go with Pakistan. Give us 50 years without terrorism and we will develop kashmir as world's best place. It's better to handover *** to India to avoid going into hands of Talibans.
> 
> Anyway, we are doing useless argument discuss 1000s of times earlier. Let have a rest.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 11:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:35 PM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> obviously joke. What India wishes is Indian People's want and Indian people want peace.


*If India is listening to UN then who is this India who is doing wtever it takes to make it strong? India is habitual wrong-wisher of Pakistan!*


----------



## EjazR

faisal4pro said:


> *... UN wanted people of Kashmir to decide and they decided to go with Pakistan. So i think it is time to hand IOK over to Pakistan to avoid further wars!*



When did they decide that? Sheikh Abdulla's National Conference was the most popular politcal party in the Kashmir valley and at the time of independance he was the one who opted to join the Indian Union. 

Muslim League only had some popularity in the areas around Mirpur, otherwise they were all under the spell of Sheikh Abdulla's pro-poor party

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aditiwari007

Omar1984 said:


> Yea ONLY Indians would want scenario 3, have you ever thought what Kashmiris would want.
> 
> NEWS FLASH FOR YOU: LOC is NOT an international border...and no country in the world recognizes it as an international border.


What Kashmiris want can be seen in the win of ppl like Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah(just find it urself who these ppl are)
Even a more better solution is that India reunites with Pakistan through a war and Islamabad becomes the capital of the Punjab state of India.


----------



## Panditji

The puppet leaders of Hurriyat have no local standing, and shy away from contesting elections on one pretext or another. Result - Disillusionment of the masses with Hurriyat. These cowards like Sayyad Ali Shah Geelani also killed Abdul Gani Lone, a fact stated by Sajjad Lone himself.

As long as these parasites are there, Kashmir cannot be peaceful. I pray for their early and painless demise, so that the valley is peaceful again. I care not what the final configuration is, though situation 3 is the best scenario. The border should be impervious.


----------



## faisal4pro

EjazR said:


> When did they decide that? Sheikh Abdulla's National Conference was the most popular politcal party in the Kashmir valley and at the time of independance he was the one who opted to join the Indian Union.
> 
> Muslim League only had some popularity in the areas around Mirpur, otherwise they were all under the spell of Sheikh Abdulla's pro-poor party


*i think u need to revise ur knowledge of history! they kashmir dispute was just because of "raja" of kashmir!*


----------



## Panditji

faisal4pro said:


> *i think u need to revise ur knowledge of history! they kashmir dispute was just because of "raja" of kashmir!*


I agree with you - If the Raja had decided well in advance to merge with India, we would not have landed up here.

But as far as the 'revision' part of your post goes, you revise a bit of the tabloid stuff they taught you in middle school about the conflict - Issue arose because of the pillage and murder by the goons sent over to 'wrest' Kashmir away from India, without any due process. It is that shortcut that we are suffering these last 6 decades.


----------



## Zee-Gen

So many ways to solve the problem and too many reasons to not solve the problemthis is Kashmir issue. Pakistan is giving ways to solve it and India is providing reasons to not solve it.

This issue will not be resolved until we have not learned the possible loss and benefit from both sides.

From Pakistans point of view, Kashmir is important in two ways..water and security. Both these issues are very sensitive from Pakistans view point and both are connected directly to its survival.

From Indians point of view, Kashmir is important from the political perspective (as what I understand, may be I am wrong).so for Pakistan, loss and gain both are consequential and for India..only loss is consequential, which India will not bear.

In my point of view the conclusion of this issue is that people from both sides should realize that as long as Kashmir issue is there, our future has no guarantee and has to generate a will to solve the issue and also to pressurize the govt. to conclude the issuebecause both countries are nuclear power (especially Indian people). Once the will is there..finding way is not impossible.and to generate a will we must understand that the ultimate solution will be a war (and fellows I am seeing the doomsday just 10-15 years away by most, as India already is trying to stop our water and now this situation cannot last for many years).


----------



## InExile

I started reading this thread with the hope that Indians and Pakistanis could find a common ground and explore compromises; but now it is with sadness I see that most of this thread is full of accusations and counter accusations, personal attacks, hardened stances and general ill will.

As an Indian, here is my stance; I dont want India to give up Kashmir for the following reasons.
1. Loss of territorial integrity and land 
2. A lost of prestige related to above
3. Jihadists and Terrorists able to operate on land that much closer to the Indian heartland.
4. Indian secular character - How can we claim to be a secular nation when we hand over our only Muslim state.
5. Loss of an important strategic region from a geopolitical perspective
6. The fact that it wont resolve anything; Pakistan will still continue to attack us by proxy.

But on the other hand a state of perpetual enmity with a neighboring country could have catastrophic potential consequences; and I am prepared to contemplate compromises; even painful ones that might consider loss of territory.

But here's the thing; as this thread as so clearly shown; there is so much hatred and bitterness. I can easily say; I dont trust Pakistanis. I dont mean to offend; I am sure all Pakistanis will say the same of Indians. Until there is trust; there can be no meaningful peace.

But I fear, looking at history, most territorial disputes are not solved by compromise and negotiation but much more likely by war and ethnic cleansing.


----------



## rajeev

Any rising power never parts with any piece of land. That is a historical fact.

I see no reason India to do so. India is getting more powerful day-by-day and there is no reason to give away something that you already have in expectation of peace by suicide bombers. It does not work.

Even with a weak hand, India held Kashmir for 60 years, now why should India negotiate for terms less favorable to it?

If you guys dont make me the usual canon fodder and dont think of it as a India-Pakistan issue, think about it?

Which power has ever given any land - it never happens.

A amazing read would be US civil war. US was formed by 13 states on basis on ability to leave to union if the state ever chooses so. But apparently when many states ceded from it, Northern US didnot give it away, it conquered South. 

Now take the US-South, do they feel the same about leaving the union. I dont think so, eventhough, they remember the old history.

If India wants to be a power in future, it has to project its confidence at any cost. A losing country does not become superpower, ever!


----------



## InExile

Today I feel in a bargaining mood, so here my solution to the Kashmir problem.

India gives up the Kashmir valley to Pakistan; but receives an equivalent amount of territory in either Sindh or in the Northern areas, Gilgit - Balistan. Given the Kashmir valley has a larger population and economy, this is a good deal for Pakistan territory vise.

Next, the muslims in the areas given to India should be resettled in the Kashmir valley, while the displaced Kashmiri pandits should take their place. That way there will be no reason to have a large military presence to guard over a disloyal population. Also since India will have territory both north and south of the Kashmir valley; it can act quickly , if ever the Kashmir valley is used as a base for an attack on India.

This even solves the Siachen glacier problem since this exchange of territory would bring it deep inside Indian borders!

Completely original thinking eh?


----------



## EjazR

InExile said:


> Today I feel in a bargaining mood, so here my solution to the Kashmir problem.
> 
> India gives up the Kashmir valley to Pakistan; but receives an equivalent amount of territory in either Sindh or in the Northern areas, Gilgit - Balistan. Given the Kashmir valley has a larger population and economy, this is a good deal for Pakistan territory vise.
> 
> Next, the muslims in the areas given to India should be resettled in the Kashmir valley, while the displaced Kashmiri pandits should take their place. That way there will be no reason to have a large military presence to guard over a disloyal population. Also since India will have territory both north and south of the Kashmir valley; it can act quickly , if ever the Kashmir valley is used as a base for an attack on India.
> 
> This even solves the Siachen glacier problem since this exchange of territory would bring it deep inside Indian borders!
> 
> *Completely original thinking eh?*



Not really, you are thinking in communal terms and that will be a failure what India stands for.

Moreover, you seem to have no idea of the ground realities of J&K by using terms like "disloyal" population. So basically no, you situation will not work.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## InExile

I should have perhaps used the term 'hostile' population. And i was referring to the residents of Gilgit Balistan, who will definitely not give allegiance to the Indian state.

My post was meant to be lighthearted to be taken seriously (which might seem inappropriate), however my basic point is that we should look at this as a territorial issue, rather than a communal or human rights issue. No country in the world can be expected to voluntarily give up its territory; however we can be flexible if the other side is willing to compromise. 

While secular ideals are good for India and essential for our prosperity and stability; Kashmir is a legacy from the time of partition; which probably does not have a solution if we stick rigidly to a secular framework.


----------



## jarnee

Pakistani politician , ppl of pakistan , On this forum and else where..keep talking about solution to kashmir. so what is the solution? 

Give all to Pakistan? 

Then what happens to billions center has invested there and new 24,000 crore development package that Central govt is giving? ..will Pakistan pay that back with interest ? remember ... Only land transfer in history politically happened when USA bought Alaska from Russia ..? 

And what about 20% Hindu population ..?..the demand is due to religious reasons right? and what about 15 Crore muslims in other parts of india..?

remember this dispute is diffrent from Palestine dispute.


----------



## WarProfessor

jarnee said:


> Give all to Pakistan?



Yeah. Haven't you hurt Pak enough? Are you sugguesting BD's independence ain't enough for you?
Have some consciouse. Don't be greedy.


----------



## third eye

jarnee said:


> Pakistani politician , ppl of pakistan , On this forum and else where..keep talking about solution to kashmir. so what is the solution?
> 
> Give all to Pakistan?
> 
> Then what happens to billions center has invested there and new 24,000 crore development package that Central govt is giving? ..will Pakistan pay that back with interest ? remember ... Only land transfer in history politically happened when USA bought Alaska from Russia ..?
> 
> And what about 20% Hindu population ..?..the demand is due to religious reasons right? and what about 15 Crore muslims in other parts of india..?
> 
> remember this dispute is diffrent from Palestine dispute.



This subject has been flogged to death here.

Upon its death, it has exhumed & flogged again and again.. of no avail.


----------



## Brisingr

J&K Facts
India controls 141,338 km2 (54,571 sq mi) ,
Pakistan 85,846 km2 (33,145 sq mi) and 
China, the remaining 37,555 km2 (14,500 sq mi).

Pak and china both illegally occupying huge land mass that belong to J&K People,India. These guys talk as if their hands are clean. First let them surrender the occupied land to India, then we will discuss about the issues happenning in kashmir.
I wounder why-o-why Indians dont make much of FUZZ about Northern Areas, Azad Kashmir, Aksai Chin and the Trans-Karakoram Tract like what they do for Kashmir. If these guys are really concerned about the kashmire ppl then let them surrender their land to them first.


----------



## logic

The only solution for Kashmir is to let the people decide in plebiscite what they want to do with their future. 
1. Join Pakistan 
2. Join India 
3. Independence 
while Pakistan and India accept the decision of people of Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jarnee

My solution.. pay $700 Billion ..buy Kashmir ..Amount is same as what America did to bail out its economy. If China has that money she takes it and then can gift it to Pakistan.

Obviously Pakistan does not have that money....


----------



## jarnee

^^^ with that money India should spend on Advanced militarization and advanced space capabilities..and uplift all Indian poor... spend on economic prosperity of all Indians..


----------



## Brisingr

jarnee said:


> My solution.. pay $700 Billion ..buy Kashmir ..Amount is same as what America did to bail out its economy. If China has that money she takes it and then can gift it to Pakistan.
> 
> Obviously Pakistan does not have that money....



Your logic stinks jarnee. Ite like selling one of your family member to a businessman for comforting the rest in your family. Will you do it???


----------



## Brisingr

logic said:


> The only solution for Kashmir is to let the people decide in plebiscite what they want to do with their future.
> 1. Join Pakistan
> 2. Join India
> 3. Independence
> while Pakistan and India accept the decision of people of Kashmir.



we will also conduct a poll in North-West Pakistan among the talibens.while Pakistan ,India and rest of the world accept the decision of talibens.


----------



## dabong1

1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.

This will give power to the pak-indo govts to keep a check on kashmir and will increase understanding and cooperation between the two nations.
You might not want a pakistani as the president of "indian" kashmir for a year but do not forget that the "pakistani" kashmiris will have to be under a indian president also for a year.

2.All three flags flown on public buildings.

A nice fudging of the issue with the indian flag flying high in muzzafrabad alongside the pak and kashmir flag and vice versa the pakistani flag flying high in srinagar alongside the indo-kashmir flag.
At least when the army men on either side of the border said that there nations flag will be flying high on the other side they will be proved correct but not in they way the thought.


3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.

4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.

6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.

9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment

10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.

11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir

All the above are to do with letting indians know that issue of "secular" india and the fear that every other state in india will want to independent if the kashmiris get there way is put to rest.
The kashmiris hold indian passports,take part in indian state elections ect should be enough for the indians to keep thinking off them as "indian kashmiris".


5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towards the sikh refugees to be resettled.

We could use this issue to show the goodwill between the two nations and give a boost to the final settlement.


7.Merge the two police forces.

A way for the indians to keep a track on whats going on pak kashmir and vice versa......it will build trust as each can make sure that kashmir is not being used to undermine either nation.

8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.

Very easy to do.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/37658-what-solution-kashmir.html#post531585

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jarnee

Brisingr said:


> Your logic stinks jarnee. Ite like selling one of your family member to a businessman for comforting the rest in your family. Will you do it???



Maybe i am wrong!! but what is the solution??.. I think there is none.

India has given so many sacifices ..faught wars to defend it..families destroyed ... the area is priceless.. 

What will pakistan do after they get it ..? they dont have anything to help them.. the best place for people of Kashmir is to be in India or be part of relatively prosperous China.

Independent Kashmir is not possible.


----------



## jarnee

^^ so what talks is Manmohan singh talking about...if there is election ..and india wins on Indian side and Pakistan on its side then ..both will say cheating cheating!!

India will surely win ....if at all peblicite is done India will win..and there is no fairness in election..anywhere in subcontinent... 
There are segments in Kashmir who are sepratist and others pro-india .. the battle is between them...and if election happens ,,,India has more money to buy political leaders... bottom line ..Money talks...also international audience here if at all allowed will be yours America..which anyway is accused to be pro india


----------



## Spring Onion

jarnee said:


> Pakistani politician , ppl of pakistan , On this forum and else where..keep talking about solution to kashmir. so what is the solution?
> *
> Give all to Pakistan? *
> 
> 
> 
> And what about 20% Hindu population ..?..the demand is due to religious reasons right? and what about 15 Crore muslims in other parts of india..?
> 
> remember this dispute is diffrent from Palestine dispute.



Dont give it to us as it doesnt belong to us neither to India.

So give it back to Kashmiris who are the owners of Kashmir which illegaly occupied by India.

Hold referendum under UN and other neutral observers and neutral countries, which will determine the fate of Kashmir.

Those areas which vote for joining India would go to you those who want an Independent Kashmir would go independent and those who want to be with Pakistan would join us.

If you are so sure of your command there and if you are so sure that they are with you then why you are afraid of holding a just neutral referendum in Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Nemesis

There is no solution per say that will satisfy either India or Pakistan. I say give both sides of Kashmir greater autonomy and allow people from both sides to come to either side of Kashmir regularly.


----------



## Nihat

great, and then we can have a referrendum party all across india and the world. Other seperatist organizations in india would get encouragement then and believe that violence is the solution to everything.

There are other territorial issues across the world , for eg - Tibet in China , Israel- Palestine, Taiwan- China, Chechneya and Russia, there was the falklands issue between UK and Argentina. Referendum is not held for every kind of dispute.

Before anyone points out UN resolutions, I'll tell you to go look up the long history behind why that was not implemented then.

Another concern is that an Independent Kashmir may well become another safe haven for Anti- India militants, who then then attack india on the pretext of alleged human rights crimes over 20 years. It'll just never end.


----------



## Spring Onion

Nemesis said:


> There is no solution per say that will satisfy either India or Pakistan.



It is not about satisfying India or Pakistan its about people of Kashmir.

The easiest soultion is to let the Kashmiri people decide which side they want to be or even Independent.


*Hold referendum and give Kashmiris choice to decide whether they want 

1. To be with India

2. To be with Pakistan 
or 

3. To be Independent.*



> I say give both sides of Kashmir greater autonomy and allow people from both sides to come to either side of Kashmir regularly.



Still the onus is on India. are you ready to give more autonomy?

And do you know that there is no communication system allowed in Indian Held Kashmir to make calls to Pakistan whereas Pakistan has allowed not only recieving but also we can make calls to Indian Held Kashmir from here


----------



## Comet

Nihat said:


> great, and then we can have a referrendum party all across india and the world.* Other seperatist organizations in india would get encouragement then and believe that violence is the solution to everything.*
> 
> There are other territorial issues across the world , for eg - Tibet in China , Israel- Palestine, Taiwan- China, Chechneya and Russia, there was the falklands issue between UK and Argentina. Referendum is not held for every kind of dispute.


Only if you have held "other parts" illegally.


Nihat said:


> Before anyone points out UN resolutions, I'll tell you to go look up the long history behind why that was not implemented then.



What are you pointing at?


Nihat said:


> Another concern is that an Independent Kashmir may well become another safe haven for Anti- India militants, who then then attack india on the pretext of alleged human rights crimes over 20 years. It'll just never end.



No it wont. If you give due share to someone, they wont bother asking for more.


----------



## PlanetWarrior

dabong1 said:


> 1.The president of kashmir is rotated every year between the indian and pakistan president.
> 
> This will give power to the pak-indo govts to keep a check on kashmir and will increase understanding and cooperation between the two nations.
> You might not want a pakistani as the president of "indian" kashmir for a year but do not forget that the "pakistani" kashmiris will have to be under a indian president also for a year.
> 
> 2.All three flags flown on public buildings.
> 
> A nice fudging of the issue with the indian flag flying high in muzzafrabad alongside the pak and kashmir flag and vice versa the pakistani flag flying high in srinagar alongside the indo-kashmir flag.
> At least when the army men on either side of the border said that there nations flag will be flying high on the other side they will be proved correct but not in they way the thought.
> 
> 
> 3.Kashmir to have no military-foreign postions......the kashmiri wishes are represented through the indian-pak embassies.
> 
> 4.elected memebers of the kashmir parliment are represented in the pak-india parliments.
> 
> 6.People with pakistani-indian passports keep the same documentation but are issued a kashmir citizen card.
> 
> 9.Kashmiris on the indian side participate in the the indian election and send representatives to the indian parliment
> 
> 10.The kashmiris on the pakistani side participate in the pakistani election and send representatives to the pak parliment.
> 
> 11.The people of kashmir also have kashmir specfic elections where non military-foreign issues are debated in the kashmir
> 
> All the above are to do with letting indians know that issue of "secular" india and the fear that every other state in india will want to independent if the kashmiris get there way is put to rest.
> The kashmiris hold indian passports,take part in indian state elections ect should be enough for the indians to keep thinking off them as "indian kashmiris".
> 
> 
> 5.Pakistan pays for the resettling of hindu kashmiri refugees and india pays for the resettling of muslim kashmiri refugees and both pay towards the sikh refugees to be resettled.
> 
> We could use this issue to show the goodwill between the two nations and give a boost to the final settlement.
> 
> 
> 7.Merge the two police forces.
> 
> A way for the indians to keep a track on whats going on pak kashmir and vice versa......it will build trust as each can make sure that kashmir is not being used to undermine either nation.
> 
> 8.Both currencies can be used in kashmir....dual pricing like you have on any holiday location.
> 
> Very easy to do.
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/37658-what-solution-kashmir.html#post531585



A very good solution except that I will add that this should be a temporary position for a few years until the position is stabilised in Kashmir and the Kashmiris are in a position to decide if they want independence or to merge with India or Pakistan. The joint rule will hopefully bring in a period for Pakistan and India to learn to trust each other. As I stated in another thread, Kashmir could become the umbilical cord which unites India and Pakistan. But Indian and Pakistani politicians would roll over and die rather than settle the issue of Kashmir for once and forever


----------



## Spring Onion

PlanetWarrior said:


> A very good solution except that I will add that this should be a temporary position for a few years until the position is stabilised in Kashmir and the Kashmiris are in a position to decide if they want independence or to merge with India or Pakistan. The joint rule will hopefully bring in a period for Pakistan and India to learn to trust each other. As I stated in another thread, Kashmir could become the umbilical cord which unites India and Pakistan. But Indian and Pakistani politicians would roll over and die rather than settle the issue of Kashmir for once and forever



This solution was given by Musharraf too but it was rejected by India.

As far as politicians on both sides are concerned i feel one day both will be rubbing their hands when US will get the pie.

So its better for India and Pakistan to solve it before US gets Kashmir as its base in the region


----------



## Barrett

As far as the buying idea is concerned it did come as a surprise to me .... how much are the legitimate indian areas for ? On a more serious note the solution to Kashmir are the various UN resolutions which are acceptable to both Pakistan and Kashmiri people. Kashmir belongs to India the same way Palestine belongs to Israel and Afghanistan,Iraq to US. Occupying land by force will never provide the right to claim it. 

*Resolution of the Commission of January 5, 1949* 


_6. (b) All person (other than citizens of the State) who on or since 15 August 1947 have entered it for other than lawful purpose, shall be required to leave the State_

I suppose the 600,000 army personals do fall under that category.

In my opinion there is no political solution to the Kashmir issue mainly because of the Indian policies of aggression.


----------



## logic

Nihat said:


> great, and then we can have a referrendum party all across india and the world. Other seperatist organizations in india would get encouragement then and believe that violence is the solution to everything.
> 
> There are other territorial issues across the world , for eg - Tibet in China , Israel- Palestine, Taiwan- China, Chechneya and Russia, there was the falklands issue between UK and Argentina. Referendum is not held for every kind of dispute.
> 
> Before anyone points out UN resolutions, I'll tell you to go look up the long history behind why that was not implemented then.
> 
> Another concern is that an Independent Kashmir may well become another safe haven for Anti- India militants, who then then attack india on the pretext of alleged human rights crimes over 20 years. It'll just never end.



Dear according to your logic India Pakistan and Kasmir will be locked up in the death match forever.


----------



## Beskar

*Threads Merged.*


----------



## PlanetWarrior

logic said:


> Dear according to your logic India Pakistan and Kasmir will be locked up in the death match forever.



I have not read all the posts in this thread as they are too numerous so forgive me if I am being repetitive of some other post/s. What confuses me is why India and Pakistan cannot reach agreement for the joint control of the whole of Kashmir. Dabong's suggestion of rotating presidency between India and Pakistan must be given a  Perhaps a 10-15 year period for joint rule and undertakings to build up the region of Kashmir jointly. Indian and Pakistani troops to be removed completely from Kashmir. A joint effort by India and Pakistan to train a formidable Kashmiri police force. Now that Pakistan is removing extremists from its soil, India's fears of Islamic insurgency from Pakistan should be scaled down. Emphasis should be for India and Pakistan to remove their nationals from Kashmir over a period and to eventually create an atmosphere in Kashmir which will allow the Kashmiris eventually to vote on whether they want independence or merger with India or Pakistan. A wealthy independent Kashmir as a buffer between India and Pakistan and a nation grateful to India and Pakistan for its successful creation can only serve the interests of India and Pakistan. That can only happen though if India and Pakistan and their successive governments are sincere in their approach towards Kashmir.

Joint rule by India and Pakistan will also give these 2 nations an opportunity to work together towards a common goal. Instead of harvesting bombs they could jointly harvest the most fertile region in Asia to the benefit of all of the people of Kashmir, India and Pakistan


----------



## Nemesis

> It is not about satisfying India or Pakistan its about people of Kashmir.



The most popular leader of Kashmir, Sheikh Abdullah wanted autonomy under the Indian union. 



> Hold referendum and give Kashmiris choice to decide whether they want
> 
> 1. To be with India
> 
> 2. To be with Pakistan
> or
> 
> 3. To be Independent.



As all governments in Pakistan have refused to recognize the independent option in the UN resolution on plebiscite, your point does not arise. 




> Still the onus is on India. are you ready to give more autonomy?



We have already given autonomy to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Discussions are taking place to give the state greater autonomy. Despite calling it "Azad"Kashmir, Pakistan does not do the same. So no, the onus is not on India but on Pakistan. 

As stated before, there are no options that will satisfy either Pakistan or India. Greater autonomy is the only way forward.


----------



## Barrett

We are again talking about the views or wishes of individuals and not the Kashmiri people in general.
All the Pakistani Governments have never refused plebiscite as according to UN

1. Envisaging a cease-fire.
2.*The withdrawal of all outside forces from the state.*
3.A plebiscite *under the control of an administrator* who would be *nominated by the Secretary General.
*

Now whereas the Autonomy on Azad Kashmir is concerned, Who told u that India gave autonomy to AJK? 

_India moved her forces into Srinagar and a drawn-out fight between Indian forces and the forces of liberation ensued. The forces of Azad Kashmir successfully resisted India's armed intervention and *liberated* one-third of the State.
_

India needs to withdraw "ALL" its forces from Kashmir and then let the Kashmiri People decide their fate through a democratic practice of exercising their Vote.


----------



## Nihat

In due time , LOC as IB is the only solution that I can see , with a no riders attached withdrawal of all Army and paramilitary units from J&K. Full autonomy to the state too.

If not now , then this will have to accepted 10-15 years down the line , simply because there is no other acceptable solution. Also, a monitoring body should be set up to keep tabs on Indian and Pak claims over river systems of the reason , this should consist of Intl, neutral members.

The concept of plebeside came up because of a stupid Indian PM decided to go to UN under Intl. preassure, it's a bit like giving up nuke weapons in the sense that , if it happens in all disputed regions of the world , then India should follow. Why the hell should we go at it alone.

American support to Pak on Kashmir will dwindle in due time as US would not want to needle india too much owing to it's own economic and diplomatic interests.

The ball is pretty much in Pakistan's court, either accept J&K as an Indian supervised region with full autonomy or continue to fight a losing battle via proxies and risk future trouble.


----------



## desiman

Fracker said:


> ohh man, then why you are scared of polling as your government promised in 1949? do it, and finish the issue. Since you guyz are so much confidence.. If they don't want to be with us, then why should we care? But this will only happen after polling not like that where you have more then 5 lac army in the kashmir and expect they will speak the truth!!



Let me get everything straight here, Kashmir is an integral part of India and will always remain so. Pakistan or Pakistani do not need to worry about Kashmir or Kashmiris as that is Indias outlook and it is being looked after in a democratic way. Pakistan needs to worry about its own problems first rather that try to interfere into Kashmir which is truly an internal Indian issue. And when it comes to threat of war, India is fully prepared and capable of taking care of any misadventure from Pakistan. When it comes to the so called UN resolutions, India is not liable to adhere to any resolutions that it feels are biased and not representing the real situation. Kashmir is an integral part of India and only because it has a Muslim majority, it does not mean that it belongs to Pakistan or is independent. There are many other regions in India that have a Muslim majority so does that mean they also dont belong to India ? If I must remind everyone, India has more Muslims than Pakistan, then by that standard, even Pakistan belongs to India. Indian Muslims are living peacefully and unlike many other countries India has managed to keep all religion running simultaneously very successfully. Yes there are skirmishes but they are a thing of the past now, and as the new generation grows up to a more liberal thinking, theses so called religious boundaries get thinner and thinner. The recent elections in Kashmir have proved that the valley is starting to realize that it benefits from peace and staying with a democratic India. Unlike Pakistan, who has been under military rule for most of its history, India has managed to maintain a robust democratic infrastructure since its independence. As shown in 1947,65,71 and the Kargil conflict, India will defend its territory at all cost and has no future plans to give up even an inch of it. My recommendation to Pakistan is that first solve your own problems before recommending solutions to other countries.


----------



## Barrett

The Solution to Kashmir is clearly stated in all the resolutions passed by UN. United Nations arbitrators have put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarization of the region, every one of which is accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government. It was your Prime Minister Nehru who ran to the UN holding his dhoti when the Indians could not handle things on their own. Once the resolution is unexpected and against their will you refuse to accept it. We as Pakistanis still have the courage to look you (a country 5 times our size) in the eye. We have liberated 37% of Kashmir earlier and will keep fighting till we liberate rest of the 43% leaving 20% of Aksai-chin. If you dont accept UN then why dont you quit as a member or you are there to accept the decisions that benefit your interests only. Whining about the UN resolutions will not make your position any stronger. You have never let any opportunity go to dub the majority Muslims who decided to remain in India as traitors and Pakistani agents. The only agenda is to keep them poor, illiterate, diseased, toiling masses in perpetual misery.

A step forward in the peace talks results in Bombs ripping through a train killing innocent civilians and according to plans Indian Media as always without a blink of the eye blaming it on Pakistan and later to their own disgrace find out the involvement of a serving army officer Col.Purohit (Military Intelligence) whose Chief Investigation Officer Karkare (ATS chief) and his top brass killed in Mumbai attacks (another inside job) under suspicious circumstances.
If India harbors and protects the perpetrators of the heinous crimes on the Samjhota Express and in Malegaon and fails to rein in the Indian Army from blowing up mosques, churches and trains, then it is as bad as the fascists who are in power. 
You have dozens of separatist movements going on in your own country and should start worrying about them first. 
India is facing enough internal strife and turmoil to endanger its very own integrity that should be taken care of first instead of pointing fingers over and across its borders.


----------



## vsdoc

Kashmir cannot / will not be "solved". Ever.

Either status quo will be maintained, or somewhere down the line there will be re-unification and re-absorption of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir back into India, as Pakistan and Pakistanis struggle to keep the rest of their country together in the face of large scale violence and anarchy across large swathes of the country.

Many experts have predicted, based on the current scenario and the way things are heading, the very real short to medium term reality of a Pakistan that has lost Balochistan, that never really had Waziristan and the so called NWFP, and that is now in reality and officially what it has and had always been for the elite polity and army since Partition in 1947 - Sindh and Punjab.

The age-old argument/stand by Pakistanis that they were always a different people from Indians per-se and hence deserved a different nation (the so-called Two-Nation theory) was and is therefore no different by extension to the Balochi people's arguably legitimate historical/racial claims of being a completely different people from sub-continental Pakistanis and thus not ever wanting to have gotten dragged into the Pakistani state from the very begining, instead of having their own *independent nationhood* (with parts of Afghanistan and Iran merged into the same) or merged into Afghanistan (or even Iran ..... depending on a *plebiscite* of what the Balochi people want for themselves and their right to determine their own future ..... that they definitely do not want Pakistan is however clear to all) with whose people they share much more in common ancestry as a people. (howz that for a single sentence OceanX? )

A coin always has two sides, and I for one would like my country to increasingly make the world aware of the other side of the Kashmir / Balochistan coin as fair return for what Pakistan has done to my country and my people for the past 6 decades.

See what India has done to develop Kashmir and see how Pakistan has treated Balochistan for the past 60 years ..... the answer and solution should and will be self-evident to all. 

The rest as they say will follow.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nihat

Barrett said:


> The Solution to Kashmir is clearly stated in all the resolutions passed by UN. United Nations arbitrators have put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarization of the region, every one of which is accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government. It was your Prime Minister Nehru who ran to the UN holding his dhoti when the Indians could not handle things on their own. Once the resolution is unexpected and against their will you refuse to accept it. We as Pakistanis still have the courage to look you (a country 5 times our size) in the eye. We have liberated 37% of Kashmir earlier and will keep fighting till we liberate rest of the 43% leaving 20% of Aksai-chin. If you dont accept UN then why dont you quit as a member or you are there to accept the decisions that benefit your interests only. Whining about the UN resolutions will not make your position any stronger. You have never let any opportunity go to dub the majority Muslims who decided to remain in India as traitors and Pakistani agents. The only agenda is to keep them poor, illiterate, diseased, toiling masses in perpetual misery.
> 
> A step forward in the peace talks results in Bombs ripping through a train killing innocent civilians and according to plans Indian Media as always without a blink of the eye blaming it on Pakistan and later to their own disgrace find out the involvement of a serving army officer Col.Purohit (Military Intelligence) whose Chief Investigation Officer Karkare (ATS chief) and his top brass killed in Mumbai attacks (another inside job) under suspicious circumstances.
> If India harbors and protects the perpetrators of the heinous crimes on the Samjhota Express and in Malegaon and fails to rein in the Indian Army from blowing up mosques, churches and trains, then it is as bad as the fascists who are in power.
> You have dozens of separatist movements going on in your own country and should start worrying about them first.
> India is facing enough internal strife and turmoil to endanger its very own integrity that should be taken care of first instead of pointing fingers over and across its borders.




A case of Pot calling the Kettle black.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

Forget Kashmir for a moment (if any of us can).

Forget *MORE THAN HALF the Muslim population* which chose to stay with and not give up on their country and their brothers in *1947.*

Even forget for a moment *Muslim Bangladesh*, which came much later.

Forget *Muslim NWFP* which has never been under the writ of the Pakistani state, and once the army leaves, will remain to never be so, aligning more with their brothers across the border than with the Pakistani state.

*Muslim Balochistan* *never* agreed to be part of Pakistan right from the very begining in 1947 ..... and have fought as many as *5 Wars of Independence* with the Pakistani state.

Where and on what foundation does the *Two-Nation Theory* stand brothers?

On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *160 million Indian Muslims said NO.*

On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *145 million Bangladeshi Muslims said NO.*

On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *12 million Balochi Muslims said NO.*

On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *20 million Muslim NWFP warring tribals said NO.* 

On what basis did you carve out Pakistan?

And *AFTER* you have answered *ALL* of the above, please tell us *on what basis you want to carve out Kashmir ......*

This is a request by a present-generation Indian to present-generation Pakistanis *..... please help us understand.*

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## All-Green

vsdoc said:


> Kashmir cannot / will not be "solved". Ever.
> 
> Either status quo will be maintained, or somewhere down the line there will be re-unification and re-absorption of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir back into India, as Pakistan and Pakistanis struggle to keep the rest of their country together in the face of large scale violence and anarchy across large swathes of the country.
> 
> Many experts have predicted, based on the current scenario and the way things are heading, the very real short to medium term reality of a Pakistan that has lost Balochistan, that never really had Waziristan and the so called NWFP, and that is now in reality and officially what it has and had always been for the elite polity and army since Partition in 1947 - Sindh and Punjab.
> 
> The age-old argument/stand by Pakistanis that they were always a different people from Indians per-se and hence deserved a different nation (the so-called Two-Nation theory) was and is therefore no different by extension to the Balochi people's arguably legitimate historical/racial claims of being a completely different people from sub-continental Pakistanis and thus not ever wanting to have gotten dragged into the Pakistani state from the very begining, instead of having their own *independent nationhood* (with parts of Afghanistan and Iran merged into the same) or merged into Afghanistan (or even Iran ..... depending on a *plebiscite* of what the Balochi people want for themselves and their right to determine their own future) with whose people they share much more in common ancestry as a people. (howz that for a single sentence OceanX? )
> 
> A coin always has two sides, and I for one would like my country to increasingly make the world aware of the other side of the Kashmir / Balochistan coin as fair return for what Pakistan has done to my country and my people for the past 6 decades.
> 
> See what the India has done to develop Kashmir and see how Pakistan has treated Balochistan for the past 60 years ..... the answer and solution should and will be self-evident to all.
> 
> The rest as they say will follow.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



A bit too much really.
Re absorption back into India...there is no real basis for such a hypothesis.
Have there been continued anti state protests in Pakistani Kashmir?
The same is not applicable in Indian Kashmir so clearly there is resentment against the state in your part of Kashmir which is the result of something much deeper than just Pakistani influence.

Are the Kashmiri Muslims in Pakistan subjected to any sort of victimization or is there any unrest in Pakistani part of Kashmir, the answer here is no.

Speaking from a Kashmiri background, let me be point blank here.
Pakistan's Kashmiris are integral part of Pakistan and don't want anything to do with India.
Even many Kashmiri Muslims on the Indian side are pro Pakistan.

There are states in India other than Kashmir which have no Muslim militant movement but are the hotbed of unrest and terrorist anti state activities...clearly even mighty India has a lot to sort out in the coming years.

Pakistan giving up Kashmir because of unrest in other parts is quite a strange thought and i hope this is not reiterated by your government because then it clearly implies that India is the key beneficiary of any terrorists activity and unrest in Pakistan, as opposed to the official view where India projects itself as a victim in case there is unrest in Pakistan.

Will India give a part of its country to Pakistan if the Naxalites grow out of control?
I mean they are operating in nearly 182 districts and have caused the death of thousands of people...Indian state has acknowledged this movement as the most serious threat to Indian national security...India also has serious problems.

Baluchis chose to become part of Pakistan...it was not forced in any manner. If few rotten eggs and some bad decisions have destabilized Baluchistan, that does not mean that Baluchistan is lost to Pakistan.
Even Akbar Bugti was pro Pakistan and was a very influential Sardar, the fact that later he fought against the state forces does not negate his acceptance of Pakistan earlier.
It was unfortunate that things came to this but it does not mean that Baluchistan did not choose to become part of Pakistan. 
On the contrary Baluchistan will be developed heavily in next 2 decades.
Baluchistan may not be a rosy place right now but a lot was done in terms of development by the GOP in last few years, politically there have been serious issues and friction which led to unrest but with passage of time Gwadar will perform and generate revenue for Baluchistan which will address the key concerns.
The population of Baluchistan is small and after the things cool down, just a few right steps in next five to ten years will make it stable again.

Coming back to Kashmir, other than the Pakistan giving up Kashmir idea which to me is quite impossible... I agree that Kashmir will not be solved since India has always been rejecting any plan downright which means that India knows it has all the Kashmir it wants to enjoy an advantage on Pakistan.
This is the reason that the terms of withdrawal as per UN resolution (to facilitate a plebiscite) were not agreed upon by India as stated by UNCIP.
Reason is obvious, because India did not want to lose the advantage in case the plebiscite was in favor of Pakistan.

It may come to be that we recognize the LOC as the boundary and be done with it...however that too seems unlikely.

The steps Musharraf took to control the cross border infiltrations were good and dramatically reduced the violence in order to provide a conducive environment for talks...however India does not want to talk it seems, there is always something which holds the talks...if we tie the talks to each and every thing then there is no hope for peace and so i see not only Pakistan but India too suffer because of such a rigid stance.
The terrorists won in Mumbai because they ensured that India has yet another reason to walk away from talks, leaving Pakistan frustrated and out of options on how to ensure stability.
Mumbai tragedy and the fallout was not at all in favor of Pakistan.
If this was a move by terrorists to cause further instability then India has played into their hands.
The more instability the more the war mongers on both sides can hold sway...this is interest of all terrorists who thrive on conflict whether they are in Pakistan or in India.

There has to be a closure on Kashmir or at least some sort of positive steps like ease of movement within Pakistani and Indian Kashmir so that the Kashmiris have more freedom and interaction in their land.
As long as there is some progress, it shall bode well for all parties except those who want War.

Time will tell how things work out but i hope that we truly achieve a better understanding and regard than the mutual state of mistrust and aggression which has always prevailed.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## desiman

Barrett said:


> The Solution to Kashmir is clearly stated in all the resolutions passed by UN. United Nations arbitrators have put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarization of the region, every one of which is accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government. It was your Prime Minister Nehru who ran to the UN holding his dhoti when the Indians could not handle things on their own. Once the resolution is unexpected and against their will you refuse to accept it. We as Pakistanis still have the courage to look you (a country 5 times our size) in the eye. We have liberated 37% of Kashmir earlier and will keep fighting till we liberate rest of the 43% leaving 20% of Aksai-chin. If you dont accept UN then why dont you quit as a member or you are there to accept the decisions that benefit your interests only. Whining about the UN resolutions will not make your position any stronger. You have never let any opportunity go to dub the majority Muslims who decided to remain in India as traitors and Pakistani agents. The only agenda is to keep them poor, illiterate, diseased, toiling masses in perpetual misery.
> 
> A step forward in the peace talks results in Bombs ripping through a train killing innocent civilians and according to plans Indian Media as always without a blink of the eye blaming it on Pakistan and later to their own disgrace find out the involvement of a serving army officer Col.Purohit (Military Intelligence) whose Chief Investigation Officer Karkare (ATS chief) and his top brass killed in Mumbai attacks (another inside job) under suspicious circumstances.
> If India harbors and protects the perpetrators of the heinous crimes on the Samjhota Express and in Malegaon and fails to rein in the Indian Army from blowing up mosques, churches and trains, then it is as bad as the fascists who are in power.
> You have dozens of separatist movements going on in your own country and should start worrying about them first.
> India is facing enough internal strife and turmoil to endanger its very own integrity that should be taken care of first instead of pointing fingers over and across its borders.





I can see here that you know a lot about India's problems, i hope you know the same amount about Pakistan problems. Dude you can stop dreaming about Kashmir, you think that if Pakistan will try to even come close to the so called 43%, India will just sit there lol Dont talk like a child brother. Pakistan is already faced with massive issues that have the capability to totally disintegrating the nation, I think you need to think about them deeply before pointing fingers at India. India is a democratic nation where everyone has the right to protest and believe in whatever they want, and even after your so called problems that India faces, we are still the second fastest growing economy and among the 10 biggest in the world, i dont see Pakistan anywhere close there ? Dude i can also give you 100 correct stats about the huge problems in Pakistan but that is of no use other than flaming. Grow up and forget Kashmir, India is there to worry about that.


----------



## desiman

vsdoc said:


> Kashmir cannot / will not be "solved". Ever.
> 
> Either status quo will be maintained, or somewhere down the line there will be re-unification and re-absorption of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir back into India, as Pakistan and Pakistanis struggle to keep the rest of their country together in the face of large scale violence and anarchy across large swathes of the country.
> 
> Many experts have predicted, based on the current scenario and the way things are heading, the very real short to medium term reality of a Pakistan that has lost Balochistan, that never really had Waziristan and the so called NWFP, and that is now in reality and officially what it has and had always been for the elite polity and army since Partition in 1947 - Sindh and Punjab.
> 
> The age-old argument/stand by Pakistanis that they were always a different people from Indians per-se and hence deserved a different nation (the so-called Two-Nation theory) was and is therefore no different by extension to the Balochi people's arguably legitimate historical/racial claims of being a completely different people from sub-continental Pakistanis and thus not ever wanting to have gotten dragged into the Pakistani state from the very begining, instead of having their own *independent nationhood* (with parts of Afghanistan and Iran merged into the same) or merged into Afghanistan (or even Iran ..... depending on a *plebiscite* of what the Balochi people want for themselves and their right to determine their own future ..... that they definitely do not want Pakistan is however clear to all) with whose people they share much more in common ancestry as a people. (howz that for a single sentence OceanX? )
> 
> A coin always has two sides, and I for one would like my country to increasingly make the world aware of the other side of the Kashmir / Balochistan coin as fair return for what Pakistan has done to my country and my people for the past 6 decades.
> 
> See what India has done to develop Kashmir and see how Pakistan has treated Balochistan for the past 60 years ..... the answer and solution should and will be self-evident to all.
> 
> The rest as they say will follow.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



GREAT POST DOC


----------



## desiman

vsdoc said:


> Forget Kashmir for a moment (if any of us can).
> 
> Forget *MORE THAN HALF the Muslim population* which chose to stay with and not give up on their country and their brothers in *1947.*
> 
> Even forget for a moment *Muslim Bangladesh*, which came much later.
> 
> Forget *Muslim NWFP* which has never been under the writ of the Pakistani state, and once the army leaves, will remain to never be so, aligning more with their brothers across the border than with the Pakistani state.
> 
> *Muslim Balochistan* *never* agreed to be part of Pakistan right from the very begining in 1947 ..... and have fought as many as *5 Wars of Independence* with the Pakistani state.
> 
> Where and on what foundation does the *Two-Nation Theory* stand brothers?
> 
> On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *160 million Indian Muslims said NO.*
> 
> On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *145 million Bangladeshi Muslims said NO.*
> 
> On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *12 million Balochi Muslims said NO.*
> 
> On what basis did you carve out Pakistan if *20 million Muslim NWFP warring tribals said NO.*
> 
> On what basis did you carve out Pakistan?
> 
> And *AFTER* you have answered *ALL* of the above, please tell us *on what basis you want to carve out Kashmir ......*
> 
> This is a request by a present-generation Indian to present-generation Pakistanis *..... please help us understand.*
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Again amazing post Doc, keep up the great work


----------



## Barrett

desidog said:


> I can see here that you know a lot about India's problems, i hope you know the same amount about Pakistan problems. Dude you can stop dreaming about Kashmir, you think that if Pakistan will try to even come close to the so called 43%, India will just sit there lol Dont talk like a child brother. Pakistan is already faced with massive issues that have the capability to totally disintegrating the nation, I think you need to think about them deeply before pointing fingers at India. India is a democratic nation where everyone has the right to protest and believe in whatever they want, and even after your so called problems that India faces, we are still the second fastest growing economy and among the 10 biggest in the world, i dont see Pakistan anywhere close there ? Dude i can also give you 100 correct stats about the huge problems in Pakistan but that is of no use other than flaming. Grow up and forget Kashmir, India is there to worry about that.



Before you give me the advise of growing up why don't you talk and defend your arguments with facts and credible sources. Yes we see you growing but unfortunately your country is still nothing but a big slum look at the economical hub for an example. In reply to your 100 stats I can give you 150 so as i advised you earlier you need take care of your own issues that endanger the very own integrity of your country. It is your country who is so scared about Kashmir that they have deployed 600,000 military officials. My reply to all your wishes "The numerous UN resolutions"..... *Why are you so scared of a Plebiscite ? *

In reply to vsdoc: 
I can name Tribes like 
Mengal,Murre, Gabol, Bugti, Khetran, Jamali etc etc who not only played a vital role in the struggle for the independence of Pakistan but also joined at their will.
As far as the NWFP is concerned I just want to remind you that these are the same people who fought and liberated the part of Kashmir we have right now.
Kindly post facts and not your wishes or what you have been taught in your Racist Hindu schools....get out of your shell and admit the realities of Gujrat and what the indians are doing to the muslims in Kashmir, more then 50,000 have been killed. Your Military officials die everyday. Kashmir is your integral part and yet they are treated as Kashmiris and not indians .... few days back your very own cricket team refused to play in Kashmir..... You block their fruit exports.... block cell phone networks.... your soldiers kill innocent civilians and rape the female members of the family on a daily basis Yet your media potrays an ideal situation and your politicians lie so blatantly that its not even funny anymore. What I perceive is that the Indians are under serious inferiority complex and a backward society...you keep comparing your progress with Pakistan....a much smaller country Why not with China....? 

Your stories would make an extra-ordinary bollywood entertainer but a little too real for the real world.....

The Solution to Kashmir is "UN RESOLUTIONS"


----------



## Nihat

> Why are you so scared of a Plebiscite ?



I'll tell you why, which is more like stating the obvious

J&K is a Muslim majority state and they have an obvious inclination towards Pakistan which is a declared Islamic State. This is just natural human nature that (birds of a feather flock together).

Muslims in the rest of India are more scattered and intermingled with the local culture whereas Kashmir's have lived in a cluster forever and with such close geographical proximity to Pak , added to the sympathy of Pak with Kashmiri's , plebiside is a gamble in which India only stands to loose.Also, the fact that around 3-4 Lac Kashmiri pundits were flushed out of the State by terrorists or slaughtered like lambs means that any plebeside is devoid of a fair reflection of the lands original inhabitants.

While it's important to respect peoples wishes , a nation cannot entertain the possibility of parting with territorial assets for it.

India does not want to risk losing a state (hence no plebeside). What it can do is make the life of the people easier by giving them more autonomy, but for that purpose it is necessary that Army is 1st withdrawn and for that it's necessary to have Zero militancy.


----------



## absarahmedkhan

Scenario 4, 5, 6 isn't substantiated enough I guess. The strategic position of Kashmir is that, even if it gets independence, it'd have to be on the side of either India or Pakistan for everyday support. Independent Kashmir can't survive without help of one country at least.


----------



## absarahmedkhan

Nihat said:


> I'll tell you why, which is more like stating the obvious
> 
> J&K is a Muslim majority state and they have an obvious inclination towards Pakistan which is a declared Islamic State. This is just natural human nature that (birds of a feather flock together).
> 
> Muslims in the rest of India are more scattered and intermingled with the local culture whereas Kashmir's have lived in a cluster forever and with such close geographical proximity to Pak , added to the sympathy of Pak with Kashmiri's , plebiside is a gamble in which India only stands to loose.Also, the fact that around 3-4 Lac Kashmiri pundits were flushed out of the State by terrorists or slaughtered like lambs means that any plebeside is devoid of a fair reflection of the lands original inhabitants.
> 
> While it's important to respect peoples wishes , a nation cannot entertain the possibility of parting with territorial assets for it.
> 
> India does not want to risk losing a state (hence no plebeside). What it can do is make the life of the people easier by giving them more autonomy, but for that purpose it is necessary that Army is 1st withdrawn and for that it's necessary to have Zero militancy.



That makes a wretched reason to support your argument, I'm sorry. 

Former Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had promised to the people of Kashmir that they would be given right of self-determination. The promise is yet to be fulfilled. When? No one knows.


----------



## Barrett

Nihat said:


> India does not want to risk losing a state (hence no plebeside). What it can do is make the life of the people easier by giving them more autonomy, but for that purpose it is necessary that Army is 1st withdrawn and for that it's necessary to have Zero militancy.



Couldn't agree more. But its like saying "We are scared of loosing the game so we wouldn't play." I suppose it is about something more then the egos of Pakistanis and Indians, its about the lives of Kashmiris and the whole conflict directly or indirectly effecting the people of both the countries. Kashmir is nothing more then a tool for political point scoring for the corrupt politicians of the two countries, as both the nations are very emotional. It is about time we sit and decide the fate of the kashmiri people once and for all. Let the people of Kashmir decide what they want .....
*Kashmir belongs to the Kashmiris*


----------



## desiman

Barrett said:


> Before you give me the advise of growing up why don't you talk and defend your arguments with facts and credible sources. Yes we see you growing but unfortunately your country is still nothing but a big slum look at the economical hub for an example. In reply to your 100 stats I can give you 150 so as i advised you earlier you need take care of your own issues that endanger the very own integrity of your country. It is your country who is so scared about Kashmir that they have deployed 600,000 military officials. My reply to all your wishes "The numerous UN resolutions"..... *Why are you so scared of a Plebiscite ? *
> 
> In reply to vsdoc:
> I can name Tribes like
> Mengal,Murre, Gabol, Bugti, Khetran, Jamali etc etc who not only played a vital role in the struggle for the independence of Pakistan but also joined at their will.
> As far as the NWFP is concerned I just want to remind you that these are the same people who fought and liberated the part of Kashmir we have right now.
> Kindly post facts and not your wishes or what you have been taught in your Racist Hindu schools....get out of your shell and admit the realities of Gujrat and what the indians are doing to the muslims in Kashmir, more then 50,000 have been killed. Your Military officials die everyday. Kashmir is your integral part and yet they are treated as Kashmiris and not indians .... few days back your very own cricket team refused to play in Kashmir..... You block their fruit exports.... block cell phone networks.... your soldiers kill innocent civilians and rape the female members of the family on a daily basis Yet your media potrays an ideal situation and your politicians lie so blatantly that its not even funny anymore. What I perceive is that the Indians are under serious inferiority complex and a backward society...you keep comparing your progress with Pakistan....a much smaller country Why not with China....?
> 
> Your stories would make an extra-ordinary bollywood entertainer but a little too real for the real world.....
> 
> The Solution to Kashmir is "UN RESOLUTIONS"




Barrett, watch you language brother, i did not use any derogatory language when i was talking about Pakistan. Pakistan isnt exactly Switzerland also. If your ego is to big to accept that Pakistan cannot be even compared to India in any way then you can say whatever you want. The fact is that Maharastra's economy is much bigger than the whole of Pakistan lol Yes we have slums but we also have many of the richest people in the world. I dont see even one Pakistani in the top 100 let alone the top 10. Buddy the fact is that Pakistan can only use Kashmir as an issue to get the crowds together and your leaders have been doing that for a long time now. India foreign policy is now geared towards China and Pakistan does not play a role anymore in Indis's foreign policy decisions. You can cry all you want and give me all the stats you have but the ground reality is a fact that Pakistan is on the verge of a all out civil war and collapse where on the other hand even with many problems India continues to grow at a truly magnificent speed and is an example to the world on how democracy works. Lastly coming to kashmir, Pakistan might as well as forget it as India has already made it very clear that Pakistan has or will ever play any role in Kashmir. Kashmir is an internal issue and will be handled by the Indian government. Pakistan does not need to tell India about what it needs to do, it first needs to solve its own huge humanitarian crisis. If pakistan can have demands about kashmir and support the few extermist there then India has also the full rights to support the Baluch people and help them in their strive for freedom. Kashmir is and will always be a part of India because that is where it belongs and Buddy if you really want to Know I am a Muslim also and I love India more than anything, and when i hear that India is doing that or this just because someone is muslim , all i can do is laugh. India has given Muslims an equal opportunity at everything, yes there are few isolated events but just to outline the success Muslims have enjoyed i can give you atleast a 100 names of very famous Muslims that are from India. We have had Presidents that are muslims, a naval chief, many prominent minister, Azim Premzi (if you know who he is), all the Khans in bollywood and the list goes on and on. The issue with Kashmir is nothing but incitement from across the border when the ground reality is very different. I have been to Kashmir many times and the love they have for India is amazing. Many young Kashmiris now work in Bombay or Delhi and have intention whatsoever to be separated from India. The issue of Kashmir is all but dead and the reality is what Pakistan muct accept and move on. Solve your own astronomical problems first before you try to interfere in someone else&#8217;s issues. Sorry i did not want to write in this way but your stupid remarks about slums has totally ticked me off, if you cant stick to the topic then dont comment on anything else, your not the only one who can do that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Barrett

desidog said:


> Barrett, watch you language brother, i did not use any derogatory language when i was talking about Pakistan. Pakistan isnt exactly Switzerland also. If your ego is to big to accept that Pakistan cannot be even compared to India in any way then you can say whatever you want. The fact is that Maharastra's economy is much bigger than the whole of Pakistan lol Yes we have slums but we also have many of the richest people in the world. I dont see even one Pakistani in the top 100 let alone the top 10. Buddy the fact is that Pakistan can only use Kashmir as an issue to get the crowds together and your leaders have been doing that for a long time now. India foreign policy is now geared towards China and Pakistan does not play a role anymore in Indis's foreign policy decisions. You can cry all you want and give me all the stats you have but the ground reality is a fact that Pakistan is on the verge of a all out civil war and collapse where on the other hand even with many problems India continues to grow at a truly magnificent speed and is an example to the world on how democracy works. Lastly coming to kashmir, Pakistan might as well as forget it as India has already made it very clear that Pakistan has or will ever play any role in Kashmir. Kashmir is an internal issue and will be handled by the Indian government. Pakistan does not need to tell India about what it needs to do, it first needs to solve its own huge humanitarian crisis. If pakistan can have demands about kashmir and support the few extermist there then India has also the full rights to support the Baluch people and help them in their strive for freedom. Kashmir is and will always be a part of India because that is where it belongs and Buddy if you really want to Know I am a Muslim also and I love India more than anything, and when i hear that India is doing that or this just because someone is muslim , all i can do is laugh. India has given Muslims an equal opportunity at everything, yes there are few isolated events but just to outline the success Muslims have enjoyed i can give you atleast a 100 names of very famous Muslims that are from India. We have had Presidents that are muslims, a naval chief, many prominent minister, Azim Premzi (if you know who he is), all the Khans in bollywood and the list goes on and on. The issue with Kashmir is nothing but incitement from across the border when the ground reality is very different. I have been to Kashmir many times and the love they have for India is amazing. Many young Kashmiris now work in Bombay or Delhi and have intention whatsoever to be separated from India. The issue of Kashmir is all but dead and the reality is what Pakistan muct accept and move on. Solve your own astronomical problems first before you try to interfere in someone elses issues. Sorry i did not want to write in this way but your stupid remarks about slums has totally ticked me off, if you cant stick to the topic then dont comment on anything else, your not the only one who can do that.



I'm not surprised that you never have any relevant replies to my questions or any facts to support your arguments. Your attitude just gives a clear picture of your intolerance. We always talk of solutions and on the contrary Indians just don't seem to admit the ground realities. There is a freedom struggle going on since the past sixty three years which you still haven't been able to curb with the presence of a huge number of army officials and claim everything to be just perfect. Yes we should leave it to India since they are doing a great job in Kashmir already. 
Bollywood is not reality brother 

Why don't you talk of solutions? 
UN resolutions ?
De-militarization ?
Plebiscite ?

Arguing with a fool proves there are two.


----------



## desiman

Barrett said:


> I'm not surprised that you never have any relevant replies to my questions or any facts to support your arguments. Your attitude just gives a clear picture of your intolerance. We always talk of solutions and on the contrary Indians just don't seem to admit the ground realities. There is a freedom struggle going on since the past sixty three years which you still haven't been able to curb with the presence of a huge number of army officials and claim everything to be just perfect. Yes we should leave it to India since they are doing a great job in Kashmir already.
> Bollywood is not reality brother
> 
> Why don't you talk of solutions?
> UN resolutions ?
> De-militarization ?
> Plebiscite ?
> 
> Arguing with a fool proves there are two.



Brother my only point is that India will solve the Kashmir issue peacefully and democratically, but Pakistan has no role to play here. India does not needs to jusitfy its actions to Pakistan or needs to work in any way with Pakistan to solve this issue as this is an internal Indian issue. My whole point is that India worries about its own problems and Pakistan worries about its own, its when you start interfering in other people issues is when problems start coming up. Kashmir is progressing and slowing but steadily moving on. The situation is much better now and tourism is starting up again. If left alone Kashmir will blossom into what it was previously again  Dont take it personally bro im just commenting on the situation.


----------



## Nihat

absarahmedkhan said:


> That makes a wretched reason to support your argument, I'm sorry.
> 
> Former Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had promised to the people of Kashmir that they would be given right of self-determination. The promise is yet to be fulfilled. When? No one knows.



JLN was quite an idiot (my personal opinion) , half the problems India faces today are because of him and his idiotic politices (as well intended as they may be). 

Under influence of the Western block , he made an irrational decision of Internationalizing a domestic or at best Bi-lateral issue , JLN has long gone and his promises and policies went with him.

As for the statement "don't play the game for fear of losing it" , one has to look at what is at stake for India.

One can type endlessly on the forum and keep crying UN , rights , plebiside , let kashmiri's decide etc. but it just keeps things stuck because this option is just not acceptable to India and she is under no compulsion whatsoever to fulfill it.

As for Kashmir belongs to Kasmiri's logic , why dosen't the same rule apply to say Tibet , where Tibet belongs to Tibetans or Chechneya belongs to the chechans.


----------



## vsdoc

Lets take the title of the thread - Seven possible solutions.

Then lets work our way backward.

*Solution* indicates that there is a *Problem*.

Where there is a Problem there has to be a *Cause*.

As is very obvious in a *Standoff* of any sort, all of the above are different and mutually exclusive depending on which side of the fence you look at it from.

I look at it as an Indian.

*Kashmir is ours ..... no IFS, no BUTS. Period.*

There would never have been a *"Problem"* were it not for *Pakistan* ..... the *Cause.*

Contrary to the 37 pages of intellectually stimulating posts here, it is my humble opinion that *the "Solution" is sadly playing itself out in Pakistan today.*

And no Bezerk, its none of the Seven you have come up with.

Its the classic case of one man's *Solution* now becoming his *Problem.*

And happily for the other, *vice versa.*

The tables have turned. 

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

Barrett said:


> As far as the NWFP is concerned I just want to remind you that these are the same people who fought and liberated the part of Kashmir we have right now.



Please read my post above ..... its directed particularly to Pakistanis who think like you.

Gain a pinky to lose an arm.



> Kindly post facts and not your wishes or what you have been taught in your Racist Hindu schools



I studied in a missionary school run by American/Canadian Jesuit priests ..... maybe you could amend your astute observation to "racist pro-conversion shaitani Christian schools" instead .... just a suggestion. 



> Kashmir is your integral part



Thank you .... its good to see a Pakistani confronting reality for a change.



> What I perceive is that the Indians are under serious inferiority complex and a backward society



Sure we are ..... especially coming from a progressive Pakistani with so many things going for him to feel superior about.



> The Solution to Kashmir is "UN RESOLUTIONS"



I again exhort you to read my post above. The solution is playing itself out ..... and kudos to Pakistan and Pakistanis for doing it single-handedly.

No India.

No USA.

No Israel.

No UN.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## r3alist

vsdoc said:


> Lets take the title of the thread - Seven possible solutions.
> 
> Then lets work our way backward.
> 
> *Solution* indicates that there is a *Problem*.
> 
> Where there is a Problem there has to be a *Cause*.
> 
> As is very obvious in a *Standoff* of any sort, all of the above are different and mutually exclusive depending on which side of the fence you look at it from.
> 
> I look at it as an Indian.
> 
> *Kashmir is ours ..... no IFS, no BUTS. Period.*
> 
> There would never have been a *"Problem"* were it not for *Pakistan* ..... the *Cause.*
> 
> Contrary to the 37 pages of intellectually stimulating posts here, it is my humble opinion that *the "Solution" is sadly playing itself out in Pakistan today.*



yes, india should takeover pakistan and then kashmir, thats the solution isn't it? 




cheers, r3alist.



do you believe in human dignity? intrinsic right to decide your own fate? human rights? 


*if you do then support the kashmiri's on this, its as simple as that. *you can try and pretend as much as you want, but those are the issues that kashmiri's worry and care about, believe me, i know more than most of you guys sitting behind your screens talking on behalf of a people that you guys yourself have no connection with.


----------



## vsdoc

r3alist said:


> yes, india should takeover pakistan and then kashmir, thats the solution isn't it?



Not Pakistan, we just want our mukut back. You guys are welcome to Pakistan ...... and the struggle to keep it Pakistan.



> do you believe in human dignity? intrinsic right to decide your own fate? human rights?



Do you? 

Believe me there is no dignity in being blown up by a terrorist bomb. 

There is no dignity in being shot in cold blood on your own soil by terrorists sent by sea by your hostile neighbour. 

There is no dignity in being forced to provide food and shelter to terrorists from across the border in the dead of night at the ends of an AK47.

Do you and your country believe in human dignity r3alist?

I believe not. At least not for the less than human dravidian-tamil black short bastards across the border. 

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## r3alist

> Not Pakistan, we just want our mukut back




oh is kashmir yours then?

hmmm, no i disagree, fight you for it? 

deal?

grow up.



but you are a funny guy, you manage to say one thing and contradict yourself the very next post.


fact is india has been ruled and lorded over by many people, shall we say politely say that many people have had a go at old mother india?hehe.


its in no position to start reversing history and make demands just because its no longer being directly ruled, the classroom geek has found some balls and now wants to become the classroom bully huh???



the funny thing is indians like yourself, who i wager have no connection to kashmir ir its people other than imperialist desires feel like they can speak best for them.

you cant speak for them thats why you never let them speak for themselves, afraid much??

ofcourse you are!!!

theres the contradiction you have to live with.




cheers, r3alist.


----------



## vsdoc

r3alist said:


> oh is kashmir yours then?
> 
> hmmm, no i disagree, fight you for it?



You didn't ask my permission the previous 5 times your army got whipped in the past now did you? 

Why start now? Go ahead and make our day ..... its the trigger India is waiting for, to provide the moral high-ground for what would follow.  

Talk about being a funny guy ..... getting a wedgie in his own backyard courtesy his own brothers, but still strutting with chest puffed out. 



> fact is india has been ruled and lorded over by many people, shall we say politely say that many people have had a go at old mother india?hehe.



You forgot your pet 1000 year spiel ..... would be nice to dig deep into the "seed" of your racial/martial origins once again ..... try me.



> its in no position to start reversing history and make demands just because its no longer being directly ruled, the classroom geek has found some balls and now wants to become the classroom bully huh???



We need no "balls" to handle our 1000 year ex-rulers my friend ..... our women are more than enough apparently. 

You should try your hand the next time you are in this part of the world ..... in case the anemic gori mems out there have made you feel more "ballsy" than you sadly ever will be.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## r3alist

vsdoc said:


> You didn't ask my permission the previous 5 times your army got whipped in the past now did you?
> 
> Why start now? Go ahead and make our day ..... its the trigger India is waiting for, to provide the moral high-ground for what would follow.
> 
> Talk about being a funny guy ..... getting a wedgie in his own backyard courtesy his own brothers, but still strutting with chest puffed out.
> 
> 
> 
> You forgot your pet 1000 year spiel ..... would be nice to dig deep into the "seed" of your racial/martial origins once again ..... try me.
> 
> 
> 
> We need no "balls" to handle our 1000 year ex-rulers my friend ..... our women are more than enough apparently.
> 
> You should try your hand the next time you are in this part of the world ..... in case the anemic gori mems out there have made you feel more "ballsy" than you sadly ever will be.
> 
> Cheers, Doc




sorry to invoke godwins law but that sounds positively nazi-esque, want to check the purity of my blood?

hmmm where have i heard that before?

so is this what our resident indian secularist comes out with?


in any case, if i were to think along those racist lines why would i want to be indian? who wants to be indian? 

anyone? white pople dont, black people certainly dont and in the uk a fair few indians dont aswell....

you guys should look at your reputation around the world in regards to these "racial hygiene" type issues , i will say no more.



anyway, this is childish, you want kashmir because you think its yours yet you remove the people out of the equation - this is imperialism my friend, what happened to democracy huh?




cheers, r3alist.


----------



## vsdoc

r3alist said:


> in any case, if i were to think along those racist lines why would i want to be indian? who wants to be indian?
> 
> anyone? white pople dont, black people certainly dont and in the uk a fair few indians dont aswell....
> 
> you guys should look at your reputation around the world in regards to these "racial hygiene" type issues , i will say no more.



The question is not about you wanting to be an Indian ..... instead its of Indians wanting to suffer the emabrrasment of you claiming to be one.

Lets not start of what the world thinks about Indians my friend ..... especially since I visit the UK pretty often and have a lot of doctor friends there. 

Being direct about what I have heard spoken about you guys would get me banned, and I kinda like it here, with you types for my dose of daily entertainment.



> anyway, this is childish, you want kashmir because you think its yours yet you remove the people out of the equation - this is imperialism my friend, what happened to democracy huh?



Democracy is alive and kicking in Kashmir buddy. Regular elections enthusiastically participated in. Popular government at the helm of things. Freedom to hold all the rallies and protests your heart desires. 

Freedom to live.

A far sight more than your most developed cities buddy ...... and not just right now, cause that would be truly below the belt.

What more do you want?

Cheers, Doc


----------



## r3alist

you really want to go down the racial eugenics route and talk about indians, where did you get your MD from :ROFL:

please lets not talk about the merits of being "a pure blooded indian", nobody else does for good reason, so i would bit my tongue to save yourself some embarrassment.




> Being direct about what I have heard spoken about you guys would get me banned



and therein lies the issue with you, stop being a charlatan, you are trying to be something you are not, you come into these threads looking for a bit of a reaction, i mean why else would you bring up your whacko notions of "racial hygiene" and pakistani's, obsessed much? ofcourse you are!!




> Freedom to hold all the rallies and protests your heart desires.



rallies, yep true, plenty of them, most of them protesting against your lot.




> A far sight more than your most developed cities buddy



so kashmir is more developed than the most developed parts of pakistan....well this is news to me




cheers, r3alist.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

r3alist said:


> you really want to go down the racial eugenics route and talk about indians, where did you get your MD from :ROFL:
> 
> please lets not talk about the merits of being "a pure blooded indian", nobody else does for good reason, so i would bit my tongue to save yourself some embarrassment.



This is a good thread and deserves not to go down the racial route. However, you are most welcome to take the issue up with me by PM ..... mods, whats the policy on banning vis-a-vis PM content please? 



> and therein lies the issue with you, stop being a charlatan, you are trying to be something you are not, you come into these threads looking for a bit of a reaction, i mean why else would you bring up your whacko notions of "racial hygiene" and pakistani's, obsessed much? ofcourse you are!!



PM please if you want to discuss what I am ..... and want to hear from me about yourself.



> rallies, yep true, plenty of them, most of them protesting against your lot.



Its the Constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT of every Indian to protest in a peaceful manner. Its called Democracy. And our soldiers posted there protect that Democratic way of life precious to all Indians ..... so that those from across the border do not sneak in by night to disturb that in any way.



> so kashmir is more developed than the most developed parts of pakistan....well this is news to me



You have 18 movie theaters in Pakistan man ..... as claimed by a Pakistani director. I think Srinagar would have as many. 

Lets not go there unfortunate cousin.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## absarahmedkhan

Nihat said:


> JLN was quite an idiot (my personal opinion) , half the problems India faces today are because of him and his idiotic politices (as well intended as they may be).
> 
> Under influence of the Western block , he made an irrational decision of Internationalizing a domestic or at best Bi-lateral issue , JLN has long gone and his promises and policies went with him.
> 
> As for the statement "don't play the game for fear of losing it" , one has to look at what is at stake for India.
> 
> One can type endlessly on the forum and keep crying UN , rights , plebiside , let kashmiri's decide etc. but it just keeps things stuck because this option is just not acceptable to India and she is under no compulsion whatsoever to fulfill it.
> 
> As for Kashmir belongs to Kasmiri's logic , why dosen't the same rule apply to say Tibet , where Tibet belongs to Tibetans or Chechneya belongs to the chechans.



I'm not talking about Tibetans or Chechen. Whatever they wants is purely their internal matter, and neither it concerns India or Pakistan 'directly'. 

Besides, unlike Kashmir, Junagadh was ruled by a Muslim Nawab. He ruled over almost 80% of Hindus. The Nawab of Junagadh was a pro-Pakistani. He decided to joined Pakistan at the time of Partition -- disregarding the sentiments of Hindus. He was guided by one of his Chief Minister Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto -- father of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto -- who also suggested the then Nawab to join Pakistan. However, if we go through the case of Kashmir, it was totally opposite. A Hindu Maha Raja ruling over a Muslim majority state of Kashmir ignoring the sentiments of majority of Kashmirs -- decided to join India whereas Nawab of Junagadh ignoring the sentiments of majority of Hindus decided to join Pakistan. Junagadh was invaded by India then. New Delhi announced plebiscite there -- which of course was a formality. Junagadh was then acceded in India.

What it was decided at the time of demarcation was a fair rule -- Muslim majority states would join Pakistan. Wasn't it fair? In both cases, India seized Junagadh so as Kashmir. 

Please, do understand the history. I'm not concerned if JLN, for you, was idiot or not. He was one of your leader who's lauded by many.


----------



## jarnee

Bezerk said:


> Frankly, India would never agree to such a Solution. That would result in loosing massive amounts of land for her. But at the end of the day, "Someone" has to sacrifice their interests for the sake of stability and peace in the region.



1.Till the time India is a democracy nothing can be compromised , as it would mean dead end for that political party.

2. India has 16 Crore muslim population, what will be the basis of this partition of india? Islam? Whole Idea of India will be lost if Kashmir is lost on religious grounds...

3. India cannot stay secular ..which is core to its existense ..so ..to me last opprtunity and i guess some Pakisnai general rightly said in 1965 ..Now or Never.


----------



## jarnee

Leave aside 7 lac Army in teh valley ..India can fight endless war ...to what ever cost ..bec ..no cost can be higher then your existence.


----------



## Barrett

vsdoc said:


> Its the Constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT of every Indian to protest in a peaceful manner. Its called Democracy. And our soldiers posted there protect that Democratic way of life precious to all Indians ..... so that those from across the border do not sneak in by night to disturb that in any way.
> 
> 
> 
> You have 18 movie theaters in Pakistan man ..... as claimed by a Pakistani director. I think Srinagar would have as many.
> 
> Lets not go there unfortunate cousin.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



600,000 to protect the democratic right ? hahahah

And i guess for the indians the number of cinemas is a symobol of development please get out of your bollywood world ....For you govinda dancing around tress might be the democratic way of expression.

Cousins ?


----------



## ice_man

i think scenario 4 is the best give KASHMIR to KASHMIRI's and deploy the UN PEACE FORCE to protect its borders from pakistan & india!!!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nihat

absarahmedkhan said:


> I'm not talking about Tibetans or Chechen. Whatever they wants is purely their internal matter, and neither it concerns India or Pakistan 'directly'.
> 
> Besides, unlike Kashmir, Junagadh was ruled by a Muslim Nawab. He ruled over almost 80% of Hindus. The Nawab of Junagadh was a pro-Pakistani. He decided to joined Pakistan at the time of Partition -- disregarding the sentiments of Hindus. He was guided by one of his Chief Minister Sir Shah Nawaz Bhutto -- father of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto -- who also suggested the then Nawab to join Pakistan. However, if we go through the case of Kashmir, it was totally opposite. A Hindu Maha Raja ruling over a Muslim majority state of Kashmir ignoring the sentiments of majority of Kashmirs -- decided to join India whereas Nawab of Junagadh ignoring the sentiments of majority of Hindus decided to join Pakistan. Junagadh was invaded by India then. New Delhi announced plebiscite there -- which of course was a formality. Junagadh was then acceded in India.
> 
> What it was decided at the time of demarcation was a fair rule -- Muslim majority states would join Pakistan. Wasn't it fair? In both cases, India seized Junagadh so as Kashmir.
> 
> Please, do understand the history. I'm not concerned if JLN, for you, was idiot or not. He was one of your leader who's lauded by many.



Fair enough , if you wish to eliminate any reference to Tibet or Chechnya then wy bother looking at Junagardh case also. Lets just take Kashmir as unique and not compare it to anything.

Even the solution that Musharraf and Vajpayee were looking at involved strengthening the LOC as a cross over point and opening multiple points for trade and people transit.

I think Pak realizes that India is not parting with any of the territory that it holds today, nor will it entertain any future possibility of the same.

"Soft borders" was a workable solution but then Pak's internal politics changed things and subsequently the terror attacks in India. This is probably the only workable solution and when the 2 nations sit for talks again, this would be the most likely outcome.


----------



## Storm Force

Mushraffs vision for Kashmir was purely a relaxed LOC border. Where the kashmiris on the 2 sides could meet and trade with relaxed border control and no long bureacratic controls or security. 

Even mushraff knew that India will never cede territory for easing of tensions. 

I also agree that the huge rise of terror threat from Afghan/pakistan border and the mumbai attack has ended this option for another decade. 

Pakistan would have to be a completely moderate civillian country with very strong business and political links to both india and the USA in general. 
For easy free access between borders with no tension in place. 

SORT OF LIKE THE FREE EASY BORDERS IN EUROPE. We europeans can go and live trade buy in any euro country we wish. 

ITS PARADISE. no restrictions or fear of war etc.


----------



## xuberant

With Pakistan giving autonomy to its northern areas as Gilgit Baltistan and India agreeing to reduce the number of troops in Kashmir, it seems that back door diplomacy is making progress and more decisions will be uncovered soon. 

The best solution which I feel is more fair is an independent Kashmir valley solution scenario 6. I dont think this region will find it hard to survive on its own because tourism industry will make it prosper. This region can be made as a non-militarized zone between the two countries; a separate independent region which wont have its own army. It would have its own independent government, judiciary, currency and can have foreign relations with rest of the world. It would have borders with both India and Pakistan and visa would be required for citizens of both countries to enter. Alongside with this solution, India should withdraw its forces from Siachen. Also, a water treaty between all three parties would be made that would restrict all of them to make dams on other parties rivers.


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

Bezerk said:


> Scenario 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> The Chenab formula*
> 
> This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistan's borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> *How do YOU see the future of Kashmir?*



Isn't the answer obvious?


----------



## SinoIndusFriendship

ice_man said:


> i think scenario 4 is the best give KASHMIR to KASHMIRI's and deploy the UN PEACE FORCE to protect its borders from pakistan & india!!!!!



This will also work.


----------



## eastwatch

South Asian Media Net

India to accept LoC as border: Mishra 
Monday, November 09,2009 

LAHORE: Indians are ready to accept the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir as a permanent international border, Brajesh Mishra, Indias first national security adviser, said on Sunday. In an interview with Zee News channel, Mishra said China, after the Kargil war in 1999, had clearly told Pakistan that the LoC should be respected, adding that China had maintained that the LoC issue should be resolved through bilateral dialogue. 

The attitude of China has changed towards India and Beijing has taken a hostile stance against New Delhi due to the Indo-US civil nuclear pact, he said. In 1962, we fought a war with China, then with Pakistan, and I am afraid that we might get a bigger jolt than 1962 in the next five years, he added. 

Mishra said that both Islamabad and Beijing were simultaneously striking a hostile posture and were trying to surround India. He said that China was trying to subdue India in South Asia, adding the Chinese had always tried to engage India in different problems with its neighbours so that New Delhi could never play an active role in South Asia.

I think we should equip our (Indian) forces as soon as possible, as we are not doing enough in this regard at the moment. We have two enemies, China and Pakistan, and if they work together we would have a bigger problem, he said. 

It is not that we should enhance our security apparatus to attack someone rather it is to defend ourselves, Mishra added. daily times monitor


----------



## pagans

Let's be honest ,there is no solution to Kashmir issue. Either INDIA or Pakistan has to become too weak for the issue to die out. There is simply no other way. I bet on it.


----------



## neyaab

Scenario 7 is the best solution


----------



## Hari

Since Kashmir is an Emotional issue for both Countries, Only Possible solution is to Make LoC an International Border with some adjustments here and there


----------



## Skies

As a naive, I think it's not difficult to take over Kashmir from India.

Pakistan, just, should attack India suddenly with some support from China. If Pakistan can take over the control of Indian Kashmir somehow, I think India will not fight again for Kashmir due to their economical and lives damages. 
And, in the mean time, arms should supply to the Kashmiri civilians if they could also fight against Indians.
As like in 1971 when our civilians took arms in their own hand and India helped at last moment and Pakistan could do nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## pagans

brotherbangladesh said:


> As a naive, I think it's not difficult to take over Kashmir from India.
> 
> Pakistan, just, should attack India suddenly with some support from China. If Pakistan can take over the control of Indian Kashmir somehow, I think India will fight again for Kashmir due to their economical and lives damages.
> And, in the mean time, arms should supply to the Kashmiri civilians if they could also fight against Indians.
> As like in 1971 when our civilians took arms in their own hand and India helped at last moment and Pakistan could do nothing.


Great Idea !!!!!!!! DO IT !!!!!!

This is called Bengali gratitude......Why did India help Bangladesh to get freedom. ?


----------



## toxic_pus

pagans said:


> This is called Bengali gratitude......


I understand what your are trying to say, but try not say it in those words. When you say 'Bengali' it includes us as well, your fellow countrymen to the your east.


----------



## sirius

brotherbangladesh said:


> As a naive, I think it's not difficult to take over Kashmir from India.
> 
> Pakistan, just, should attack India suddenly with some support from China. If Pakistan can take over the control of Indian Kashmir somehow, I think India will fight again for Kashmir due to their economical and lives damages.
> And, in the mean time, arms should supply to the Kashmiri civilians if they could also fight against Indians.
> As like in 1971 when our civilians took arms in their own hand and India helped at last moment and Pakistan could do nothing.



and we will just let kashmir go?


----------



## kashith

brotherbangladesh said:


> As a naive, I think it's not difficult to take over Kashmir from India.
> 
> Pakistan, just, should attack India suddenly with some support from China. If Pakistan can take over the control of Indian Kashmir somehow, I think India will fight again for Kashmir due to their economical and lives damages.
> And, in the mean time, arms should supply to the Kashmiri civilians if they could also fight against Indians.
> As like in 1971 when our civilians took arms in their own hand and India helped at last moment and Pakistan could do nothing.



You are naive!!!!! i dont know why Bangladeshis hold a grudge against Indians.Could you explain a bit?


----------



## pagans

kashith said:


> You are naive!!!!! i dont know why Bangladeshis hold a grudge against Indians.Could you explain a bit?


It's religious hate .Nothing else.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## pagans

toxic_pus said:


> I understand what your are trying to say, but try not say it in those words. When you say 'Bengali' it includes us as well, your fellow countrymen to the your east.


Sorry.......

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Skies

Post#572 +

Kashmiri brothers/sis can read this thread in below to boil their bloods.

 http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangladesh-defence/41456-battles-1971-a.html

They have to be *craziest* to get rid of India.


----------



## Skies

Post#572 + Post#579 +

Let me say, why Kashmiris will win in case they will fight their best against India with support of Pakistan.
Because, Kashimiris will fight for their freedom and India will fight to dominate. So, as Kashmiris will fight for their freedom, their mental strength will be higher than Indians. As Kashmiris will fight for their rights they will get the most strength which will arise inside them spontaneously. 

Freedom is Kashmiris' only one option and dominate Kashmir is not only one option for India as we had (freedom) in 71. That's why India will loose one day at my point of view.


----------



## pagans

brotherbangladesh said:


> Post#572 + Post#579 +
> 
> Let me say, why Kashmiris will win in case they will fight their best against India with support of Pakistan.
> Because, Kashimiris will fight for their freedom and India will fight to dominate. So, as Kashmiris will fight for their freedom, their mental strength will be higher than Indians. As Kashmiris will fight for their rights they will get the most strength which will arise inside them spontaneously.
> 
> Freedom is Kashmiris' only one option and dominate Kashmir is not only one option for India as we had (freedom) in 71. That's why India will loose one day at my point of view.



India will never loose. Kashmiris are not fighting for freedom.They can't do it because they already have freedom.
What Kashmirs actually doing is fighting for Islam,which is jihad,which is unacceptable. Crushing the Kashmiris in their evil design is humanity.
India will win because truth alone wins and truth is with India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bandit

brotherbangladesh said:


> Post#572 + Post#579 +
> 
> Let me say, why Kashmiris will win in case they will fight their best against India with support of Pakistan.



With support of Pakistan? Paksitan will support only if Kashmir is willing to split from India _and_ join Pakistan. Pakistan has signed the UN document taking away the option of freedom from Kashmiris so theres no support from Pakistan for Kashmiris freedom. 



> Because, Kashimiris will fight for their freedom and India will fight to dominate. So, as Kashmiris will fight for their freedom, their mental strength will be higher than Indians. As Kashmiris will fight for their rights they will get the most strength which will arise inside them spontaneously.



Kashmiris have always supported India when there has been an armed intrusion from Pakistans side. Pakistanis in general and some Bangladeshis have the misconception that the kashmiri populace would support them in case of any conflict with India due to religion, alleged oppression etc. etc. This was the basis of 1965 attack by Pakistan which was an utter failure. Read below-
Link



> After Pakistan was successful in the Rann of Kutch earlier in 1965, Ayub Khan (by nature a cautious person) was pressured by the hawks in his cabinet (led by Z.A. Bhutto) and the army to infiltrate the ceasefire line in Kashmir. *The action was based on the incorrect premise that indigenous resistance could be ignited by a few saboteurs*.
> 
> On August 5, 1965 between 26,000 and 33,000 Pakistani soldiers crossed the Line of Control dressed as Kashmiri locals headed for various areas within Kashmir. *Indian forces, tipped off by the local populace,* crossed the cease fire line on August 15.







> Freedom is Kashmiris' only one option and dominate Kashmir is not only one option for India as we had (freedom) in 71. That's why India will loose one day at my point of view.



Theres no mass uprising in Kashmir except by a few terrorists and separatist leaders, and those too probably on Pakistani payrolls. So your point of view, based on incorrect premise, does not matter.


----------



## Rajkumar

*BJP opposes proposal to grant autonomy to J-K*


New Delhi/Kashmir: A Prime Minister appointed panel has recommended autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir but it has not pleased the Bharatiya Janata Party.

Arun Jaitley, a member of the Working Group, has written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh saying the last meeting that took place involving political parties was two years ago and that they were consulted when the report was prepared.

So opposition to the report on autonomy for J-K is gathering steam after Jaitley revealed details of a letter he sent to the Prime Minister on Thursday.

"Why over two years after the virtual abandonment of the Working Group, this report was unilaterally authored? What was the compulsion to by-pass the Working Group? I have an uneasy feeling the Government wants to show to sections of the international community that it is willing to dilute the Indian position on J-K," Jaitley wrote in his letter.

Jaitley's unease reflects the stress the report places on autonomy for J-K to the maximum extent possible and that could have crucial implications.

The recommendations include going back to the 1953 position when Kashmir had a Sadar-e-Riyasat instead of Governor and where the Centre only controlled defence, foreign policy and currency that implies that ties with the Indian federation would be minimal

Only the ruling National Conference has welcomed the report taking credit for the state Assembly resolution on autonomy passed eight years ago when Farooq Abdullah was chief minister.

The separatists are dismissive and the People's Democratic Party (PDP) saying it doesn't go far enough.

"Self rule is the ultimate document as far as we are concerned. The report takes care of one of the aspects of self rule. We need re-negotiation of water resources. There cannot be self-rule without self reliance. We expect the Prime Minister will look at Kashmir problem in totality," said PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti.

It's pretty clear the BJP will oppose any move to turn the clock back on J-K with sections of the Congress probably sharing the same sentiment.

So how much of autonomy would be acceptable is a challenge for the Centre.

(With inputs from Divyamanu Chaudhary and Mufti Islah)


BJP opposes proposal to grant autonomy to J-K


----------



## vsdoc

Any dilution of our stand on kashmir by ANY party and the country will be up in flames ..... North South East and West.

Pakistan will be the least of any Indian's concerns then.

And the party which dares to even think of such a thing is doomed for eternity ..... as are its active politicians/leaders and their progeny till such time as their seed is not extinguished from the common gene pool.

Enough wet dreams now. Let's get back to reality.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## Storm Force

Yeah. 

OK lets give autonamy to Punjab as well and ASSAM 

Heck lets give goa back to portugal 

Rubbish post


----------



## desiman

brotherbangladesh said:


> Post#572 + Post#579 +
> 
> Let me say, why Kashmiris will win in case they will fight their best against India with support of Pakistan.
> Because, Kashimiris will fight for their freedom and India will fight to dominate. So, as Kashmiris will fight for their freedom, their mental strength will be higher than Indians. As Kashmiris will fight for their rights they will get the most strength which will arise inside them spontaneously.
> 
> Freedom is Kashmiris' only one option and dominate Kashmir is not only one option for India as we had (freedom) in 71. That's why India will loose one day at my point of view.



We should have also just left Bangladesh alone in 71 and let them fight on their own and continued to be dominated by Pakistan. I find it quite amusing that today many Bangladeshs want to support Pakistan against India, when it was India that got them freedom in the first place. Its quite sad, makes me think that our armed forces should have not interfered with the mukti bahni movement. Kashmir is India's issue and no other country has any right to interfere in it. India will take care of Kashmir in a democratic way and does not need to be instructed how to do so by countries that need to first solve their own grave issues.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## FreekiN

I've seen this before somewhere. I think #7 is the most likely to happen but of course we all want scenario 2.

So what happens to the Chinese controlled Kashmir? No one ever talks about that. D:


----------



## ejaz007

*Ruckus in Indo-Pak peace moot as speakers urge Kashmir settlement*

** Group of Kashmiri pandits objects to JKLF chief Yasin Maliks presence in the moot 
* Malik suggests joint body of Indo-Pak political parties on Kashmir*

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: Commotion broke out at a conference of India-Pakistan peace activists when a group of Kashmiri Hindu pundits belonging to Panun Kashmir and Roots in Kashmir (RIK) organisations objected to the presence of Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front chief Yasin Malik as a speaker.

Holding placards, they hurled abuses and called Malik a rapist and a murderer before police intervened and escorted majority of them out of the India International Centre (IIC) auditorium.

Malik orated his speech amongst the commotion and challenged the protesters to prove the charges against him.

He accused the pundits of working at the behest of Indian intelligence agencies. I want migrant Kashmiri pundits to return to their homeland. It is my wish. We are incomplete without them. They are our blood. But some vested interests keep these weeping boys active in Delhi to stop us from raising our concerns, the JKLF chief said.

Joint body: Amidst the protests, Malik suggested a joint committee of political parties across the borders involving representatives of Congress, BJP, the Pakistan Peoples Party, the Pakistan Muslim League and Jamaat-e-Islami to sit down with Kashmiri leaders to draw a road map for the resolution of the Kashmir dispute.

He also asked media to grow up and play a constructive role in the peace process.

Malik said that since 1947, the people of Kashmir had only received conflicts, pointing out that the people of Kashmir did not have a history of violence otherwise. 

The JKLF leader said despite his abandoning violence and declaring ceasefire at the behest of Indian civil society activists, he lost some 600 colleagues and bore several attempts on his life.

Suggestion: Peoples Conference Chairman Sajjad Ghani Lone said although a majority of Kashmiris favoured independence, they had an emotional bond with Pakistan. Therefore, he proposed a Nepal-India type arrangement between Kashmir and Pakistan as well, where the people from each country could freely come and work in the other area.

He stressed the time had come to go beyond autonomy and self-rule which were limited to discussing power sharing formula between Srinagar and New Delhli.

Lone also called for eschewing extreme positions and asked for economic sovereignty for Jammu and Kashmir. He suggested dismantling of trade barriers between Srinagar and Muzaffarabad. 

Independent MLA from Langate, Engineer Rashid, said India and Pakistan were commercialising and communalising the Kashmir issue. He asked both the countries to show respect towards the sufferings and sacrifices of Kashmiri people and rejected autonomy and self-rule as possible solutions for the Kashmir problem.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Abhiras

For indian point of views india should delay the issue.....

about 45% of people of J&K lives in south kashmir...& about 3% in Ladakh.......which would never agree to independent kashmir or joining pakistan....
& %age of the people living in jammu area is increasing..& power is shifting from Srinagar to Jammu.....

even the hindu right wing party(BJP) is performing very good in J&K as in 2008 electing it scores 11/83 seats compared to last election where it scores only 1 or 2 seats.....

So , let the pro indian population rise & 25 or 50 years afterword Election should occur......then It will remains will india

the increase of jammu influence is good for india....


----------



## PAFAce

Abhiras said:


> For indian point of views india should delay the issue.....
> 
> about 45&#37; of people of J&K lives in south kashmir...& about 3% in Ladakh.......which would never agree to independent kashmir or joining pakistan....
> & %age of the people living in jammu area is increasing..& power is shifting from Srinagar to Jammu.....
> 
> even the hindu right wing party(BJP) is performing very good in J&K as in 2008 electing it scores 11/83 seats compared to last election where it scores only 1 or 2 seats.....
> 
> So , let the pro indian population rise & 25 or 50 years afterword Election should occur......then It will remains will india
> 
> the increase of jammu influence is good for india....


Why do you think the state transferred land to the Hindu organization? For this very reason; to neutralize the vast majority of Muslims in the region with Hindus from all over India, particularly in Jammu and Ladakh. This will offset the currently most populous territory, the Valley, hence stopping any hope of self-determination (making it impractical).

Kashmir is the only Muslim majority state in India, and that doesn't sit well with the central government and the rest of the states. Nobody in India wants to discuss the _actual_ most practical solutions; (i) either hold a plebiscite, or (ii) Kashmir Valley (at least most of it) goes to Pakistan with Jammu and Ladakh remaining with India.

That is the only scenarios that will satisfy the other two parties, Pakistan and Kashmir, and it's something you guys are unwilling to discuss as it will require giving up territory. Anybody who discusses turning the LoC into an international border is being unjust to the people of the Valley, even though this seems to be popular amongst the populations of the two countries.


----------



## Valiant_Soul

PAFAce said:


> Why do you think the state transferred land to the Hindu organization? For this very reason; to neutralize the vast majority of Muslims in the region with Hindus from all over India



If that was the case, India could simply allow people from rest of the country to settle in Kashmir.



> Nobody in India wants to discuss the _actual_ most practical solutions; (i) either hold a plebiscite



Meaningless now - the population demographic has changed of both sides. Moreover, the land belongs to the nation and not to the ethnic population. They can have all the rights under the constitution, but no one can play with national integrity. 



> (ii) Kashmir Valley (at least most of it) goes to Pakistan with Jammu and Ladakh remaining with India.



How can you be so naive and expect this to ever happen? No country can compromise with its territorial integrity. So please get over with your Kashmir obsession, it will take you no where. 



> Anybody who discusses turning the LoC into an international border is being unjust to the people of the Valley



How come? Does India not guarantee them every freedom in the constitution? What freedom you seek? If that is something to do based on religion, then that is totally an unacceptable cause. 

What can Pakistan do to free Kashmir? Either wage a full fledged war or continue to encourage cross-border terrorism. In either case, India has the capability to withstand both, but Pakistan will move towards a path of no return. Now it is for you to decide whether it is Kashmir of more importance or Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Trichy

India only make decide on J&K there is *NO HELL* here to make to say do this and that to make peace... we know what to do @ what time... we don't bother about others...

Note: the 7 ways never happen @ any point and the only hope is LoC to b'com IB, nothing else in the century...


----------



## PAFAce

Valiant_Soul said:


> If that was the case, India could simply allow people from rest of the country to settle in Kashmir.


As you have. It is the will of the central government to offset the anti-Indian Muslim majority, and it's done everything it can to do that. Why else would the people of Kashmir oppose land transfer to a Hindu organization?



> Meaningless now - the population demographic has changed of both sides. Moreover, the land belongs to the nation and not to the ethnic population. They can have all the rights under the constitution, but no one can play with national integrity.


They are a disputed territory, not an "unbreakable part of India" no matter how much you scream. Therefore, the people have every right to "play with national integrity" because they don't believe in it. Freedom is the right denied to them in your constitution, and the presence of half a million soldiers, frequent curfews, violations of human rights etc. is the way that is accomplished. To say that they have every right under the constitution other than the freedom to choose their allegiance is self-contradictory.



> How can you be so naive and expect this to ever happen? No country can compromise with its territorial integrity. So please get over with your Kashmir obsession, it will take you no where.


I'm not saying it will happen, but yes, I do believe that it's the best option. First and foremost, it satisfies the people of the Valley, Ladakh and Jammu, secondly it satisfies Pakistan and, most of all, it allows India to keep a major chunk of Kashmir. It's the best possible win-win-win situation, but Indians will end up losing territory, which is unacceptable to any occupying force. I am proud of my obsession with Kashmir, I believe their freedom is every bit as important as yours or mine, even if you and your friends don't. You, on the other hand, should get over your obsession with this occupation and the constant denial; it will be better not only for you, but for the peace of this region. Tough ask, but please do try.


> How come? Does India not guarantee them every freedom in the constitution? What freedom you seek? If that is something to do based on religion, then that is totally an unacceptable cause.


It is more than just religious, but that's the way most of you prefer to see it. It's based on many principles. Kashmir, at various times, has been a political, economic and moral struggle. Like I said, you can't deny them the most basic right and then claim they are "free".



> What can Pakistan do to free Kashmir? Either wage a full fledged war or continue to encourage cross-border terrorism. In either case, India has the capability to withstand both, but Pakistan will move towards a path of no return. Now it is for you to decide whether it is Kashmir of more importance or Pakistan.


Like I've said before, Kashmir's freedom is every bit as important as Pakistan's, and many Pakistanis have shed their blood alongside Kashmiris for this very reason. Pakistan can support Kashmir's cause for as long as possible, in whichever manner possible. The ball, however, has always been in India's court, and continues to be. As long as their is no awakening of the collective Indian conscience, Kashmir will never be resolved the way it should be. Full-fledged war should be a last resort, but if it's necessary for our brothers in Kashmir, then so be it. I do not love war, but I love the people for whom war may become necessary.



Trichy said:


> India only make decide on J&K there is *NO HELL* here to make to say do this and that to make peace... we know what to do @ what time... we don't bother about others..


Yes, it's been very clear that Indians only care about themselves, you don't have to re-iterate it. You also don't have to beat the "we'll do whatever the heck we want and you can't do sh*t about it" drum, because many of your brethren are already doing so.


----------



## Valiant_Soul

*PAFAce*

I ask you just this - what principle is it to promote killing of unarmed and unprepared people, even if you believe in oppression of Kashmir by India? You should wage a properly declared war, even I in your assumed enemy nation would respect you for that. But just because you scream oppression, we cannot consider it so. Kashmiris are free to choose their allegiance, but the land belongs to the nation. If you think otherwise, you should either convince the world and put pressure on India or wage a properly declared war. But killing of innocents is not justified by any means and that will gain you respect neither here nor in the next world.


----------



## PAFAce

Valiant_Soul said:


> I ask you just this - what principle is it to promote killing of unarmed and unprepared people, even if you believe in oppression of Kashmir by India


When did I say I support this? Why is it that anybody who speaks for the rights of Kashmiris is declared a terrorist by Indians?



> You should wage a properly declared war, even I in your assumed enemy nation would respect you for that.


There are various types of warfare, you should turn to History books before asking me that question. As for respect, your Armed Forces respects us plenty, because they know what we're capable of. That's all the respect we need.



> Kashmiris are free to choose their allegiance, but the land belongs to the nation.


In other words, the Kashmiris can go to hell, the land belongs to India. Once again, you show no regard for the people of Kashmir with this statement. All you want to do is occupy a piece of land without its people. _That_ is why they want independence in the first place; it's their land a lot more than it is yours (or even mine for that matter).



> If you think otherwise, you should either convince the world and put pressure on India or wage a properly declared war.


Like I said, there are many forms of warfare. The pressure waxes and wanes, and right now, it's pretty low. It's a waiting game for Kashmiris, nobody can sustain an occupation forever. This is why every Kashmiri says "_when_ we attain freedom" and not "_if_ we attain freedom" in the documentary Jashn-e-Azadi.



> killing of innocents is not justified by any means and that will gain you respect neither here nor in the next world.


You're absolutely right. Which is why you should be lecturing your soldiers who recently shot killed two teenage boys for simply protesting (without weapons). You should also be lecturing your government who took their land and gave it to a Hindu organization to attract more Hindus into the region. BSF soldiers are, at the very least, as unpopular in the Valley than militants, if not more. Killing innocents and denying basic rights has a lot to do with that.

Speaking of the next world, maybe you should be more concerned about the Kashmiri blood on you hands when you support this occupation.


----------



## Abi

Why do people always forget about China when discussing Kashmir? China has a lot of Kashmir land as well.


----------



## EjazR

*@PAFAce*

Are you referring tot he Amarnath land controversy as land being given to attract Hindus from outside J&K? I think that this is a misplaced view.

It was specifically handed over to provide for Hindu pilgrims but communal elements both Hindu and Muslim were able to capitalize on the religious based politics that followed.

However, please note that the land deal was revoked by the J&K govt. Which shows that the J&K govt. has the power to take hard decisions if needed. Thus, the locals can get their griviances resolved under the present setup.

The land is now only leased out for the period of the pilgrimage. Please note that the Shrine board also consists of local Hindus, the J&K CM and governor.


Killing of innocents and harsh measures that results in deaths for protesters is wrong. However, political parties like the PDP and NC also take up this issue and there is no reason why the J&K govt. can take action against them as well as they have in the past. If there is proof that any security personnel had deliberately and intentionally targeted teenagers to kill them they should be punished as per law. Again, this is well within the power and responsibility of the J&K govt. 

Also please note that there are around 35&#37; Muslims in Jammu and 47% Muslims in Ladakh, which are significant Muslim populations. Don't these Muslims matters? Even in Kashmir valley, the districts that are in highlighted during protests are 95% of the time shopian, sopur and old city Srinagar. The rest of the 6-7 districts in the valley hardly have the scale of unrest and law and order issues as compared to these districts. The opinion of these quiet people matter as much as the loud hurriyet groups. And also lets not discount the popular opinion in the valley that Jammu and Ladakh should be not be separated from the valley and that J&K should remain united.


Lets get one thing straight, local kashmiris who have a sepratist point of view and want to put forward this to the GoI and the local populace can do so without the use of violence. But militants mainly Pakistani nationals under groups like LeT, HUJI, Hizb and other assorted groups under the United Jihad Council based in Muzaffarabad are terrorists just like the TTP. They have killed more Kashmiri Muslims civilians (about 15000) than any other community including Hindu civilians (around 2000). Moreover they have been involved in enforcing a similar Taliban style parallel govt. where people are beheaded for being "spies" women are attacked with acid for not wearing proper "Islamic dress" and any local Kashmiri and his family who works to counter them is fair game to be killed and tortured. There have even been cases of ears and noses being cutoff of these alleged "spies". 

Lets differentiate between these two groups. 
There are separatists who have abjured violence such as Yasin Malik (JKLF founder), Mirwaiz (his father was killed by a militant) e.t.c [ironically the Indian security forces at times have provided them with a security detail to protect them from militants]. 

Then you have the TTP clones like LeT, Hizb, HUJI and the umbrella organization UJC. This should not be given any support by any sane person as they have actually been responsible for bringing the IA and paramilitary forces in J&K as well as killings of a large number locals opposed to their ideology.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hindustan

well you guys are taliking about kashmir let talk on Balochistan what soultion you want for them 

they are fighiting for freedom

Baloch Independence Movement 4


----------



## FreekiN

Like 1 percent of Balochistan supports seperation. And you government happens to be arming that 1 &#37;. Totally understandable as we did the same thing in Khalistan.


----------



## Xeric

Freekin, just ignore the troll, would you?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAFAce

hindustan said:


> well you guys are taliking about kashmir let talk on Balochistan what soultion you want for them





hero said:


> How do you concluded that 1&#37; balochistan supports separation? did pakistan conduct poll/referendums in balochistan?


Stop your whining, trolls. Before we even _begin_ to speak about Balochistan, we should first speak about Assam, Khalistan, Telangana, Tamil Eelam etc. But I'm sure you don't want to do that, so let's cut the crap and concentrate on the "disputed territory" of Kashmir. Oh, and by the way, Balochistan was not forced to become a part of Pakistan, they did so at their own will, which is why it has never been contested as disputed territory.

If you can't talk sense, then it is best to shut up and let grown men like *EjazR* do the talking, at least that guy knows what we're talking about. Every time someone like you opens his mouth, all you do is hurt India's case (even your countrymen are probably ashamed at your ignorance).


xeric said:


> Freekin, just ignore the troll, would you?


Sorry sir, for not following your order. It was best to shut their mouths first.


----------



## hero

PAFAce said:


> Stop your whining, trolls. Before we even _begin_ to speak about Balochistan, we should first speak about Assam, Khalistan, Telangana, Tamil Eelam etc. But I'm sure you don't want to do that, so let's cut the crap and concentrate on the "disputed territory" of Kashmir. Oh, and by the way, Balochistan was not forced to become a part of Pakistan, they did so at their own will, which is why it has never been contested as disputed territory.
> 
> If you can't talk sense, then it is best to shut up and let grown men like *EjazR* do the talking, at least that guy knows what we're talking about. Every time someone like you opens his mouth, all you do is hurt India's case (even your countrymen are probably ashamed at your ignorance).
> 
> Sorry sir, for not following your order. It was best to shut their mouths first.



Pakistan should stop supporting and training terrorist. If you say dispute then it is dispute between kashmiri people and india. We are going to short it ourself. It is nothing to do with pakistan.


----------



## Trichy

PAFAce said:


> Stop your whining, trolls. Before we even _begin_ to speak about Balochistan, we should first speak about Assam, Khalistan, Telangana, Tamil Eelam etc. But I'm sure you don't want to do that, so let's cut the crap and concentrate on the "disputed territory" of Kashmir. Oh, and by the way, Balochistan was not forced to become a part of Pakistan, they did so at their own will, which is why it has never been contested as disputed territory.
> 
> If you can't talk sense, then it is best to shut up and let grown men like *EjazR* do the talking, at least that guy knows what we're talking about. Every time someone like you opens his mouth, all you do is hurt India's case (even your countrymen are probably ashamed at your ignorance).
> 
> Sorry sir, for not following your order. It was best to shut their mouths first.



i) Tamil Eleam is not a problem of India!
ii) Telangana wants separate state not a freedom from the India!
iii) Khalistan is a vanished issue (Indian PM is from there only)
iv) Assam ULFA already Crack-down but ya they are small groups only problem now


----------



## toxic_pus

Regarding this 'Kashmir is a disputed territory', some members, particularly those who swear by UN resolutions, should be better advised to note, that the 'dispute' is between India and Pakistan, and not between India and people of Kashmir, whereby the 'dispute' is to be solved with recourse to Kashmiri's opinion. The oh-so-divine UN resolutions are clear that there are only two parties to this 'dispute' and Kashmiris are not one of them. So this canard, 'Kashmiris right to self-determination' arises out of the 'disputed status' of Kashmir, is what it is - a canard.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Valiant_Soul

PAFAce said:


> When did I say I support this? Why is it that anybody who speaks for the rights of Kashmiris is declared a terrorist by Indians?



Okay, so you wish to bury your head in the sand over 15 years of cross-border terrorism. I do not know how many times this has been discussed to death that Pakistani establishment at one level or another is the force behind cross-border terrorism in India. Isn't this your covert warfare because this is all you can do?



> There are various types of warfare, you should turn to History books before asking me that question. As for respect, your Armed Forces respects us plenty, because they know what we're capable of. That's all the respect we need.



I know all kinds of warfare, but none that is targeted towards unarmed innocent people. Yes we know what you are capable of - that has been quite explicit from the four wars. Our armed forces so love to talk about the time it will take for them to complete their task once they get on to it. That shows their respect for your strength. 



> In other words, the Kashmiris can go to hell, the land belongs to India. Once again, you show no regard for the people of Kashmir with this statement. All you want to do is occupy a piece of land without its people. _That_ is why they want independence in the first place; it's their land a lot more than it is yours (or even mine for that matter).



Astonishing the way you can twist the whole meaning of what has been said. I said they are free to choose their allegiance, they are free to call India their home or they can choose to be part of some other nation as people in any Indian region has the right. Yes, the land is paramount because the national integrity is paramount. That however is not contradictory to the upliftment of the people of Kashmir. 



> It's a waiting game for Kashmiris, nobody can sustain an occupation forever. This is why every Kashmiri says "_when_ we attain freedom" and not "_if_ we attain freedom" in the documentary Jashn-e-Azadi


.

This is not an occupation by any stretch of imagination. But let us wait and see where this takes you and us. 



> You're absolutely right. Which is why you should be lecturing your soldiers who recently shot killed two teenage boys for simply protesting (without weapons).



Any credible source/link for the same? 



> You should also be lecturing your government who took their land and gave it to a Hindu organization to attract more Hindus into the region. BSF soldiers are, at the very least, as unpopular in the Valley than militants, if not more. Killing innocents and denying basic rights has a lot to do with that.



Propaganda talk! As I said, if India wants to change the population demographic it has all the right to have people from everywhere else settle in Kashmir. Also read what EjazR has mentioned, you have your answer in his post. And do not forget the displaced Kashmiri pandits.


----------



## PAFAce

Valiant_Soul said:


> Okay, so you wish to bury your head in the sand over 15 years of cross-border terrorism. I do not know how many times this has been discussed to death that Pakistani establishment at one level or another is the force behind cross-border terrorism in India. Isn't this your covert warfare because this is all you can do?


We can do plenty, and that is the only reason why your Generals don't have their evening tea at the Lahore gym-khana. I think that's all I need to say about your superiority complex. As for civilian deaths, you'd do well to research the number of civilians killed by militants over the last year versus those killed by your soldiers, or for that matter, read up on the casualties since 1990 and you'll come crashing off your high horse.



> I know all kinds of warfare, but none that is targeted towards unarmed innocent people. Yes we know what you are capable of - that has been quite explicit from the four wars. Our armed forces so love to talk about the time it will take for them to complete their task once they get on to it. That shows their respect for your strength.


"Once they get to it" is laughable, because once they get to it, we'll get to them. They've been "getting to it" since 1947, but all the poor blokes have managed to do is sit around talking about how they will do it. "Dus qadam aur Pakistan khatam" is quite a wet-dream for many. "We'll take back East Bengal, then we'll take back West Punjab" is what Ms. Gandhi claimed after the humiliation at the hands of the Chinese, and we know how well that's been going. But I don't want to get into a boasting match, I have sufficient knowledge of the capabilities of both our Armed Forces to sleep peacefully right beside the Wagah Border. Any keen student of the Armed Forces on either side will let you know that if they are sitting around talking about "the time it will take for them to complete their task", they are wasting your hard earned money. What your soldiers should be doing is working to overturn their image as the laughing-stock of professional Armed Forces.



> Astonishing the way you can twist the whole meaning of what has been said. Yes, the land is paramount because the national integrity is paramount. That however is not contradictory to the upliftment of the people of Kashmir.


You claim that land as if it belongs to you. It's a shame that you have absolutely no respect for the indigenous population nor their hardships at the hands of your armed forces, all you see is your ego. 



> This is not an occupation by any stretch of imagination. But let us wait and see where this takes you and us.


It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.



> Any credible source/link for the same?


If you can't be bothered to research even the most basic facts about the current affairs regarding Kashmir, then I feel extremely disappointed at the fact that I've spent many minutes debating with you. It's like you don't even want to learn about Kashmir's issues, you'd just rather spew the same garbage that you've been force fed by your governments for over six decades.

_The protests started after a 14-year-old boy died after he was struck in the head by a police tear gas shell as an anti-Indian protest ended last Sunday. The police officer who fired the shell was suspended and police called it "a callous and irresponsible action."

Then on Friday, witnesses said paramilitary soldiers charged at a group of people gathered on a playground and began firing as they fled, killing a 17 year old. Hemant Lohia, a top police officer, confirmed that the boy died from a bullet wound but said details about his death were still under investigation. _
Source: washingtonpost.com

Now that you've made it perfectly clear that you are not interested in conducting even basic research on the subject, I don't see much point in continuing our discussion. You can live in your self-made paradise, while I whole-heartedly support the people being put through your hell.


> Propaganda talk! As I said, if India wants to change the population demographic it has all the right to have people from everywhere else settle in Kashmir. Also read what EjazR has mentioned, you have your answer in his post. And do not forget the displaced Kashmiri pandits.


India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India. Also, *EjazR* didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how". I'm not interested in "how", I'm interested in their _objectives_. I am glad that the people of Kashmir brought the tyrants to their knees with the uprising, but I'm sad that it cost them at least four innocent lives while doing so (not including the two women found dead weeks before).



hero said:


> If you say dispute then it is dispute between kashmiri people and india.





toxic_pus said:


> the 'dispute' is between India and Pakistan, and not between India and people of Kashmir, whereby the 'dispute' is to be solved with recourse to Kashmiri's opinion.


Please make up your minds, you guys are so damn confused. In any case, there are three parties involved in this issue, and all three will have to compromise. If, for some reason, India does not want Kashmir to join as a party,then Pakistan should (and does) represent the will of the majority of Kashmiris. It's really very simple. Stop indulging in petty arguments and lets get to solving the issue.



Trichy said:


> i) Tamil Eleam is not a problem of India!
> ii) Telangana wants separate state not a freedom from the India!
> iii) Khalistan is a vanished issue (Indian PM is from there only)
> iv) Assam ULFA already Crack-down but ya they are small groups only problem now


Ghalat fehmi.

The largest Tamil and Sikh communities outside of South Asia are found in Canada. Separatist Tamils here claim Northern Sri Lanka and the Southern portion of the state of Tamil Nadu as sovereign territory, hence Tamil Eelam definitely applied to India as well (though it isn't a major concern). 

During the massacre of Sikhs involved in the Khalistan movement, there was mass refugee-immigration from India to Canada, and hence many seriously anti-Indian sentiments can be found amongst a small portion of Sikhs in Canada (particularly in British Columbia). Human Rights Watch and other Sikh organizations certainly wants India to probe the massacre, but the Indian government is reluctant to do so (understandably).

Telangana is definitely a struggle for a separate state, but to say that there is no nationalist movement is foolish. This situation, however, is still very much manageable (though Mr. Chidambaram has done everything in his power to screw it up).

Lastly, Assam is very much alive, despite the crackdown and the Bangladeshi government selling out. The biggest concern for you is the fact that the leader of ULFA has asked for a plebiscite to be conducted in Assam, which is a clear Red Flag for any observer about public opinion in the region. If I were you, I'd try to get control of that situation using diplomacy and tactics, not a heavy hand. It has every potential to turn into another Kashmir (though I don't expect the Bangladeshis to ever support that movement as Pakistanis support Kashmir).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yuba

PAFAce said:


> We can do plenty, and that is the only reason why your soldiers don't have their afternoon tea in the Lahore gym-khana. I think that's all I need to say about your superiority complex. As for civilian deaths, you'd do well to research the number of civilians killed by militants over the last year versus your soldiers, or for that matter, read up on the casualties since 1990 and you'll come crashing off your high horse.
> 
> 
> "Once they get to it" is laughable, because once they get to it, we'll get to them. They've been "getting to it" since 1947, but all the poor blokes have managed is sitting around and chatting about how they will do it. "Dus qadam aur Pakistna Khatam" is quite a wer-dream for many. "We'll take back East Bengal, then we'll take back West Punjab" is what Ms. Gandhi claimed after the humiliation at the hands of the Chinese. We know how well that's been going. Bit I don't want to get into a boasting match, I have sufficient knowledge of the capabilities of both our Armed Forces to sleep peacefully right beside the Wagah Border.
> 
> 
> You claim that land as if it belongs to you. It's a shame that you have absolutely no respect for the indigenous population nor their hardships at the hands of your armed forces, all you see is your ego.
> 
> 
> It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.
> 
> 
> If you can't be bothered to research even the most basic facts about the current affairs regarding Kashmir, then I feel extremely disappointed at the fact that I've spent many minutes debating with you. It's like you don't even want to learn about Kashmir's issues, you'd just rather spew the same garbage that you've been force fed by your governments for over six decades.
> 
> _The protests started after a 14-year-old boy died after he was struck in the head by a police tear gas shell as an anti-Indian protest ended last Sunday. The police officer who fired the shell was suspended and police called it "a callous and irresponsible action."
> 
> Then on Friday, witnesses said paramilitary soldiers charged at a group of people gathered on a playground and began firing as they fled, killing a 17 year old. Hemant Lohia, a top police officer, confirmed that the boy died from a bullet wound but said details about his death were still under investigation. _
> Source: washingtonpost.com
> 
> Now that you've made it perfectly clear that you are not interested in conducting even basic research on the subject, I don't see much point in continuing our discussion. You can live in your self-made paradise, while I whole-heartedly support the people being put through your hell.
> 
> India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India. Also, *EjazR* didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how". I'm not interested in "how", I'm interested in their _objectives_. I am glad that the people of Kashmir brought the tyrants to their knees with the uprising, but I'm sad that it cost them at least four innocent lives while doing so (not including the two women found dead weeks before).



if pakistan military so powerfull why you not take kashmir what you should do is read the neutral accounts of indo pac wars instead of digesting you militarys propaganda i cant belive you live in this bubble you created for yourselves i from india but i still do not say we won 62 war but you still think you won in 47 65 and kargil


----------



## yuba

by the way during operation gibralter was it not local kashmiris that told the indians about the infiltrations

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> "We'll take back East Bengal, then we'll take back West Punjab" is what Ms. Gandhi claimed after the humiliation at the hands of the Chinese...


A citation would be appreciated. Btw, Ms. Gandhi became PM in 1966, a good 4 years after Indo-China war.



> It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.


Please elaborate, why it is 'occupation'. 



> India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India. Also, *EjazR* didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how".


How is GoI trying to 'willfully' altering the demographics when nobody from the rest of India can even buy land and settle permanently in Kashmir.

EDIT: *Ejaz* has clearly explained 'why'.


EjazR said:


> It was specifically handed over to provide for Hindu pilgrims...


You would have read it, only if you were not busy burying your head in the sand.


----------



## PAFAce

yuba said:


> if pakistan military so powerfull why you not take kashmir what you should do is read the neutral accounts of indo pac wars instead of digesting you militarys propaganda i cant belive you live in this bubble you created for yourselves i from india but i still do not say we won 62 war but you still think you won in 47 65 and kargil


I don't know where you picked up that I claim to have won every War. Kargil was a debacle for us, so was Siachen. However, we certainly repelled your aggressive intents well enough in 1965, and 1947-48 was a victory for Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. Now, it seems that Indians' desire for War knows absolutely no bounds. The motto seems to be "Why bother with civilised debate or negotiations when you can oppress, maim, kill and bomb!"



toxic_pus said:


> A citation would be appreciated. Btw, Ms. Gandhi became PM in 1966, a good 4 years after Indo-China war.


That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. _If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event._



> Please elaborate, why it is 'occupation'.


1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).

I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.



> You would have read it, only if you were not busy burying your head in the sand.


It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, *EjazR* simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write _that_ on the brochure.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## yuba

PAFAce said:


> I don't know where you picked up that I claim to have won every War. Kargil was a debacle for us, so was Siachen. However, we certainly repelled your aggressive intents well enough in 1965, and 1947-48 was a victory for Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. Now, it seems that Indians' desire for War knows absolutely no bounds. The motto seems to be "Why bother with civilised debate or negotiations when you can oppress, maim, kill and bomb!"
> 
> 
> That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. _If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event._
> 
> 
> 1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
> 2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
> 3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
> 4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
> 5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).
> 
> I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.
> 
> 
> It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, *EjazR* simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write _that_ on the brochure.



i am all for debate but untill you realise that no matter what india will not give up ourside of the loc,so the best solution would be to make it a soft border encourage trade and try to live peacefully as neighbors


----------



## yuba

PAFAce said:


> I don't know where you picked up that I claim to have won every War. Kargil was a debacle for us, so was Siachen. However, we certainly repelled your aggressive intents well enough in 1965, and 1947-48 was a victory for Pakistan and Azad Kashmir. Now, it seems that Indians' desire for War knows absolutely no bounds. The motto seems to be "Why bother with civilised debate or negotiations when you can oppress, maim, kill and bomb!"
> 
> 
> That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. _If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event._
> 
> 
> 1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
> 2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
> 3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
> 4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
> 5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).
> 
> I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.
> 
> 
> It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, *EjazR* simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write _that_ on the brochure.



sending terrorists across the loc to kill innocents shoot people in hotels is that what you mean by civilised debate


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> Please make up your minds, you guys are so damn confused. In any case, there are three parties involved in this issue, and all three will have to compromise. If, for some reason, India does not want Kashmir to join as a party,then Pakistan should (and does) represent the will of the majority of Kashmiris. It's really very simple. Stop indulging in petty arguments and lets get to solving the issue.


The people who matter in New Delhi are far from confused. But your confusion is spilling out of your guts. First you did a 'monkey see, monkey do' with the word 'disputed' without realising its connotation in the context of UN resolutions. When cut down to size, you have resorted to the usual 'Pakistan should represent the will of the majority of Kashmirs'. This sense of entitlement is amazing. 

How did you gather that Pakistan is somehow entitled to represent Kashmiris? Did it occur to you that a party to a dispute can't 'represent' a facilitator. 



> Ghalat fehmi.


 Yeah right.



> The largest Tamil and Sikh communities outside of South Asia are found in Canada. Separatist Tamils here claim Northern Sri Lanka and the Southern portion of the state of Tamil Nadu as sovereign territory, hence Tamil Eelam definitely applied to India as well (though it isn't a major concern).
> 
> During the massacre of Sikhs involved in the Khalistan movement, there was mass refugee-immigration from India to Canada, and hence many seriously anti-Indian sentiments can be found amongst a small portion of Sikhs in Canada (particularly in British Columbia). Human Rights Watch and other Sikh organizations certainly wants India to probe the massacre, but the Indian government is reluctant to do so (understandably).


The expats mean diddly squat as long as there is nothing on the ground and the situation on ground is cool as cucumber. If expats' opinion is all you have got to measure a movement, then remember there is a significant number of Baloch expats who are against Pakistan. 

Next time try harder.



> Telangana is definitely a struggle for a separate state, but to say that there is no nationalist movement is foolish. This situation, however, is still very much manageable (though Mr. Chidambaram has done everything in his power to screw it up).


You have no clue to what you are talking about. Isn't it?



> Lastly, Assam is very much alive, despite the crackdown and the Bangladeshi government selling out. The biggest concern for you is the fact that the leader of ULFA has asked for a plebiscite to be conducted in Assam, which is a clear Red Flag for any observer about public opinion in the region. If I were you, I'd try to get control of that situation using diplomacy and tactics, not a heavy hand. It has every potential to turn into another Kashmir (though I don't expect the Bangladeshis to ever support that movement as Pakistanis support Kashmir).


 Pathetic. But then again, you must be right. After all a Pakistani knows more about India that Indians themselves.


----------



## ejaz007

*BJP warns govt against any deal on Kashmir*
* Advani questions if powerful nudge from US behind willingness to talk to Pakistan
By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: The Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday questioned if a powerful nudge from Washington was behind New Delhis offer for talks with Islamabad, and warned against any deal on Kashmir that breaches a Lok Sabha resolution. The resolution  unanimously passed on February 22, 1994  says Jammu and Kashmir has been, is and shall ... [remain] an integral part of India. 

In a two-page statement issue in New Delhi, Advani highlights US President Barack Obamas statement in 2008 on working with Pakistan and India to try to resolve the Kashmir crisis in a serious way. He then says the governments sudden willingness to hold talks with Pakistan had prompted political analysts to ask if this was a consequence of Obamas statement being put into action. Separately, the BJP welcomed a high court order quashing a five percent quota for Muslims in jobs.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## yuba

toxic_pus said:


> The people who matter in New Delhi are far from confused. But your confusion is spilling out of your guts. First you did a 'monkey see, monkey do' with the word 'disputed' without realising its connotation in the context of UN resolutions. When cut down to size, you have resorted to the usual 'Pakistan should represent the will of the majority of Kashmirs'. This sense of entitlement is amazing.
> 
> How did you gather that Pakistan is somehow entitled to represent Kashmiris? Did it occur to you that a party to a dispute can't 'represent' a facilitator.
> 
> 
> Yeah right.
> 
> 
> The expats mean diddly squat as long as there is nothing on the ground and the situation on ground is cool as cucumber. If expats' opinion is all you have got to measure a movement, then remember there is a significant number of Baloch expats who are against Pakistan.
> 
> Next time try harder.
> 
> 
> You have no clue to what you are talking about. Isn't it?
> 
> 
> Pathetic. But then again, you must be right. After all a Pakistani knows more about India that Indians themselves.



i am a sikh but i am also an indian most people who want a khalistan live outsidethe country you go to punjab and see how much most sikhs love india there may have been some problems in the past and i think some people should be punished for their role in delhi riots but we sikhs allways have and allways will be ready to protect our motherland india

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> That's what I said, "after the humiliation" of the Sino-Indian war of 1962. _If something happens after a particular date or event, it happens during the period of time that follows that date or event._


Yes we all know what 'after' means. Question is why are you giving me English lessons when you should be giving a citation.



> 1. Majority population does not want to be a part of India.
> 2. Half a Million Indian troops and armed personnel make sure that the people cannot achieve their desire for 1.
> 3. When people protest against 2 and for 1, they are forcefully put down and their lives threatened.
> 4. The people have no say in deciding their future.
> 5. Preferential treatment is given to the minorities that support 2, in direct violation of the rights of the rest of the populace (1).
> 
> I really tried to make it as simply as I possible could to understand. I'm sorry if I haven't done a good enough job.


Horsepucky. IA is in Kashmir on the basis of Instrument of Accession which granted India the constitutional right to be in Kashmir. That was bolstered by UN writ, which required India to maintain presence. To prove that presence of IA in Kashmir is merely 'occupational' you have to prove that IA doesn't have a writ to be there.

1. Irrelevant, because India's presence is constitutional and is vetted by UN.

2. Bogus, no terrorism, no 'half a million Indian troops'. There wasn't any 'half a million troops' before the insurgency broke out in '87.

3. It is not unique to Kashmir. Police break up rallies in other parts of India as well, if such a rally is considered to be disruptive of civil life.

4. Indian democracy gives them the right to say about their future.

5. BS, unless you prove it.



> It is way too easy to ruffle your feathers. You should try some breathing techniques or something to control your emotions (India is the best place to learn yoga, try it out). Getting personal like this does not help us discuss the points. Also, *EjazR* simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write _that_ on the brochure.


It would take a lot more than that to ruffle my my feathers. Don't you loose sleep on that. But can you explain how can GoI 'encourage' Hindu worshipers to settle down in Kashmir, when they can't even buy land to settle down. 

Btw, Kashmir houses a number of sites which are considered to be holy by the Hindus.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAFAce

toxic_pus said:


> When cut down to size, you have resorted to the usual 'Pakistan should represent the will of the majority of Kashmirs'. This sense of entitlement is amazing.
> 
> How did you gather that Pakistan is somehow entitled to represent Kashmiris? Did it occur to you that a party to a dispute can't 'represent' a facilitator.


you're the one hell bent on denying them any chance at being involved in the process of resolution. In that case, we have every right to represent them in the room. You don't like it, but it doesn't change the fact that their opinions on their future are a lot similar to ours than yours.



> The expats mean diddly squat as long as there is nothing on the ground and the situation on ground is cool as cucumber. If expats' opinion is all you have got to measure a movement, then remember there is a significant number of Baloch expats who are against Pakistan.


Why are you crying? That was my point exactly. It was meant to shut up the idiot who brougt Balochistan into the conversation, and for any idiot who thought he was right to do so. Your past bites you in the back, and you try to vent it at me. I'm not your mother.



> You have no clue to what you are talking about. Isn't it?


I work with two people who hail from the Hyderabad (India) and one from Kerala. They are far more critical of Chidambaram than I wrote here. Other than that, Allah has given me the ability to read. So yeah, I do have an idea, more than you might think.



> After all a Pakistani knows more about India that Indians themselves.


Generally, I wouldn't think so, but I guess in this case its true.



toxic_pus said:


> IA is in Kashmir on the basis of Instrument of Accession which granted India the constitutional right to be in Kashmir.


You choose to bring the UN resolution in when its convenient for you, and ignore it otherwise. When it comes to honoring your promises, your tongue is tied, but when it comes to throwing mud, you're king. You can't have "constitutional rights" to be in Kashmir when the majority rejects the constitution in the first place. Either that, or majority opinion doesn't matter to you and your democracy is a sham. Which is it? Also, the rights of the constitution cannot be provided selectively, and their right to demonstrate and protest freely is granted to them by the constitution. Yet, you do everything in your power to shut down all protests no matter how peaceful, which is a direct violation of their rights. You reject their rights, they reject your laws, simple as that. (Note: you might want to bring the UN Resolution back in here, but make sure you do it selectively if you don't want to highlight your own shortcomings).

But you're right, it's not an occupation. The soldiers are there on a peace-keeping mission. Now you may sleep easy.


> Kashmir houses a number of sites which are considered to holy by the Hindus.


Hence the occupation.



yuba said:


> i am a sikh but i am also an indian most people who want a khalistan live outsidethe country you go to punjab and see how much most sikhs love india there may have been some problems in the past and i think some people should be punished for their role in delhi riots but we sikhs allways have and allways will be ready to protect our motherland india


And what the heck does this have to do with anything here? Could this online butt-kiss not be handled through Private Messaging or on other forums?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> you're the one hell bent on denying them any chance at being involved in the process of resolution. In that case, we have every right to represent them in the room. You don't like it, but it doesn't change the fact that their opinions on their future are a lot similar to ours than yours.


Assuming that by 'you', you mean India, you should ask these questions to your leadership as well. For example, at the UN Pakistan was a party to the dispute and yet Pakistan forgot to include the Kashmiris as the other party. Why? 

Why did Jinnah refuse plebiscite when it was offered?

The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind.



> Why are you crying? That was my point exactly. It was meant to shut up the idiot who brougt Balochistan into the conversation, and for any idiot who thought he was right to do so. Your past bites you in the back, and you try to vent it at me. I'm not your mother.


Fair enough.

Although my past, in spite of all the lows, is many orders of magnitude better than yours.



> I work with two people who hail from the Hyderabad (India) and one from Kerala. They are far more critical of Chidambaram than I wrote here. Other than that, Allah has given me the ability to read. So yeah, I do have an idea, more than you might think.


Yeah right. I am critical of Chidambaram. I guess that makes me a 'secessionist'.

Then again I heard something from a friend's sister's brother-in-law's 2nd cousin, who heard it from...... See where I'm going with this?



> Generally, I wouldn't think so, but I guess in this case its true.


 Of course. Why not.


----------



## PAFAce

*Kashmir Resolution Proposal #8*

Okay, I'm tired of battling bats. Here is a resolution I propose (if self-determination is not feasible):










Benefits to India:
- The most troublesome area of Indian Control Kashmir, the Valley, will no longer be a problem.
- A defined and permanent International Border will allow for relations with Pakistan to improve, which will ultimately be in India's best interest.
- India still retains about 60-70&#37; of the currently disputed territory with Pakistan, as the relatively large but scarcely populated Buddhist majority state of Ladakh and the Hindu majority state of Jammu remain a part of India.
- Economic development in Jammu and Ladakh can be increased to unprecedented levels as it is no longer disputed territory.
- India keeps most of the strategic heights of Siachen, Kargil etc. without having to worry about Pakistani aggression (which can be enforced through a comprehensive treaty).

Benefits to Kashmiris
- The people of the Valley get what they want, separation from India.
- The people of Ladakh and Jammu get what they want, a peaceful Kashmir and increased integration with India.
- The people of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan get what they want, increased integration with Pakistan without a constant threat of war with India.
- The people of all regions of Kashmir will see investment increase and quality of life improve manifold as the region is no longer considered disputed.

Benefits to Pakistan:
- A defined and permanent International Border will allow for relations with India to improve, which will ultimately be in Pakistan's best interest.
- Pakistanis and Kashmiris of the Valley will get what they have always wanted, free and peaceful Kashmir.
- Economic development in Azad Kashmir, the Valley and Gilgit-Baltistan can be increased to unprecedented levels as it is no longer disputed territory.

It's got something for all three parties, and should be far more acceptable than either of the 7 offered solutions. Also, it is believed by many experts and locals that this will be the outcome of any referendum or plebiscite held in the separate districts of Kashmir (if the choice is Pakistan or India only). Added benefit, aesthetically speaking, the map of India gets to keep its head and the map of Pakistan gets to keep its nose. 

Let's discuss in a civil fashion, and let's keep the personal attacks out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## brahmastra

^^^^ Whats assurity that suppose India gives you valley you will not promote terrorism to get remaining kashmir?

and if kashmir is disputed for you than who gave you right to 'gift' some of part of land to China.
why you are not worried about 'chinese occupation' on kashmir and just so colled 'Indian occupation'.


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> You choose to bring the UN resolution in when its convenient for you, and ignore it otherwise. When it comes to honoring your promises, your tongue is tied, but when it comes to throwing mud, you're king.


I brought in UN because some members here attach divinity to those resolutions. You can see though, that my argument is based not on UN resolutions but on Instrument of Accession. 



> You can't have "constitutional rights" to be in Kashmir when the majority rejects the constitution in the first place.


Accept that the granting of that constitutional right didn't depend on Kashmiris. Hence their 'rejection' doesn't matter. As insensitive as it may sound, that is the cold hard truth of life. Ask Jinnah.



> Either that, or majority opinion doesn't matter to you and your democracy is a sham.


Majority opinion does matter. Secessionist opinion doesn't.



> Also, the rights of the constitution cannot be provided selectively, and their right to demonstrate and protest freely is granted to them by the constitution. Yet, you do everything in your power to shut down all protests no matter how peaceful, which is a direct violation of their rights. You reject their rights, they reject your laws, simple as that. (Note: you might want to bring the UN Resolution back in here, but make sure you do it selectively if you don't want to highlight your own shortcomings).


Prove that Indian constitution is applied selectively in Kashmir. You can do that by first proving that police in India doesn't break up political rallies or protest etc. in any other parts of India.



> But you're right, it's not an occupation. The soldiers are there on a peace-keeping mission. Now you may sleep easy.


I am sleeping OK. Thanks for your concern though.



> Hence the occupation.


May be we should attack China. After all Manasarovar is in China. 



> And what the heck does this have to do with anything here? Could this online butt-kiss not be handled through Private Messaging or on other forums?


Reality hurts. Doesn't it.


----------



## PAFAce

brahmastra said:


> ^^^^ Whats assurity that suppose India gives you valley you will not promote terrorism to get remaining kashmir?


There is little anti-India sentiment in Ladakh and Jammu, something which has always existed in the Muslim majority Valley (hence, the most troublesome region). Also, once the Valley is freed, Pakistan has no reason to support the freedom fighters or support any anti-India militancies (which, like I said, are at very manageable levels in L&J). Lastly, it can be ensured by treaty that no such actions are carried out by either side, and that top level intelligence will be shared.

Trust me, once the Valley is freed, the temperature will cool-down to pleasant levels and the populations of both countries will pressure the governments to stop the fighting. The nitty-gritties can be worked out by the diplomats, I can only suggest an overall solution that based on give-and-take and compromise, and most of all, everyone gets most of what they want.


> and if kashmir is disputed for you than who gave you right to 'gift' some of part of land to China.
> why you are not worried about 'chinese occupation' on kashmir and just so colled 'Indian occupation'.


Pakistan and China resolved their land issue, something that India should take a lesson from. The land contested betwen China and India is something that should be resolved between those two countries (with the involvement of the people of the contested region). I can only represent the Pakistani side, and by commonality of objectives, the Valley's side.


----------



## ssheppard

PAFAce said:


> There is no widespread anti-India sentiment in Ladakh and Jammu, which has always existed in the Muslim majority Valley. Also, once the Valley is freed, Pakistan has no reason to spread so-called "terrorism" or support any anti-India movements (which, like I said, do not exist in L&J). Lastly, ensured by treaty that no such actions are carried out.
> 
> Trust me, once the Valley is freed, the temperature will cool-down to pleasant levels and the populations of both countries will pressure the governments to stop the fighting.
> 
> Pakistan and China resolved their land issue, something that India should take a lesson from. The land contested betwen China and India is something that should be resolved between those two countries (with the involvement of the people of the contested region). I can only represent the Pakistani side, and by commonality of objectives, the Valley's side.






Remember Khalistan Terrorism......The great Pakistani Initiative to Break Away Punjab from India.......

Pakistan would think of some more _____stans 

its better to keep it busy with Kashmir....as long Pakistan is busy in Kashmir ...other parts of India would grow...and prosper......and soon Kashmirs would realize (I have) that its better if they stick to their Country than fighting a battle for a Country that has not let them live peacefully for past 20 years.....

Pakistan thought of bleeding India through Kashmir...but guess who is bleeding now...


----------



## PAFAce

ssheppard said:


> Remember Khalistan Terrorism......The great Pakistani Initiative to Break Away Punjab from India.......
> Pakistan would think of some more _____stans


Pakistan's support for Khalistan was because of Kashmir. As long as you keep believing that we live to destroy you, you will never get over your Pakistan-phobia and nothing will ever get resolved. Once Kashmir is resolved, there will be no need for any more ____stans.

Also, without Benazir Bhutto, the Khalistan movement was going nowhere. She did to the Khalistan movement what Hasina is currently doing to the Assam movement. History is a great teacher, you just don't want to learn.



> its better to keep it busy with Kashmir....as long Pakistan is busy in Kashmir ...other parts of India would grow...and prosper......and soon Kashmirs would realize (I have) that its better if they stick to their Country than fighting a battle for a Country that has not let them live peacefully for past 20 years.....


You probably never lost a loved one to indiscriminate BSF firing (soldiers of a country who haven't let them live in peace for the past 60 years, which is greater than 20 I think). Stop the BS, nobody's buying what you're selling, we're all pretty aware of the feelings of the average Kashmiri. If the people of the Valley haven't fallen for it in sixty years, I don't think they'll fall for it now. Also, when Pakistan had only Kashmir to worry about, we were doing quite well economically (similar economic growth numbers as India, but _without_ the massive unemployment, poverty or over-population). Once the Talibs are taken care of, we'll go back to that growth, and all you'll get from your premature chest-pumping is a sore chest.



> Pakistan thought of bleeding India through Kashmir...but guess who is bleeding now...


And here goes the rhetoric. The Kashmiris are the ones who have bled the most, and since you claim to be one, you should know this (and brother, it ain't because of Pakistan). As a general rule, if you don't have something intelligent to add, don't open the yapper. By the way, your pride at being an Indian is visible form your flags.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> Lastly, it can be* ensured by treaty* that no such actions are carried out by either side, and that top level intelligence will be shared.


Bingo. Thats what we need. A 'treaty' to stop terrorism. Why didn't we think of it before? 



> Pakistan and China resolved their land issue, something that India should take a lesson from. The land contested betwen China and India is something that should be resolved between those two countries (with the involvement of the people of the contested region). I can only represent the Pakistani side, and by commonality of objectives, the Valley's side.


That doesn't answer the question. What gave Pakistan the right to enter into an _ex parte_ agreement with a third party, ceding land, which they themselves claim to be 'disputed'?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> Pakistan's support for Khalistan was because of Kashmir.


Can you please elaborate how Kashmir could have been solved by supporting Khalistan.


----------



## EjazR

PAFAce said:


> Also, *EjazR* simply stated what he read or heard, that in no way points to the objectives, which was clearly to attract a greater number of Hindu worshippers every year and encourage them to settle in the area. Obviously, they're not going to write _that_ on the brochure.



PAFAce, legally there is no way that a person outside J&K can buy property there. Only a few states like J&K and in the NE have this law constitutionally under article 370. Just before the row, the separatists had been completely confused because of their boycott for elections being a failure. Infact, Junoon had come and performed in Srinagar just a few weeks before even though the separatists and Salahuddin the head of UJC had asked the GoP not to send them. There were plans to have two more Pakistani bands to come and perform here but that got scrapped as the law and order situation worsened.

The problem was that there was lot of rumor mongering, the Hindu communal elements used this as did the separatists. So your point of using the land to "settle" Hindus from outside J&K is a non-starter. In fact, seeing that the J&K govt. was able to revoke the land transfer and just reconstitute a lease arrangement proves this point. 

In both cases this was govt. land that would have been used to assist Hindu pilgrims. The idea was that instead of building, then dismantling shelters every year, lets build permanent shelters that could be used by the pilgrims. Again, no one would settle here. Its similar to the permanent tents put up by the govt. of Saudi Arabia in Arafat for the Hajj. This is *why *the title deed was being transferred to the shrine board - which was a J&K based organization. However, now the title deed will not change but still the shrine board will lease the land and use it for the same purpose. I won't pass judgment on weather it was the right way to help the pilgrims, but certainly there was no need to communalise this as some "Hindu demographic invasion" of J&K. The other extreme where VHP and other extremists group hijacked the issue was equally repulsive. No local would deny Hindus their right to perform pilgrimage and its usually muslim kashmiris who benefit economically during the pilgrimage season. 

That is why A. 370 has been in place till now and not even the BJP govt. could revoke it.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> They are a disputed territory, not an "unbreakable part of India" no matter how much you scream. Therefore, the people have every right to "play with national integrity" because they don't believe in it



People who do not believe in National integrity are not entitled to the rights that you are so strongly advocating. Should be tried and shot for treason.



PAFAce said:


> Freedom is the right denied to them in your constitution, and the To say that they have every right under the constitution other than the freedom to choose their allegiance is self-contradictory.


Constitution of INdia does not give any citizen (any where in India) to choose allegiance to a foreign country. It does allow the citizens to leave with their wealth and go settle anywhere in the world they chose to...



PAFAce said:


> I'm not saying it will happen, but yes, I do believe that it's the best option. First and foremost, it satisfies the people of the Valley, Ladakh and Jammu, secondly it satisfies Pakistan and, most of all, it allows India to keep a major chunk of Kashmir. It's the best possible win-win-win situation, but Indians will end up losing territory, which is unacceptable to any occupying force. I am proud of my obsession with Kashmir, I believe their freedom is every bit as important as yours or mine, even if you and your friends don't. You, on the other hand, should get over your obsession with this occupation and the constant denial; it will be better not only for you, but for the peace of this region. Tough ask, but please do try.


Sir.. there is a distinct difference in the situation in J&K and an occupied territory from an individual's perspective. In an occupied territory, no one is allowed to leave or sell their property or emigrate. None of these apply to Kashmir. People are free to go and settle in P0K if they want to or more importantly if Pakistan would have them. They have all the freedom that any other citizen in any other part of India has. They just dont have the freedom to squander away a part of India which no citizen of a country deserve to have. 




PAFAce said:


> It is more than just religious, but that's the way most of you prefer to see it. It's based on many principles. Kashmir, at various times, has been a political, economic and moral struggle. Like I said, you can't deny them the most basic right and then claim they are "free".


Right to take your country's land to a foreign country where you want to emigrate to is a freedom not given to any citizen of India.. Be it in Kashmir or in any other state..



PAFAce said:


> Like I've said before, Kashmir's freedom is every bit as important as Pakistan's, and many Pakistanis have shed their blood alongside Kashmiris for this very reason. Pakistan can support Kashmir's cause for as long as possible, in whichever manner possible. The ball, however, has always been in India's court, and continues to be. As long as their is no awakening of the collective Indian conscience, Kashmir will never be resolved the way it should be. Full-fledged war should be a last resort, but if it's necessary for our brothers in Kashmir, then so be it. I do not love war, but I love the people for whom war may become necessary.


You can choose to shed as much blood Indian or Pakistani. Or feel free to attack India to wrest away Kashmir rofl. Not gonna happen..You have tried it in the past a couple of times.. Give it another shot if you want to.. And about the ball.. Yes its in our court and dont expect it coming back to you. This is a game we will not play.. 




PAFAce said:


> Yes, it's been very clear that Indians only care about themselves, you don't have to re-iterate it. You also don't have to beat the "we'll do whatever the heck we want and you can't do sh*t about it" drum, because many of your brethren are already doing so.



Yes we Indians only care about ourselves which includes all non traitors(which is the majority of people even though you dont believe it) living in J&K


----------



## All-Green

brahmastra said:


> ^^^^ Whats assurity that suppose India gives you valley you will not promote terrorism to get remaining kashmir?
> 
> and if kashmir is disputed for you than who gave you right to 'gift' some of part of land to China.
> why you are not worried about 'chinese occupation' on kashmir and just so colled 'Indian occupation'.



If this happens then I am confident that there will be no more reason for any Kashmiri to dislike India and when that happens there will be no violence in Kashmir.

Kashmiris have been protesting the Indian occupation since long in the Valley, we do not see such mass unrest in the Pakistani part of Kashmir so it is natural to assume that the Kashmiris in the valley are more affiliated with Pakistan and despite whatever India gives them, it is unlikely that they will be satisfied.

Terrorism is a global phenomena and can strike anywhere but when the locals have no need to use violence as a means to an end then terrorists cannot use the situation to their advantage.
Pakistan is already at war with the terrorist groups, LET being one of the most prominent of them, however lets not kid ourselves if we think that Kashmir struggle under discussion is terrorism, extremist elements may have crept in but the Kashmiris in the valley as a people have not been happy and have been extremely vocal about it. They have come out in numbers many times as a protest against Indian occupation.
The people protesting in thousands strong are not terrorists or foreign elements, they are Kashmiris.

Pakistanis are genuinely sympathetic to the cause of the Kashmiris but when the cause is addressed, there is no reason for Kashmiris and Pakistanis to see India as an enemy, no more phobias of each other...

With a little give and take the issue can be resolved and will bring about much greater benefits in the long run to all parties in question.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> Oh, and by the way, Balochistan was not forced to become a part of Pakistan, they did so at their own will, which is why it has never been contested as disputed territory.



On the same lines, didnt maharaja of Kashmir willingly joined the Indian Nation thru the accession agreement just like Ahmed Yar Khan signed an accession agreement for joining Pakistan?? Why the double standards.. Also if you give an arguement that the decision of the central authority can be overturned by the population, then the same logic can be applied to the Nehru's promise of holding a referendum. Just like in your arguement, that people of Kashmir do not agree to the accession agreement between maharaja of Kashmir and India, the people of India do not agree to the promises made by Nehru about the so called referendum..

Please note that I am not contesting Balochistan but talking about Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## All-Green

ssheppard said:


> Remember Khalistan Terrorism......The great Pakistani Initiative to Break Away Punjab from India.......
> 
> Pakistan would think of some more _____stans
> 
> its better to keep it busy with Kashmir....as long Pakistan is busy in Kashmir ...other parts of India would grow...and prosper......and soon Kashmirs would realize (I have) that its better if they stick to their Country than fighting a battle for a Country that has not let them live peacefully for past 20 years.....
> 
> Pakistan thought of bleeding India through Kashmir...but guess who is bleeding now...



So Khalistan was perpetrated by Pakistan operatives?
There was no Sikh movement against Indian state in Punjab?

Read more about the origins of the Sikh dissent, the semi autonomous status which they believed had been promised to them by Gandhi and Nehru.
The subsequent falling out was not something that had anything to do with Pakistan brainwashing the Sikh.

After the golden temple incident, Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards who i believe were not on payroll of ISI, the Sikhs massacred in the riots afterward were also not killed by ISI...even a person like Khushwant Singh openly criticized the role of congress in the subsequent Sikh massacres.

I think the way you are going you can easily blame the Naxalite movement on Pakistan as well....

Better wake up and realize that there have been many uprisings in India which were not perpetrated by Pakistan but were carried out by those within the borders of the Indian State and the reasons had nothing to do with Pakistan.

Let us stick to the topic at hand which is very much a flash point between India and Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Valiant_Soul

PAFAce said:


> We can do plenty, and that is the only reason why your Generals don't have their evening tea at the Lahore gym-khana. I think that's all I need to say about your superiority complex. As for civilian deaths, you'd do well to research the number of civilians killed by militants over the last year versus those killed by your soldiers, or for that matter, read up on the casualties since 1990 and you'll come crashing off your high horse.



I am not interested in any research on casualties because I know that cannot be documented properly by anyone. The thing that is most significant is the intention to have a united and prosperous India. And we do not need to learn from you what the intentions of our chosen governments are, unlike the intentions of the actual source of power in Pakistan.



> "Once they get to it" is laughable, because once they get to it, we'll get to them. They've been "getting to it" since 1947, but all the poor blokes have managed to do is sit around talking about how they will do it. "Dus qadam aur Pakistan khatam" is quite a wet-dream for many. "We'll take back East Bengal, then we'll take back West Punjab" is what Ms. Gandhi claimed after the humiliation at the hands of the Chinese, and we know how well that's been going. But I don't want to get into a boasting match, I have sufficient knowledge of the capabilities of both our Armed Forces to sleep peacefully right beside the Wagah Border. Any keen student of the Armed Forces on either side will let you know that if they are sitting around talking about "the time it will take for them to complete their task", they are wasting your hard earned money. What your soldiers should be doing is working to overturn their image as the laughing-stock of professional Armed Forces.



Again you are mistaking intentions with capabilities. It has never been the intention of India to destroy Pakistan, but as far as defending our boundaries is concerned you know how hardly you have been hit on that front.



> You claim that land as if it belongs to you. It's a shame that you have absolutely no respect for the indigenous population nor their hardships at the hands of your armed forces, all you see is your ego.



Of course it legally belongs to us. You must be aware of the Instrument of Accession. That is legality as far as land is concerned. 



> It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.



Likewise we can say the same things about Balochistan etc, why do you make yourself a party to this dispute when you do not have the guts to yell for freedom Chinese occupied Kashmir? Hypocrisy!



> If you can't be bothered to research even the most basic facts about the current affairs regarding Kashmir, then I feel extremely disappointed at the fact that I've spent many minutes debating with you. It's like you don't even want to learn about Kashmir's issues, you'd just rather spew the same garbage that you've been force fed by your governments for over six decades.
> 
> _The protests started after a 14-year-old boy died after he was struck in the head by a police tear gas shell as an anti-Indian protest ended last Sunday. *The police officer who fired the shell was suspended and police called it "a callous and irresponsible action."*
> 
> Then on Friday, witnesses said paramilitary soldiers charged at a group of people gathered on a playground and began firing as they fled, killing a 17 year old. Hemant Lohia, a top police officer, confirmed that the boy died from a bullet wound but said details about his death were still under investigation. _
> Source: washingtonpost.com



From what you have quoted from the article, that should tell you why I asked from the source from your side. Does the article classifies it state-sponsored terrorism or mistake committed by an officer? Read the bold part as well. In the heat of things, these kind of mishaps occur everywhere in India and Kashmir is not exclusive, and you so callous to describe it oppression? 



> Now that you've made it perfectly clear that you are not interested in conducting even basic research on the subject, I don't see much point in continuing our discussion. You can live in your self-made paradise, while I whole-heartedly support the people being put through your hell.



I so agree that it is no point in discussing this. Let us look to the future because in the next 5-10 years it will be quite apparent to you what blunder you have done and you are doing by poking your nose in issues that should not be of your bother at all. But since you choose to classify people on the basis of religion, I think that is the fate you deserve.



> India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India. Also, *EjazR* didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how". I'm not interested in "how", I'm interested in their _objectives_. I am glad that the people of Kashmir brought the tyrants to their knees with the uprising, but I'm sad that it cost them at least four innocent lives while doing so (not including the two women found dead weeks before).



He did mentioned both how and why.


----------



## toxic_pus

All-Green said:


> So Khalistan was perpetrated by Pakistan operatives?
> There was no Sikh movement against Indian state in Punjab?
> 
> Read more about the origins of the Sikh dissent, the semi autonomous status which they believed had been promised to them by Gandhi and Nehru.
> The subsequent falling out was not something that had anything to do with Pakistan brainwashing the Sikh.
> 
> After the golden temple incident, Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her Sikh bodyguards who i believe were not on payroll of ISI, the Sikhs massacred in the riots afterward were also not killed by ISI...even a person like Khushwant Singh openly criticized the role of congress in the subsequent Sikh massacres.


The fact remains that Pak trained and armed the insurgents. That was being referred here.


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> It is an occupation by its very definition, and no occupation lasts forever. It is unsustainable.


Not true.. If I go by your definition the Mughal rule in India was occupation and lasted more than the rule of any other empire in India including British. I think your definition of occupation is biased and is a good example of force fitting a term to a situation. Occupation is always of a foreign force and Indian forces are not foreign. Even if I agree to all your arguements about promises made by Nehru, UN resolution etc, its still a dispute and not a conquest by Indian forces. As a matter of fact, the only legal document (accession agreement) in this tamasha (understand that the UN resolution is not a legal document) actually shows Pakistan as an Illegal squatter in the Pakistan occupied Kashmir. 



PAFAce said:


> India has no right to willfully alter the demographics of the region because it has no right over the region at all, it is a disputed territory with a majority population that wants nothing to do with India.



Rubbish . The govt in INdia has all the rights to do what they want to do in Kashmir within the constitution of India which in this case accords greater rights to the State govt in terms of land allocation etc. 




PAFAce said:


> Also, *EjazR* didn't answer "why" the government did what it did (because he knows very well why they did it) but spent his time explaining "how". I'm not interested in "how", I'm interested in their _objectives_. I am glad that the people of Kashmir brought the tyrants to their knees with the uprising, but I'm sad that it cost them at least four innocent lives while doing so (not including the two women found dead weeks before).


Extremely ill researched comment. The Why is as follows..

The land in question was 0.40 km2 of forest land to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board (SASB) to set up temporary shelters and facilities for the Hindu pilgrims on their way to Amarnath temple..

After protests (first in Kashmir then counter protests in Jammu) the land is now given as a lease and not transfer to fulfill the same purpose of creating temporary shelters during the period of pilgrimage.





PAFAce said:


> Please make up your minds, you guys are so damn confused. In any case, there are three parties involved in this issue, and all three will have to compromise. If, for some reason, India does not want Kashmir to join as a party,then Pakistan should (and does) represent the will of the majority of Kashmiris. It's really very simple. Stop indulging in petty arguments and lets get to solving the issue.


Rubbish again




PAFAce said:


> Ghalat fehmi.
> 
> The largest Tamil and Sikh communities outside of South Asia are found in Canada. Separatist Tamils here claim Northern Sri Lanka and the Southern portion of the state of Tamil Nadu as sovereign territory, hence Tamil Eelam definitely applied to India as well (though it isn't a major concern).
> 
> During the massacre of Sikhs involved in the Khalistan movement, there was mass refugee-immigration from India to Canada, and hence many seriously anti-Indian sentiments can be found amongst a small portion of Sikhs in Canada (particularly in British Columbia). Human Rights Watch and other Sikh organizations certainly wants India to probe the massacre, but the Indian government is reluctant to do so (understandably).
> 
> Telangana is definitely a struggle for a separate state, but to say that there is no nationalist movement is foolish. This situation, however, is still very much manageable (though Mr. Chidambaram has done everything in his power to screw it up).
> 
> Lastly, Assam is very much alive, despite the crackdown and the Bangladeshi government selling out. The biggest concern for you is the fact that the leader of ULFA has asked for a plebiscite to be conducted in Assam, which is a clear Red Flag for any observer about public opinion in the region. If I were you, I'd try to get control of that situation using diplomacy and tactics, not a heavy hand. It has every potential to turn into another Kashmir (though I don't expect the Bangladeshis to ever support that movement as Pakistanis support Kashmir).



If you are clutching at straws to prove a point, go look up Balawaristan, Waziristan, Sindhu desh movements apart from Balochistan. The examples given by you are as dead as the one I mentioned, but then it looks you do want to go there...


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

karan.1970 said:


> . Even if I agree to all your arguements about promises made by Nehru, UN resolution etc, its still a dispute and not a conquest by Indian forces. As a matter of fact, the only legal document (accession agreement) in this tamasha (understand that the UN resolution is not a legal document) actually shows Pakistan as an Illegal squatter in the Pakistan occupied Kashmir.
> 
> 
> 
> And if shows india as an oppressed country where kashmiris have taken half a million indian army hostage?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rubbish . The govt in INdia has all the rights to do what they want to do in Kashmir within the constitution of India which in this case accords greater rights to the State govt in terms of land allocation etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> GOI can kill people 90000 dead several thousand rapes,hell u failed in Kashmir even after 52 years.Kashmiris still call themselves KASHMIRI not india?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The land in question was 0.40 km2 of forest land to the Shri Amarnathji Shrine Board (SASB) to set up temporary shelters and facilities for the Hindu pilgrims on their way to Amarnath temple..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was the hindu head of indian occupied kashmir that told them to move.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are clutching at straws to prove a point, go look up Balawaristan, Waziristan, Sindhu desh movements apart from Balochistan. The examples given by you are as dead as the one I mentioned, but then it looks you do want to go there..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where is balwaristan?waziristan do they want seperation?
> Sindhu desh movement died decades ago with u tried to play the sindh card failed like heck.
> Im from balouchistan and let me tel u something an ordinary balouchi youths want nothin except jobs and the truth is that due to tribal factor most of them are illiterate and unskilled.
> And the terrorist group bla is nothing but a dead horse given a life injection by india and revived in 2000s and most of them are gun for hires blowing small gass pipe?and nothin else.
> Also WHOLE WORLD CALLS THEM TERRORISTS even indian govt. that calls them terrorists will arms and trains them from afghanistan.
> I feel funny that a country with 17 insurgencies wanting FREEDOM is talking about other countries.
> Heck chandimbiram said in a press conference that Khalistani terrorists from sikh community are raising there heads once again in rajhistan and punjab.Should worry about one more insurgency.THANKS
Click to expand...


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> *Kashmir Resolution Proposal #8*
> 
> Okay, I'm tired of battling bats. Here is a resolution I propose (if self-determination is not feasible):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Benefits to India:
> - The most troublesome area of Indian Control Kashmir, the Valley, will no longer be a problem.
> - A defined and permanent International Border will allow for relations with Pakistan to improve, which will ultimately be in India's best interest.
> - India still retains about 60-70% of the currently disputed territory with Pakistan, as the relatively large but scarcely populated Buddhist majority state of Ladakh and the Hindu majority state of Jammu remain a part of India.
> - Economic development in Jammu and Ladakh can be increased to unprecedented levels as it is no longer disputed territory.
> - India keeps most of the strategic heights of Siachen, Kargil etc. without having to worry about Pakistani aggression (which can be enforced through a comprehensive treaty).
> 
> Benefits to Kashmiris
> - The people of the Valley get what they want, separation from India.
> - The people of Ladakh and Jammu get what they want, a peaceful Kashmir and increased integration with India.
> - The people of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan get what they want, increased integration with Pakistan without a constant threat of war with India.
> - The people of all regions of Kashmir will see investment increase and quality of life improve manifold as the region is no longer considered disputed.
> 
> Benefits to Pakistan:
> - A defined and permanent International Border will allow for relations with India to improve, which will ultimately be in Pakistan's best interest.
> - Pakistanis and Kashmiris of the Valley will get what they have always wanted, free and peaceful Kashmir.
> - Economic development in Azad Kashmir, the Valley and Gilgit-Baltistan can be increased to unprecedented levels as it is no longer disputed territory.
> 
> It's got something for all three parties, and should be far more acceptable than either of the 7 offered solutions. Also, it is believed by many experts and locals that this will be the outcome of any referendum or plebiscite held in the separate districts of Kashmir (if the choice is Pakistan or India only). Added benefit, aesthetically speaking, the map of India gets to keep its head and the map of Pakistan gets to keep its nose.
> 
> Let's discuss in a civil fashion, and let's keep the personal attacks out.



I respect the sentiment. The problem doesnt change. See the difficulty is not in drawing a line on the map. Its the stance and stakes for the 2 parties involved i.e. Pakistan and India. Yes, I am not forgetting Kashmiris, but believe it or not they are just pawns in this great game between India and Pakistan. 99% of them wont care either way as long as life is peaceful.. But coming back to my original points.. India will never climb down from its stand of not loosing territory and Pakistan will stick to its stand of rights of Kashmiris which is basically a guise for annexing territory. I personally believe that we are destined to live with this for all foreseeable future. The intensity will go up or down depending on the political and economical ground realities in Pakistan (as we can see for last couple of year). 

From an Indian point of view, the best thing would be to remove article 370 from Kashmir and let the natural flow of industrialization and growth take care of the situation. Tata's and Ambanis will take care of their facilities them selves and Kashmir will get the commercial growth it deserves.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> I can only suggest an overall solution that based on give-and-take and compromise, and most of all, everyone gets most of what they want.



What is Pakistan giving up from what is in its control according to your solution?


----------



## karan.1970

ssheppard said:


> Remember Khalistan Terrorism......The great Pakistani Initiative to Break Away Punjab from India.......
> 
> Pakistan would think of some more _____stans
> 
> its better to keep it busy with Kashmir....as long Pakistan is busy in Kashmir ...other parts of India would grow...and prosper......and soon Kashmirs would realize (I have) that its better if they stick to their Country than fighting a battle for a Country that has not let them live peacefully for past 20 years.....
> 
> Pakistan thought of bleeding India through Kashmir...but guess who is bleeding now...



So true.. have you read this article

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/44215-monkey-trap.html


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> Also, when Pakistan had only Kashmir to worry about, we were doing quite well economically (similar economic growth numbers as India, but _without_ the massive unemployment, poverty or over-population). Once the Talibs are taken care of, we'll go back to that growth, and all you'll get from your premature chest-pumping is a sore chest.
> 
> And here goes the rhetoric. The Kashmiris are the ones who have bled the most, and since you claim to be one, you should know this (and brother, it ain't because of Pakistan).



Guess how did Pakistan's problems with Talibs begin. It started when you began growing Terrorist legions for battles in Kashmir and Afg without sending your regular Army forgetting that a double edged sword cuts both ways..

Any way, I believe a picture speaks a million words, so here goes


Look at the slope from 1990 onwards (when Pakistan really started cranking up the proxy war strategy)

If this is a premature pride, I guess I am fine with it.

Kashmiris werent bleeding at all before you guys stepped in in late 1980s after getting kicked out of Punjab adventure. So yes, it is because of Pakistan. Incidently if I count right, there has been less incidents and more growth in J&K in last 2 years than Pakistan... So yes, Pakistan is bleeding and majorly as a result of your own policies

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## karan.1970

All-Green said:


> If this happens then I am confident that there will be no more reason for any Kashmiri to dislike India and when that happens there will be no violence in Kashmir.



Sir.. The violence in J&K is not because of Kashmiris' dislike for India, but because of Pakistanis' dislike for India. And no Indian thinks that a chance to get Pakistan to like us is worth giving up a part of our country for..


----------



## karan.1970

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> And if shows india as an oppressed country where kashmiris have taken half a million indian army hostage?


You mean India as an oppressing country.. right?? OK...



Pakistani Nationalist said:


> GOI can kill people 90000 dead several thousand rapes,hell u failed in Kashmir even after 52 years.Kashmiris still call themselves KASHMIRI not india?


Ok. Its still a part of India



Pakistani Nationalist said:


> It was the hindu head of indian occupied kashmir that told them to move.


 My friend, Internet is a vast source of information. Enrich your knowledge a bit by reading history instead of posting rubbish





Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Where is balwaristan?waziristan do they want seperation?
> Sindhu desh movement died decades ago with u tried to play the sindh card failed like heck.
> Im from balouchistan and let me tel u something an ordinary balouchi youths want nothin except jobs and the truth is that due to tribal factor most of them are illiterate and unskilled.
> And the terrorist group bla is nothing but a dead horse given a life injection by india and revived in 2000s and most of them are gun for hires blowing small gass pipe?and nothin else.
> Also WHOLE WORLD CALLS THEM TERRORISTS even indian govt. that calls them terrorists will arms and trains them from afghanistan.


Read carefully.. I said that the points raised by PAFACE are as irrelevent as the examples of balwaristan, waziristan and Sindhu desh. 



Pakistani Nationalist said:


> I feel funny



Try Haajmola.. 

============================
Didn't realize.. Just made Lt Col..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## brahmastra

PAFAce said:


> There is little anti-India sentiment in Ladakh and Jammu, something which has always existed in the Muslim majority Valley (hence, the most troublesome region). Also, once the Valley is freed, Pakistan has no reason to support the freedom fighters or support any anti-India militancies (which, like I said, are at very manageable levels in L&J). Lastly, it can be ensured by treaty that no such actions are carried out by either side, and that top level intelligence will be shared.
> 
> Trust me, once the Valley is freed, the temperature will cool-down to pleasant levels and the populations of both countries will pressure the governments to stop the fighting. The nitty-gritties can be worked out by the diplomats, I can only suggest an overall solution that based on give-and-take and compromise, and most of all, everyone gets most of what they want.
> 
> Pakistan and China resolved their land issue, something that India should take a lesson from. The land contested betwen China and India is something that should be resolved between those two countries (with the involvement of the people of the contested region). I can only represent the Pakistani side, and by commonality of objectives, the Valley's side.



still you didn't answer the second part.
here is the question.

and if kashmir is disputed for you than who gave you right to 'gift' some of part of land to China.
why you are not worried about 'chinese occupation' on kashmir and just so colled 'Indian occupation'.


----------



## All-Green

karan.1970 said:


> Sir.. The violence in J&K is not because of Kashmiris' dislike for India, but because of Pakistanis' dislike for India. And no Indian thinks that a chance to get Pakistan to like us is worth giving up a part of our country for..



Karan, no doubt Kashmir is something over which Pakistan and India have become enemies more than anything else.
I am not ignoring the fact that 90% of all our issues are tied to Kashmir.

Let me assure you that humans are sentimental beings, sometimes it is not enough that you have economic growth etc.
If economics are the only motivation then our forefathers would not have gained support when they rallied together to become independent of the British Empire.
Same is the case with many of the Kashmiris who just do not want to be a part of India and over time many have become frustrated over the state of affairs. 
It does not mean that India is evil and Pakistan is good, just as it does not hold the other way around as well.

The fact that Pakistan is also a stakeholder means that Kashmir is something to which all three are tied and will all be frustrated one way or another...till we think out of the box which seems the only option.

However, if small adjustments are made and entire Kashmir is declared as a zone in which Kashmiris can roam easily...i think the enmity will subside...

The reason why i say it is simple...all of you no matter how much you hate each other's country just picture that Kashmir was no longer an issue...do you see any other major reason why we need to be hostile all the time?
Will it not bring about a huge change for the positive?
If you see all of this then it makes sense to resolve it and not let our past enmity, hate and mistrust stand in the way.

I think all parties have learnt their lessons by now, it has been 6 decades and this issue has held ransom the prosperity and fate of billions in the region...clearly it has significance, enough to resolve it.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Xeric

Which Instrument of Accession? This one:

Pakistan Times | Op-Ed: Kashmir-historic facts can't be Altered

_......This fraudulent document has been the subject of controversy for the past 50 years because its validity was in doubt right from its execution. That is why the then British governor general Lord Mountbatten, is on record having accepted the accession *with the provision* that the final disposition of the state would be decided by a reference to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

It was due to this controversy that the Indian government had kept the so-called accession document as a closely-guarded secret. The New Delhi press reports quoted an English weekly of Jammu, The Sahayogi Times as saying that *'.the missing of the historic treaty is reported to have come to light when it was required for compiling the case to rebut the 'charge' of Pakistan and the doubts raised in the United States of America and some Arab and Western countries about the validity of the so-called Instrument of Accession*....
_

*Dr Alistair Lamb explains why the Instrument of Accession is nothing more than an Indian lie*

*Excerpts from 'The Myth of Indian Claim to JAMMU AND KASHMIR A REAPPRAISAL'

by Alistair Lamb

THE INDIAN CLAIM TO JAMMU AND KASHMIR - A REAPPRAISAL:*

The formal overt Indian intervention in the internal affairs of the State of Jammu and Kashmir began on about 9.00 a.m. on 27 October 1947, when Indian troops started landing at Srinagar airfield. *India has officially dated the commencement of its claim that the State was part of Indian sovereign territory to a few hours earlier, at some point in the afternoon or evening of 26 October*. From their arrival on 27 October 1947 to the present day, Indian troops have continued to occupy a large proportion of the State of Jammu and Kashmir despite the increasingly manifest opposition of a majority of the population to their presence. To critics of Indias position and actions in the State of Jammu and Kashmir the Government of New Delhi has consistently declared that the State of Jammu and Kashmir lies entirely within the sphere of internal Indian policy. Do the facts support the Indian contention in this respect?

The State of Jammu and Kashmir was a Princely State within the British Indian Empire. By the rules of the British transfer of power in Indian subcontinent in 1947 the Ruler of the State, Maharajah Sir Hari Singh, with the departure of the British and the lapsing of Paramountcy (as the relationship between State and British Crown was termed), could opt to join either India or Pakistan or, by doing nothing, become from 15 August 1947 the Ruler of an independent polity. The choice was the Rulers and his alone: there was no provision for popular consultation in the Indian Princely States during the final days of the British Raj.* On 15th August 1947, by default, the State of Jammu and Kashmir became independent.*

India maintains that this period of independence, the existence of which it has never challenged effectively, *came to an end on 26/27 October as the result of two pairs of closely related transactions, which we must now examine. They are:

(a) an Instrument of Accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India which the Maharajah is alleged to have signed on 26 October 1947, and;

(b) the acceptance of this Instrument by the Governor-General of India, Lord Mountbatten, on 27 October 1947; plus

(c) a letter from the Maharajah to Lord Mountbatten, dated 26 October 1947, in which Indian military aid is sought in return for accession to India (on terms stated in an allegedly enclosed Instrument) and the appointment of Sheikh Abdullah to head an Interim Government of the State; and

(d) a letter from Lord Mountbatten to the Maharajah, dated 27 October 1947, acknowledging the above and noting that, once the affairs of the State have been settled and law and order is restored, the question of the States accession should be settled by a reference to the people.*

In both pairs of documents it will be noted that the date of the communication from the Maharajah, *be it the alleged Instrument of Accession or the letter to Lord Mountbatten, is given as 26 October 1947, that is to say before the Indian troops actually began overtly to intervene in the States affairs on the morning of 27 October 1947. It has been said that Lord Mountbatten insisted on the Maharajahs signature as a precondition for his approval of Indian intervention in the affairs of what would otherwise be an independent State.*

The date, 26 October 1947, has hitherto been accepted as true by virtually all observers, be they sympathetic or hostile to the Indian case. It is to be found in an official communication by Lord Mountbatten, as Governor General of Pakistan, on 1 November 1947; and it is repeated in the White paper on Jammu and Kashmir which the Government of India laid before the Indian Parliament in March 1948. Pakistani diplomats have never challenged it. Recent research, however, has demonstrated beyond *a shadow of a doubt that the date is false. *This fact emerges from the archives, and it is also quite clear from such sources as the memoirs of the Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir at the time, Mehr Chand Mahajan, and the recently published correspondence of Jawaharlal Nehru, the Indian Prime Minister. Circumstantial accounts of the events of 26 October 1947, notably that of V.P Menon (in his The Integration of the Indian States, London 1965), who said he was actually present when the Maharajah signed, are simply not true.

*It is now absolutely clear that the two documents (a) the Instrument of Accession, and (c) the letter to Lord Mountbatten, could not possibly have been signed by the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir on 26 October 1947. The earliest possible time and date for their signature would have to be the afternoon of 27 October 1947. During 26 October 1947 the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir was travelling by road from Srinagar to Jammu. His Prime Minister, M.C. Mahajan, who was negotiating with the Government of India, and the senior Indian official concerned in State matters, V.P. Menon, were still in New Delhi where they remained overnight, and where their presence was noted by many observers. There was no communication of any sort between New Delhi and the traveling Maharajah. Menon and Mahajan set out by air from New Delhi to Jammu at about 10.00 a.m. on 27 October, and the Maharajah learned from them for the first time the result of his Prime Ministers negotiations in New Delhi in the early afternoon of that day.*

*The key point, of course, a has already been noted above, is that it is now obvious that these documents could only have been signed after the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. When the Indian troops arrived at Srinagar air field, that State was still independent. *Any agreements favourable to India signed after such intervention cannot escape the charge of having been produced under duress. It was, one presumes, to escape just such a charge that the false date 26 October 1947 was assigned to these two documents. *The deliberately distorted account of that very senior Indian official, V.P. Menon, to which reference has already been made, was no doubt executed for the same end. Falsification of such a fundamental element as date of signature, however, once established, can only cast grave doubt over the validity of the document as a whole .*

*An examination of the transactions behind these four documents in the light of the new evidence produces a number of other serious doubts. It is clear, for example, that in the case of (c) and (d), the exchange of letters between the Maharajah and Lord Mountbatten, Lord Mountbattens reply must antedate the letter to which it is an answer unless, as seems more than probable, both were drafted by the Government of India before being taken up to Jammu on 27 October 1947 (by V.P. Menon and Jammu and Kashmir Prime Minister M.C. Mahajan, whose movements, incidentally, are correctly reported in the London Times of 28 October 1947) after the arrival of the Indian troops at Srinagar airfield. The case is very strong, therefore, that document (c), the Maharajahs letter to Lord Mountbatten, was dictated to the Maharajah.

Documents (c) and (d) were published by the Government of India on 28 October 1947. The far more important document (a), the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed. To date no satisfactory original of this Instrument as signed by the Maharajah ever did sign an Instrument of Accession. There are, indeed, grounds for suspecting that he did no such thing. The Instrument of Accession referred to in document (c); a letter which as we have seen was probably drafted by Indian officials prior to being shown to the Maharajah, may never have existed, and can hardly have existed when the letter was being prepared.
*
*Even if there had been an Instrument of Accession, then if it followed the form indicated in the unsigned example of such an Instrument published in the Indian 1948 White Paper it would have been extremely restrictive in the rights conferred upon the Government of India. All that were in fact transferred from the State to the Government of India by such an Instrument were the powers over Defence, Foreign Relations and certain aspects of Communications. Virtually all else was left with the State Government. Thanks to Article 370 of the Indian Constitution of January 1950 (which, unlike much else relating to the former Princely States, has survived to some significant degree in current Indian constitution theory, if not in practice), the State of Jammu and Kashmir was accorded a degree of autonomy which does not sit at all comfortably with the current authoritarian Indian administration of those parts of the State which it holds.*

Not only would such an Instrument have been restrictive, but also by virtue of the provisions, of (d), Lord Mountbattens letter to the Maharajah dated 27 October 1947, it would have been conditional. Lord Mountbatten, as Governor-General of India, made it clear that the State of Jammu and Kashmir would only be incorporated permanently within the Indian fold after approval as a result of some form of reference to the people, a procedure which soon (with United Nations participation) became defined as a *fair and free plebiscite . India has never permitted such a reference to the people to be made.*

*Why would the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir not have signed an Instrument of Accession? The answer lies in the complex course of events of August, September and October 1947 emerged. The Maharajah, confronted with growing internal disorder (including a full scale rebellion in the Poonch region of the State), sought Indian military help without, it at all possible, surrendering his own independence. The Government of India delayed assisting him in the hope that in despair he would accede to India before any Indian actions had to be taken. In the event, India had to move first. **Having secured what he wanted, Indian military assistance, the Maharajah would naturally have wished to avoid paying the price of the surrender of his independence by signing any instrument which he could possibly avoid signing. *From the Afternoon of 27 October 1947 onwards a smoke screen conceals both the details and the immediate outcome of this struggle of wills between the Government of India and the Maharajah of Jammu and Kashmir. To judge from the 1948 White Paper an Instrument of accession may not have been signed by March 1948, by which time the Indian case for sovereignty over Jammu and Kashmir was already being argued before the United Nations.

The patently false dates of documents (a) and (c) alter fundamentally the nature of the overt Indian intervention in Jammu and Kashmir on 27 October 1947. India was not defending its own but intervening in a foreign State. There can be no reasonable doubt that had Pakistan been aware of this falsification of the record it would have argued very differently in international for from the outset of the dispute; and had the United Nations understood the true chronology it would have listened with for less sympathy to arguments presented to it by successive Indian representatives. Given the facts as they are now known, it may well be that an impartial international tribunal would decided that India had no right at all to be in the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## All-Green

toxic_pus said:


> *The fact remains that Pak trained and armed the insurgents*. That was being referred here.




It is not a fact and certainly was not raised as an issue with any solid evidence, it was seen as a possibility because it was a great opportunity for Pakistan to give India a Bangladesh of its own.

Even Gen Kuldip Singh (officer in charge of operation bluestar)as i recall in his interviews also hinted at a *possibility (not proven fact) of Pakistani help* and highlighted a fear of Pakistan stepping in and recognizing Khalistan just as India did in Bangladesh ( i vividly recall him mentioning Bangladesh and equating the two in case Pakistan Army stepped in, which it did not).
Now the possibility (which was not availed by Pakistan) has become a fact 2 decades down the line?

Sikhs have been one of the most fierce warriors of subcontinent...they needed training from Pakistan to fight?
All that funding of Sikh community all over the world towards the cause should not be ignored.
It was a pretty popular cause on its own, why taint it with Pakistani influence and support?

Anyways, it is now buried in the past but stop painting it in any other tone than what it was primarily...a rebellion of the Sikhs in Indian Punjab with many members of Sikh community all over the world funding and helping their people, now that is a fact which cannot be denied.

Once again it is not that Pakistan and India are evil, however there have been many things in their history which are not desirable and nobody wants to own up to them despite making mistakes

Let us get back to topic at hand now, otherwise mods will have to ban me.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Which Instrument of Accession? This one:
> 
> Pakistan Times | Op-Ed: Kashmir-historic facts can't be Altered
> 
> _......This fraudulent document has been the subject of controversy for the past 50 years because its validity was in doubt right from its execution. That is why the then British governor general Lord Mountbatten, is on record having accepted the accession *with the provision* that the final disposition of the state would be decided by a reference to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
> 
> *Dr Alistair Lamb explains why the Instrument of Accession is nothing more than an Indian lie*
> 
> *Excerpts from 'The Myth of Indian Claim to JAMMU AND KASHMIR A REAPPRAISAL'
> 
> by Alistair Lamb
> 
> THE INDIAN CLAIM TO JAMMU AND KASHMIR - A REAPPRAISAL:*
> 
> The formal overt Indian intervention in the internal affairs of the State of Jammu and Kashmir began on about 9.00 a.m. on 27 October 1947, when Indian troops started landing at Srinagar airfield. *India ----
> 
> .*_


_*

An article from a Pakistani Newspaper and a conspiracy theory of an acknowledged India baiter.. hmm.. ..*_


----------



## karan.1970

All-Green said:


> Karan, no doubt Kashmir is something over which Pakistan and India have become enemies more than anything else.
> I am not ignoring the fact that 90% of all our issues are tied to Kashmir.
> 
> Let me assure you that humans are sentimental beings, sometimes it is not enough that you have economic growth etc.
> If economics are the only motivation then our forefathers would not have gained support when they rallied together to become independent of the British Empire.
> Same is the case with many of the Kashmiris who just do not want to be a part of India and over time many have become frustrated over the state of affairs.
> It does not mean that India is evil and Pakistan is good, just as it does not hold the other way around as well.
> 
> The fact that Pakistan is also a stakeholder means that Kashmir is something to which all three are tied and will all be frustrated one way or another...till we think out of the box which seems the only option.
> 
> However, if small adjustments are made and entire Kashmir is declared as a zone in which Kashmiris can roam easily...i think the enmity will subside...
> 
> The reason why i say it is simple...all of you no matter how much you hate each other's country just picture that Kashmir was no longer an issue...do you see any other major reason why we need to be hostile all the time?
> Will it not bring about a huge change for the positive?
> If you see all of this then it makes sense to resolve it and not let our past enmity, hate and mistrust stand in the way.
> 
> I think all parties have learnt their lessons by now, it has been 6 decades and this issue has held ransom the prosperity and fate of billions in the region...clearly it has significance, enough to resolve it.



Thank you sir.. A voice of sanity is always a welcome change in the constant barrage of claims and counter claims..


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> An article from a Pakistani Newspaper and a conspiracy theory of an acknowledged India baiter.. hmm.. ..





So the Pakistani press dont stand a chance, right?

And atleast Lamb is better than your Vermas who sits in think tanks, is biased to the extent of conspiracy and cant say anything less raising the Akhund Bharat slogan.

i wonder why would a UK national would write to the 'truth' about the I of A? May be he is pained over the Kashmiri plight, right?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hindustan

i dont know why not pakistan understand from what pepoples of kashmir want 

they show you what they want in last election 

why dont you guys let them live with peace 

pakistan is creating problem in kashmir


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> i wonder why would a UK national would write to the 'truth' about the I of A? *May be he is pained over the Kashmiri plight, right?*


Not the least. Where there is conspiracy, there is money to be made.

Anyway...



Alistair Lambs brain fart said:


> Documents (c) and (d) were published by the Government of India on 28 October 1947. The far more important document (a), the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed. *To date no satisfactory original of this Instrument as signed by the Maharajah ever did sign an Instrument of Accession. There are, indeed, grounds for suspecting that he did no such thing.* The Instrument of Accession referred to in document (c); a letter which as we have seen was probably drafted by Indian officials prior to being shown to the Maharajah, may never have existed, and can hardly have existed when the letter was being prepared.


You mean this Instrument of Accession, Mr Lamb?











Alistair Lambs brain fart said:


> Any agreements favourable to India signed after such intervention cannot escape the charge of having been produced under duress. It was, one presumes, to escape just such a charge that the false date 26 October 1947 was assigned to these two documents.


To prove duress one has to prove that the original decision to accede was taken at a date or time later than 27th October, 1947, when IA was already there in Kashmir. The signing date doesnt prove that the decision was taken there and then. The fact remains that the oral agreement was reached before 26th October, 1947. Mehr Chand was in Delhi to negotiate accession long before 26th October, 1947. He had the _carte blanche_ to decide on behalf of the Maharaja [refer _Looking Back_ by Mehr Chand]. The signing date was merely ceremonious.

But then again, you already know that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## toxic_pus

All-Green said:


> It is not a fact and certainly was not raised as an issue with any solid evidence, it was seen as a possibility because it was a great opportunity for Pakistan to give India a Bangladesh of its own.
> 
> Even Gen Kuldip Singh (officer in charge of operation bluestar)as i recall in his interviews also hinted at a *possibility (not proven fact) of Pakistani help* and highlighted a fear of Pakistan stepping in and recognizing Khalistan just as India did in Bangladesh ( i vividly recall him mentioning Bangladesh and equating the two in case Pakistan Army stepped in, which it did not).
> Now the possibility (which was not availed by Pakistan) has become a fact 2 decades down the line?
> 
> Sikhs have been one of the most fierce warriors of subcontinent...they needed training from Pakistan to fight?
> All that funding of Sikh community all over the world towards the cause should not be ignored.
> It was a pretty popular cause on its own, why taint it with Pakistani influence and support?
> 
> Anyways, it is now buried in the past but stop painting it in any other tone than what it was primarily...a rebellion of the Sikhs in Indian Punjab with many members of Sikh community all over the world funding and helping their people, now that is a fact which cannot be denied.
> 
> Once again it is not that Pakistan and India are evil, however there have been many things in their history which are not desirable and nobody wants to own up to them despite making mistakes
> 
> Let us get back to topic at hand now, otherwise mods will have to ban me.


K.P.S. Gill is the one you should be reading or hearing. Not Gen. Kuldip Singh. The former was the one responsible for fighting the Punjab insurgency throughout the 80s and successfully quelling it. 

No one however denies the fact that it was a rebellion of the Sikhs. Its just that, Pakistan tried to pull a Bangladesh on us but failed miserably. That is also a fact.


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> Not the least. Where there is conspiracy, there is money to be made.
> 
> Anyway...
> 
> 
> You mean this Instrument of Accession, Mr Lamb?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To prove duress one has to prove that the original decision to accede was taken at a date or time later than 27th October, 1947, when IA was already there in Kashmir. The signing date doesnt prove that the decision was taken there and then. The fact remains that the oral agreement was reached before 26th October, 1947. Mehr Chand was in Delhi to negotiate accession long before 26th October, 1947. He had the _carte blanche_ to decide on behalf of the Maharaja [refer _Looking Back_ by Mehr Chand]. The signing date was merely ceremonious.
> 
> But then again, you already know that.





i knew you would come up with this illegible piece. The one that was never produced at the time when it was required but when it was 'created'.

And FYKI, yes, official correspondence and decisions are based on documented dates. i wonder how it would be if india 'decides' to raise/lower fuel prices but enforce them prior to the notification issued by the concerned ministry?

How about you celebrating your independence on some August? Or may be how about Pakistanis celebrating their independence on 23 March 1940 when it was DECIDED that an independent homeland would made for the indian Muslims?

i wonder how your office records correspond to each other?!!

You have hence proved, that the IA went inside an INDEPENDENT State against the will of the ruler and committed crimes against humanity to which it is still party to!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> i knew you would come up with this illegible piece. The one that was never produced at the time when it was required but when it was 'created'.


To prove that this is an 'illegal piece' you have to prove that the signatures that this document bears are fraudulent. Till that time, it is just as legal as it can get. 

You are however free to call it 'illegal'. You will only make Jinnah look bad. 


> And FYKI, yes, official correspondence and decisions are based on documented dates. i wonder how it would be if india 'decides' to raise/lower fuel prices but enforce them prior to the notification issued by the concerned ministry?
> 
> How about you celebrating your independence on some August? Or may be how about Pakistanis celebrating their independence on 23 March 1940 when it was DECIDED that an independent homeland would made for the indian Muslims?
> 
> i wonder how your office records correspond to each other?!!


Still doesn't prove what Lamb was bleating about. That is, the Instrument was 'signed under duress'. All the examples that you have cited actually bolster what I have said. The decision to raise/lower fuel price, or decision to grant independence to India and Pakistan are/were taken prior to the date of notification. Similarly the date on the Instrument doesn't mean that the decision was taken on that date (or time). Hence, the question of 'accession under duress' doesn't arise. 

However that you have equated Notifications to agreements, probably tells a thing or two about your piss poor understanding of agreements, or what makes an agreement valid. 


> You have hence proved, that the IA went inside an INDEPENDENT State against the will of the ruler and committed crimes against humanity to which it is still party to!


Far from it. Oral agreement is still valid.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> To prove that this is an 'illegal piece' you have prove that the signatures that this document bears are fraudulent. Till that time, it is just as legal as it can get.


Si it's legal just because some one like you says so, right?



> You are however free to call it 'illegal'. You will only make Jinnah look bad.





The damn thing was not even provided to Pakistan when you jumped inside Srinagar. Keep the BS to yourself!



> Still doesn't prove what Lamb was bleating about. That is, the Instrument was 'signed under duress'.


It proves many other things that you have very conveniently ignored



> All the incidents that you have cited actually bolsters what I have said. The decision to raise/lower fuel price, or decision to grant independence to India and Pakistan are/were taken prior to the date of notification. Similarly the date on the Instrument doesn't mean that the decision was taken on that date (or time). Hence, the question of 'acceding under duress' doesn't arise.



This gives me so much insight to your understanding of how things get enacted and incidered!!



> Far from it. Oral agreement is still valid.





So things in india get done orally, right?

BTW, why did you waste so much paper and ink on your constitution?

Jungle raj would have been a better option for your likes!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

i am still waiting an explanation to the following:

*the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed.*

May be the indian thought that things would also get done orally outside india

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Si it's legal just because some one like you says so, right?


No. Because you couldn't prove that the signatures are fraud.



> The damn thing was not even provided to Pakistan when you jumped inside Srinagar. Keep the BS to yourself!


Wonder why Jinnah, the fine constitutional lawyer that he was, didn't proceed too far with this. 

Could it be that he figured that not much of a legal case can be made out of it.



> It proves many other things that you have very conveniently ignored


I answered the key issue. 



> This gives me so much insight to your understanding of how things get enacted and incidered!!


OK. If that makes you happy 



> So things in india get done orally, right?


Thats how it done all over the world. But that's real world we are talking about. Not the fantasy world you live in.



> BTW, why did you waste so much paper and ink on your constitution?
> 
> Jungle raj would have been a better option for your likes!


Now you have equated agreements with constitution. In other words you don't know what a constitution is or what it stands for. Jinnah is surely turning in his grave.


----------



## Xeric

Ok, now the usual chankian tactics.

Rant on, boy!


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> i am still waiting an explanation to the following:
> 
> *the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed.*
> 
> May be the indian thought that things would also get done orally outside india


The whole point of the para above is to prove that there is/was no Instrument of Accession. I believe those images prove that there is and always was an Instrument of Accession, unless of course you can prove 'fraud'.

This kind of argument is called fallacy (I am forgetting the latin name of the fallacy). These arguments go like - the other party hasn't seen it, therefore it doesn't exist.

Other than that the para is meaningless.


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Ok, now the usual *chankian tactics*.


Thank you for equating me to the great man.


----------



## Xeric

You have failed to address the points raised by Mr Lamb. Instead you have restored to rhetoric and nit picking. i have learned that you master in red herring and that's only what you can do best.

i am still waiting if you can pick up the concerns raised by the writer and can negate them with proof and logic, or else you can shut up and let others give it a try.


N.B. Do you suffer from anal retention, BTW?


P.S. i was more concerned about the baleful and noxious behavior of your 'hero', even if one consider him as such


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> So the Pakistani press dont stand a chance, right?


On this topic it doesnt.. because there are similar articles in Indian press that talks exactly the opposite POV. . So its a he said she said.. No value



xeric said:


> And atleast Lamb is better than your Vermas who sits in think tanks, is biased to the extent of conspiracy and cant say anything less raising the Akhund Bharat slogan.


He could be. But most folks dont pay attention to either..



xeric said:


> i wonder why would a UK national would write to the 'truth' about the I of A? May be he is pained over the Kashmiri plight, right?


No! wrong..


----------



## Valiant_Soul

xeric said:


> i am still waiting if you can pick up the concerns raised by the writer and can negate them with proof and logic, or else you can shut up and let others give it a try.



And why would anyone be interested in banging his head against the wall trying to ponder over issues that have well crossed their timeline to ponder upon? It is sufficient to know that there was an agreement done to accede J&K to India - time, duress are all speculative. 

It is best if you leave the obsession with Kashmir because the land will undoubtedly remain with India. If some Kashmiris so desire to become part of an Islamic state (that being the so-called issue), there are so many around the world and they are free to migrate. Or they can stay here and enjoy every freedom entitled under a secular, democratic constitution, and as they are. Is this not simple enough to understand? Oh, but I have no civil answer for hidden intentions of dividing people on the basis of religion and thereby annexing more land.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> i am still waiting an explanation to the following:
> 
> *the alleged Instrument of Accession, was not published until many years later, if at all. It was not communicated to Pakistan at the outset of the overt Indian intervention in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, nor was it presented in facsimile to the United Nations in early 1948 as part of the initial Indian reference to the Security Council. The 1948 White Paper in which the Government of India set out its formal case in respect to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, does not contain the Instrument of Accession as claimed to have been signed by the Maharajah: instead, it reproduces an unsigned from of Accession such as, it is imposed, the Maharajah might have signed.
> To date no satisfactory original of this Instrument as signed by the Maharajah ever did sign an Instrument of Accession. There are, indeed, grounds for suspecting that he did no such thing. The Instrument of Accession referred to in document (c); a letter which as we have seen was probably drafted by Indian officials prior to being shown to the Maharajah, may never have existed, and can hardly have existed when the letter was being prepared*
> 
> May be the indian thought that things would also get done orally outside india



We want to go down this path of *If My Aunt had a mush she would be my uncle*? Really? 

Read the paragraph laced with "Grounds for suspicion, probably drafted by indian officials, may never have existed". Looks like a text book for "How do write conspiracy theories"..

Tell your friend Mr Lamb to either put forward a proof of fraud or to take a chill pill.. The burden of proof is on the accuser and not accused. Reasonable doubt is a valid defence and not a successful prosecution strategy..

So anyone backing this theory should either put up or shut up..


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> We want to go down this path of *If My Aunt had a mush she would be my uncle*? Really?
> 
> Read the paragraph laced with "Grounds for suspicion, probably drafted by indian officials, may never have existed". Looks like a text book for "How do write conspiracy theories"..
> 
> Tell your friend Mr Lamb to either put forward a proof of fraud or to take a chill pill.. The burden of proof is on the accuser and not accused. Reasonable doubt is a valid defence and not a successful prosecution strategy..
> 
> So anyone backing this theory should either put up or shut up..


You people find the easiest route out, dont you? 

The question remains; why wasnt the holy document presented at the occasions mentioned in 'not my friend' Mr Lambs book!

So, please put up or shut up!!


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> You people find the easiest route out, dont you?
> 
> The question remains; why wasnt the holy document presented at the occasions mentioned in 'not my friend' Mr Lambs book!
> 
> So, please put up or shut up!!



Keeping it simple and to the point is easy to do and easy to understand. So yeah.. easiest route is mostly good..


It wasnt.. So what?? What does it prove (except to conspiracy theorists or writers wanting to sell books in Pakistan)?? diddly squat. Either prove that its a fake or forget it..As I said, the burden of proof is with the accuser...


----------



## Xeric

*Either prove that its a fake*

Guess what, he already did

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> You have failed to address the points raised by Mr Lamb. Instead you have restored to rhetoric and nit picking. i have learned that you master in red herring and that's only what you can do best.


I have addressed exactly the issue that Lamb has bleated about. All those 'points' were built only to conclude a) the Instrument of Accession doesn't exist and b) even if it exists, it is still 'illegal' since it was made under 'duress'. I have addressed both these issues.

Your inability to grasp the core issue is your problem and yours only.


> i am still waiting if you can pick up the concerns raised by the writer and can negate them with proof and logic, or else you can shut up and let others give it a try.


Existence of signed Instrument of Accession is the proof against a) above. The logic why that signature can't be construed as 'under duress' has been explained in my earlier post.



> N.B. Do you suffer from anal retention, BTW?


Why, do you? You seem to know the symptoms. But don't worry. I am fine. Thanks for asking though. And my sympathies to you.



> P.S. i was more concerned about the baleful and noxious behavior of your 'hero', even if one consider him as such


I will take it as a compliment. If your enemy is pissed, then you have done it right. Right?


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> *Either prove that its a fake*
> 
> Guess what, he already did


Guess what, he just took you for a ride. And you are not even aware of it.


----------



## Hyde

i remember the famous slogan when we were childs

*"Kashmir bane ga Pakistan"*

and this song






or in a new version


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

I just pray to God with all my heart , that the Kashmir Dispute gets settled so that Pakistan and India can live in peaceful and collaborative Environment ..Ameen ...!!!


----------



## Xeric

Address the concerns raised by the writer or else keep the gutter tight, would you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Address the concerns raised by the writer or else keep the gutter tight, would you?



I think I did write about those concerns from which you selected a one liner and responded "Guess what, he already did"..
Since you chose not to respond to my comments on the topic, I dont think I need to add anything.

My last remark was a response to your implication that I was ranting. If I misread your implication, then my bad and I apologise..

Finally your latest comment about the gutter.. well, abusing generally doesn't get you anywhere.. does it??


----------



## PAFAce

It's been nearly 24 hours, and still the intent to derail the thread from its true objectives is going strong. Certain Indian members simply can't stand talk of peace and freedom in Kashmir, and we all know that denying that a problem exists is the easiest way to avoid a solution.

However, I am far more interested in discussing with those interested in a possible _solution_ and not engaging in personal attacks and mischief. Here is what I proposed (since my original post got buried in all the crap, I'll repost the images):









Like I've said, it seems to be the best possible solution for all three parties. The term "trust deficit" is overused these days, but it definitely stands true between Pakistan and India. To get past this, we must really get serious about the discussion and engage in trust building measures. Pakistan's offer for Composite Talks has always been on the table, but the Indians have shown a reluctance to accept it (understandably, as Bombay was a tragedy that would stir any country up). However, unless and until the Kashmir issue is resolved (to the satisfaction of the people of Kashmir, first and foremost, as well as the people of Pakistan and India) who knows how many more Bombays and Kargils could happen?

Both countries are trying to play games with each other, be it "bleeding by a thousand cuts" or "mouse traps", but it's all wishful thinking. We know they won't work, but will serve only to widen the divide and delay the eventuality. Nobody has ever been able keep a people prisoner in their own occupied land forever, and it's not going to happen this time, so it's best to get the issue resolved ASAP and move on. South Asia is the next Europe in terms of economic growth, but we must try out best to avoid a Great War.


----------



## EjazR

PAFAce said:


> *Kashmir Resolution Proposal #8*



First of all, appreciate the effort, I must have missed this post. However, there are some fundamental perceptions that have to be clarified.

The biggest stumbling block in understanding the Valley situation is that most Pakistanis believe that the indigenous separatists (note not all valley Kashmiris only the separatists) want to join Pakistan. What they really want is to have an independent state which would comprise of the Pakistani Northern Areas and Kashmir as well as the India state of J&K. Infact many groups in Pakistan are also working for this but severe political and media restrictions in GB and Pakistani Kashmir don't allow the general Pakistani population to know about it.

An even smaller subset of the separatists include people like Syed Ali Shah Gilani, these are your pro-Pakistan elements and they are similar to your Qazi Hussain and Maulana Fazlullah types. Hardly someone any sane Pakistani would want to rule over them. Similarly they only have marginal support in their hometown of Sopore and Shopian. Hardly the types Pakistan should be supporting if they really cared for the Kashmiris.

The other major issue is that we have to have a peaceful atmosphere before we can reach a settlement. It doesn't have to be 100&#37; but at least similar to 2007-2008 where militant attacks were at an all time low and a settlement with Musharraf was almost done.
Please note that these groups have killed more Kashmiri muslims than any other ethnic group. They target any person or politican who is pro-India or even sepratists or former militatns who want to talk to India. Media groups that critisize their role are targeting as well.

And what guarantee is there that LeT, Hizb, HUJI type groups will not continue their attacks further into Indian territory as they announced recently in a JuD meet with some retired intelligence and army personnel in attendance. As we have seen with the case of TTP, we won't know when these groups will turn back on their benefactors for any perceived "munafiqat". These terrorists groups will only be responsible for more suffering of the Kashmiri people just like the Afghan Taliban have been for the Afghans. However, atleast in the Afghan case they were indigenous, but here they are mainly foreign nationals.

So here are two important on the ground situation to be considered first
(1) Anti-India does not mean pro-Pakistan. Sepratists are not all valley Kashmiris and that majority of the separatists want a secular independent J&K state representing the entire historical J&K state.

(2) Militant/proxy groups targeting Kashmir are part of the problem. Even from the separatist pov, they have caused enormous harm to their cause and have alienated them from the local population. All attempts must be undertaken by the GoP to restrict and dismantle these groups BEFORE any settlement could be reached. This is vital to provide a free atmosphere to pro-India politicians and people to articulate their vision and media groups to freely criticize them.

----------------------
I have earlier posted a study conducted by an Irish group specializing in conflict studies with a focus on what the people want. Please go through the whole report to get an idea of what the priorities are for the people in J&K. As you will see, even in the valley the percentage unacceptable for joining Pakistan is slightly higher than joining India.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmi...r-seven-possible-solutions-29.html#post399662

A screenshot of the relevant poll is here

http://f.imagehost.org/view/0091/JandKopinionpoll2009

The entire study for both IaK and Pak can be found on www.peacepolls.org

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PAFAce

EjazR said:


> So here are two important on the ground situation to be considered first
> (1) Anti-India does not mean pro-Pakistan. Sepratists are not all valley Kashmiris and that majority of the separatists want a secular independent J&K state representing the entire historical J&K state.



Firstly, *EjazR*, thank you for being civil. You are certainly a trend-breaker, and I hope you are also a trend-setter.

Now, your points are understood. I have seen that study conducted by Peacepolls, and yes, it is indeed true that most Kashmiris in the Valley support the idea of an independent Kashmir. However, the vast majority of the people in Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan strongly support remaining with Pakistan (as backed by the poll), whereas a majority of the people in Ladakh and Jammu have shown the desire to remain with India. Therefore, the Valley remains the only place which is not happy with the status quo (i.e., under Indian control). Now, the poll shows that the number who oppose merger with Pakistan and/or India is similar, however, it does not show how many of those who do not support merger with Pakistan claim India is unacceptable and vice versa. If this statistic were to be estimated using what we already know about the Valley, then the common view found in the Valley is "anything but India", and the events of this year and the year before are testament to that. Given the choice between Pakisan and India and no independence, most experts have little doubt that the people of the Valley would choose Pakistan. A study that further backs this claim is one conducted by an Indian journalism network in the early nineties whcih listed _only_ merger with Pakistan or India as possible solutions. It was found that the overwhelming majority (do not remember the number) supported merger with Pakistan (the poll was alluded to in the documentary Jashn-e-Azadi). This view has also been expressed by the likes of Yasin Malik, who has made it clear that, betwen the two, he would choose Pakistan. You don't have to take my word for it (as you probably won't), but I implore you to try and understand _why_ a referendum or an official opinion poll has never been conducted in the Valley by the Indian government. There is a reason why the Valley is boiling with anti-Indian sentiments to this day.



> (2) Militant/proxy groups targeting Kashmir are part of the problem. Even from the separatist pov, they have caused enormous harm to their cause and have alienated them from the local population. All attempts must be undertaken by the GoP to restrict and dismantle these groups BEFORE any settlement could be reached. This is vital to provide a free atmosphere to pro-India politicians and people to articulate their vision and media groups to freely criticize them.


Sir, the militant networks are not majority Pakistanis as is being claimed, because such an idea is absurd to say the least. Separatist militant networks _originated_ in Kashmir, and received traning, logistical support and reinforcements from Pakistan. Nobody is denying that Pakistanis are involved in the Valley, but their involvement is exaggerated to spread the false claim that _we_ started this problem. Furthermore, Kashmiri youth has been becoming increasingly militant-minded, according to Eric Margolis, a Canadian expert on this issue. The reason for this is that the youth see little or no other options; they see that in the first 40 years of peaceful and political struggle got them nowhere, whereas the 20 years of militancy forced the Indian government to take notice. Hence, militancy cannot be stopped by Pakistan alone, as it would clearly be seen as withdrawal of support by the people of Kashmir. Militant networks, however, can be _controlled_ or made _passive_ for certain periods of time (as Yasin Malik's JKLF) to allow pro-India politicians and groups to express their opinions freely. For that to happen India will first have to show the resolve to find a solution. All we have been seeing so far is half-hearted participation in meetings where the Kashmir issue is put last on the to-do list.

Thus, the following points will make my solution possible:
(I) If independence is not an option, the Valley would choose Pakistan, plain and simple. Since self-determination is not something that India is keen on, and since indepence will not be supported in India, Pakistan, Jammu, Ladakh, Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir, merger with Pakistan remains the only way forward that would be acceptable to the Valley.
(II) The militancy began a long time after the occupation began, therefore, it will end once the occupation winds down. You cannot expect Pakistanis and Kashmiris to have blind faith in India's intentions to resolve the issue, mainly because India has given neither of us any reason to do so. Work towards a solution, reach a compromise, and I guarantee, militancy will decline (as it will no longer be seen as a requirement by Pakistanis or Kashmiris).
(III) India has not been serious about discussions at all, and is quite happy with the status quo at the expense of the people of the Valley. This can only change if the people of India stop the charade and actually awaken their collective conscience. What makes it okay for Kashmiris to sleep in fear while Bombay-ers sleep peacefully? That is the question they have to ask themselves. Only then can India get serious. Once you are determined to solve the issue, you should have no problem realizing that losing a small piece of territory will save us both years of frustration and bloodshed.
(IV) The presence of a mountain of Indian armed personnel and the constant human rights abuse are unacceptable to the people of Kashmir, and these factors also greatly hinder peace-building and trust-building. However, since India would be reluctant to decrease the troop-presence by too much before any resolution is reached, and both Pakistanis and Kashmiris would be reluctant to pull back all militant efforts as long as there is a strong Indian military presence, the solution _must_ be reached _before_ either side can de-escalate its military presence in the region.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> It's been nearly 24 hours, and still the intent to derail the thread from its true objectives is going strong. Certain Indian members simply can't stand talk of peace and freedom in Kashmir, and we all know that denying that a problem exists is the easiest way to avoid a solution.
> 
> However, I am far more interested in discussing with those interested in a possible _solution_ and not engaging in personal attacks and mischief. Here is what I proposed (since my original post got buried in all the crap, I'll repost the images):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I've said, it seems to be the best possible solution for all three parties. The term "trust deficit" is overused these days, but it definitely stands true between Pakistan and India. To get past this, we must really get serious about the discussion and engage in trust building measures. Pakistan's offer for Composite Talks has always been on the table, but the Indians have shown a reluctance to accept it (understandably, as Bombay was a tragedy that would stir any country up). However, unless and until the Kashmir issue is resolved (to the satisfaction of the people of Kashmir, first and foremost, as well as the people of Pakistan and India) who knows how many more Bombays and Kargils could happen?
> 
> Both countries are trying to play games with each other, be it "bleeding by a thousand cuts" or "mouse traps", but it's all wishful thinking. We know they won't work, but will serve only to widen the divide and delay the eventuality. Nobody has ever been able keep a people prisoner in their own occupied land forever, and it's not going to happen this time, so it's best to get the issue resolved ASAP and move on. South Asia is the next Europe in terms of economic growth, but we must try out best to avoid a Great War.



I did respond to your earlier note on the solution #8, but I guess that got lost in the barrage you mentioned.. Repeating it here..



karan.1970 said:


> I respect the sentiment. The problem doesnt change. See the difficulty is not in drawing a line on the map. Its the stance and stakes for the 2 parties involved i.e. Pakistan and India. Yes, I am not forgetting Kashmiris, but believe it or not they are just pawns in this great game between India and Pakistan. 99% of them wont care either way as long as life is peaceful.. But coming back to my original points.. India will never climb down from its stand of not loosing territory and Pakistan will stick to its stand of rights of Kashmiris which is basically a guise for annexing territory. I personally believe that we are destined to live with this for all foreseeable future. The intensity will go up or down depending on the political and economical ground realities in Pakistan (as we can see for last couple of year).
> 
> From an Indian point of view, the best thing would be to remove article 370 from Kashmir and let the natural flow of industrialization and growth take care of the situation. Tata's and Ambanis will take care of their facilities them selves and Kashmir will get the commercial growth it deserves.



I somehow like All-Green's solution better. It's less disruptive and more likely to find acceptance on the India side of the border. Even though it will have a series of tactical difficulties but they can be addressed if the will to solve the issue exists on both side. 

At the end of the day, as we have seen in past, any solution that results in territory loss will not be acceptable to the folks in Delhi..


----------



## All-Green

toxic_pus said:


> K.P.S. Gill is the one you should be reading or hearing. Not Gen. Kuldip Singh. The former was the one responsible for fighting the Punjab insurgency throughout the 80s and successfully quelling it.
> 
> No one however denies the fact that it was a rebellion of the Sikhs. *Its just that, Pakistan tried to pull a Bangladesh on us but failed miserably. That is also a fact.*



Well if it was an established fact then all would have reiterated the same, not to mention solid proof would have been given and diplomatic assault on Pakistan would have been launched.
The leaders of the Khalistan movement visited many countries of the world including Pakistan so that is not something exclusive to Pakistan.
Pakistan also houses many Sikh holy places and has entertained our Sikh brothers many times so it is not that we have no ties with the Sikhs of subcontinent after partition and have zero affiliation with the Sikhs.

However leaving everything aside, Pakistan did not pull a Bangladesh on India because Pakistan Army did not support the Khalistan movement by entering Indian Punjab which India did in Bangladesh.
Now that is a fact and no one can deny that.

Your comment about Pakistan failing miserably in doing what India did to Pakistan is unsubstantiated.
Had our Army crossed the border, only then can you comment on their failure...they did not do it.

You can take this on PM now, let us not derail the thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Trichy

*This MAP how it look like Land for land what you say best idea???*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> Now, the poll shows that the number who oppose merger with Pakistan and/or India is similar, however, it does not show how many of those who do not support merger with Pakistan claim India is unacceptable and vice versa. If this statistic were to be estimated using what we already know about the Valley, then the common view found in the Valley is "anything but India"...


The image posted by *EjazR* isn't enough. Let me post a couple of stats, from the same survey:

All Muslims in Kashmir (Valley, Jammu and Ladakh):






Muslims in Kashmir Valley:






All Muslims:

*47&#37;* and *49%* find 'status quo' and 'joining India', respectively, unacceptable. Surprisingly, a whopping *71%* also find 'joining Pakistan' unacceptable. Understandably, *84%* find independence essential/ desirable/ acceptable/ tolerable (EDAT) of which *63%* find independence as essential and desirable (ED).

All Muslims in Valley:

*58%* and *63%* find 'status quo' and 'joining India', respectively, unacceptable. However, *69%* find 'joining Pakistan' unacceptable, as well. A whopping *93%* find independence as EDAT, of which *78%* find independence as ED.

Although it is impossible to draw a linear correlation between the options, a reasonable conclusion can still be drawn from all of this. It appears that, in the valley, for the increase in unacceptability of &#8216;status quo&#8217; (*11%* points) and &#8216;Joining India&#8217; (*14%* points) there is no significant corresponding reduction in unacceptability of &#8216;joining Pakistan&#8217; (there is reduction of measly *2%* points). In other words, the desire to &#8216;join Pakistan&#8217; isn&#8217;t a default conclusion to the unacceptability of &#8216;status quo&#8217; and not &#8216;joining India&#8217;. There is however, increase in the desire for &#8216;independence&#8217; (*9%* points) and a desire for &#8216;open boundary&#8217; (*5%* points). It appears that, the Muslims in the Valley, would rather be independent than join either of the state. Contrary to &#8216;anything but India&#8217; they seem to prefer &#8216;anything but India OR _Pakistan_&#8217;.



> Given the choice between Pakisan and India and no independence, most experts have little doubt that the people of the Valley would choose Pakistan.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Thus, the following points will make my solution possible:
> (I) If independence is not an option, the Valley would choose Pakistan, plain and simple.


The above statistics just proved you and those experts wrong. Majority wouldn't have anything other than independence. 

We can now stop this mental masturbation of unilaterally pushing the LoC further to the east, and claim that it is what is &#8216;desired&#8217; by the Muslims of the Valley. Clearly it is not.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

Hmmm....

Why dont hold the plebiscite right now??

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Xeric

Well, the way the pollers have jotted down the introduction to this poll shows _clearly_ the intentions behind the poll.

Conducting polls with preconceived notion would _easily_ mean that the polls are neutral.

Here, have a look (some details given by those who conducted the polls-how truthful of them ):


> *Introduction*
> In the summer of 2008 Kashmir witnessed the worst outbreak of communal riots and killings in over a decade and it seemed as if Kashmir might once again become the crucible of regional violence. But Benazir Bhutto had been brutally assassinated only 6 months earlier in Rawalpindi in December 2007 and in November 2008, six months after the Kashmir riots international terrorists with Pakistan connections were held responsible for the Mumbai massacre. *(the probably forgot the 220 indian districts packed up with naxalites)* Following the attempt to abduct the Sri Lanka cricket team in Lahore and increased activity of militants throughout the country commentators were suggesting Pakistan might soon become the next failed
> state *(lovely!)*.
> 
> The Pakistan army have now entered the Swat valley in force to
> confront the Taliban but force alone will not solve all these problems.
> In this context *(what if the context has changed after our success in WOT?)* a subset of the questions asked in Indian administered Kashmir (IaK) last year were repeated in Pakistan administered Kashmir (PaK) this year in the hope of discovering any possibilities at all for a diplomatic intervention that just might help to contribute to a resolution of this crisis and that might also enjoy wide popular support.
> 
> *The Constitutional Question*
> When various constitutional options were presented to the people of IaK last year the results were very clear. The overwhelming preference of the Muslims, particularly for those in the Valley, was an independent Kashmir (63% essential, 15% desirable, 10% acceptable, 4% tolerable and 7% unacceptable). But the Hindus of Jammu *(what about the Muslims of Jammu)* and the Buddhists *(who are 47.4% of the Ladakhi population)* of Ladakh
> wanted to stay with India *(it's like saying 7 out of 10 Muslims wants to join Pakistan and 3 out of 3 indians desirous to stay with india-how gets the popular vote now?)* and rejected the independence option at 59% and 74% unacceptable respectively (Table 1). Critically, however, the Muslims of IaK, at 71% unacceptable over all, along with the Hindus at 78% and Buddhists at 84% unacceptable also firmly rejected joining with Pakistan.
> Clearly if the Muslim population of PaK followed this same pattern with a call for independence and a rejection of the state of Pakistan then a new fault line might emerge *(what a wish-list )* in the region between the Muslims of PaK and the Valley on the one hand and the Hindus and Buddhists on the other. This, however, has not happened.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Hmmm....
> 
> Why dont hold the plebiscite right now??



Can't.. Constitutionally not possible and communicated to UN way back in 1960s. Get over it..


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Can't.. Constitutionally not possible and communicated to UN way back in 1960s. Get over it..





So you say it and it just happens, right?

Hmm....so the Jungle raj syndrome still prevails within the indian establishment and the its citizens. Gosh, why is the world fighting terrorism only?!

So now you eat your words again. You did that recently when the US kicked the little RAW inside you from Afghanistan. and you come running asking Pakistan to start over the talks. 

Well this is what you people have been saying, what happened to the constitution now? Just because you are in the habit of running in circles and rhetoric it wont mean that you can just screw around:

*INDIA'S COMMITMENT OF PLEBISCITE FOR THE PEOPLE OF KASHMIR*

Our view which we have repeatedly made public is that the question of accession in any disputed territory or State must be decided in accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to this view.
*
* JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(in telegram No. 402-Primin-2227 dated 27 October 1947 to Prime Minister of Pakistan repeating telegram addressed to Prime Minister of United Kingdom).

In regard to accession also, it has been made clear that this is subject to reference to people of State and their decision.
*
* JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(in telegram No.413 dated 28 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).

 .the people of Kashmir would decide the question of accession. It is open to them to accede to either Dominion then.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(in telegram No.255 dated 31 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).

Kashmir should decide question of accession by plebiscite or referendum under international auspices such as those of the United Nations.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Letter No. 368-Primin dated 21 November 1947 to Prime Minister of Pakistan).

We are anxious not to finalize anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately to decide.

And let me make it clear that it has been our policy all along that where there is a dispute about the accession of a state to either Dominion, the accession must be made by the people of that state.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Broadcast to the Nation: All India Radio: 2 November 1947).

* The issue in Kashmir is whether violence and naked force should decide the future or the will of the people. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU

(Statement in Indian Constituent Assembly; 25 November 1947).

We have not opposed at any time an over-all plebiscite for the State as a whole.
*
* JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(in telegram dated 16 August 1950 addressed to the U.N. Representative for India and Pakistan: S/1791 : Anne 1(B).

The most feasible method of ascertaining the wishes of the people was by fair and impartial plebiscite.
*
* JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Joint press communique of the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan issued in Delhi after their meeting on 20 August 1953).

People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a commodity for sale or to be bartered. It has an individual existence and its people must be the final arbiters of their future.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Report to the All-India Congress Committee, 6 July 1951; The Statesman, New Delhi, 9 July 1951).

Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied about between India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of Kashmir.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Statement in the Indian Parliament, 31 March 1955).

We had given our pledge to the people of Kashmir, and subsequently to the United Nations; we stood by it and we stand by it today. Let the people of Kashmir decide.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Statement in the Indian Parliament, 12 February 1951).

We have taken the issue to the United Nations and given our word of honour for a peaceful solution. As a great nation, we cannot go back on it. We have left the question for final solution to the people of Kashmir and we are determined to abide by their decision.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Amrita Bazar Patrika, Calcutta, 2 January 1952).

If, after a proper plebiscite, the people of Kashmir said, We do not want to be with India, we are committed to accept that. We will accept it though it might pain us. We will not send any army against them. We will accept that, however hurt we might feel about it, we will change the Constitution, if necessary.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Statement in the Indian Parliament, 26 June 1952).

I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir; it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but every where.

I started with the presumption that it is for the people of Kashmir to decide their own future. We will not compel them. In that sense, the people of Kashmir are sovereign.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
(Statement in Indian Parliament, 7 August 1952)

The whole dispute about Kashmir is still before the United Nations. We cannot just decide things concerning Kashmir. We cannot pass a bill or issue an order concerning Kashmir or do whatever we want.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(The Statesman, 1 May 1953)

Leave the decision regarding the future of this State to the people of the State is not merely a promise to your Government but also to the people of Kashmir and to the world.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(In telegram No. 25 dated 31 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).

In regard to accession also it has been made clear that this is subject to reference to people of State and their decision.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(In telegram No.413 dated 28 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).

That Government of India and Pakistan should make a joint request to U.N.O. to undertake a plebiscite in Kashmir at the earliest possible date.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
(In telegram No. Primin-304 dated 8 November 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).

We have always right from the beginning accepted the idea of the Kashmir people deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite..

Ultimately, the final decision of settlement, which must come, has first of all to be made basically by the people of Kashmir.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Statement at Press Conference in London, 16 January 1951, The Statesman, 18 January 1951).

But so far as the Government of India are concerned, every assurance and international commitment in regard to Kashmir stands.

* * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*

(Statement in the Indian Council of States; 18 May 1954).



Faulty constitution or betraying your own leaders?!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Skeptic

xeric said:


> So you say it and it just happens, right?
> 
> Hmm....so the Jungle raj syndrome still prevails within the indian establishment and the its citizens. Gosh, why is the world fighting terrorism only?!
> 
> So now you eat your words again. You did that recently when the US kicked the little RAW inside you from Afghanistan. and you come running asking Pakistan to start over the talks.
> 
> Well this is what you people have been saying, what happened to the constitution now? Just because you are in the habit of running in circles and rhetoric it wont mean that you can just screw around:
> 
> *INDIA'S COMMITMENT OF PLEBISCITE FOR THE PEOPLE OF KASHMIR*
> 
> &#8220;Our view which we have repeatedly made public is that the question of accession in any disputed territory or State must be decided in accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to this view.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram No. 402-Primin-2227 dated 27 October 1947 to Prime Minister of Pakistan repeating telegram addressed to Prime Minister of United Kingdom).
> 
> &#8220;In regard to accession also, it has been made clear that this is subject to reference to people of State and their decision.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram No.413 dated 28 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220; &#8230;&#8230;.the people of Kashmir would decide the question of accession. It is open to them to accede to either Dominion then.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram No.255 dated 31 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;Kashmir should decide question of accession by plebiscite or referendum under international auspices such as those of the United Nations.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Letter No. 368-Primin dated 21 November 1947 to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;We are anxious not to finalize anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately to decide.
> 
> &#8220;And let me make it clear that it has been our policy all along that where there is a dispute about the accession of a state to either Dominion, the accession must be made by the people of that state.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Broadcast to the Nation: &#8220;All India Radio&#8221;: 2 November 1947).
> 
> * &#8220;The issue in Kashmir is whether violence and naked force should decide the future or the will of the people.&#8221; JAWAHARLAL NEHRU
> 
> (Statement in Indian Constituent Assembly; 25 November 1947).
> 
> &#8220;We have not opposed at any time an over-all plebiscite for the State as a whole&#8230;&#8230;.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram dated 16 August 1950 addressed to the U.N. Representative for India and Pakistan: S/1791 : Anne 1(B).
> 
> &#8220;The most feasible method of ascertaining the wishes of the people was by fair and impartial plebiscite.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Joint press communique of the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan issued in Delhi after their meeting on 20 August 1953).
> 
> &#8220;People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a commodity for sale or to be bartered. It has an individual existence and its people must be the final arbiters of their future.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Report to the All-India Congress Committee, 6 July 1951; The Statesman, New Delhi, 9 July 1951).
> 
> &#8220;Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied about between India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of Kashmir.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Parliament, 31 March 1955).
> 
> &#8220;We had given our pledge to the people of Kashmir, and subsequently to the United Nations; we stood by it and we stand by it today. Let the people of Kashmir decide.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Parliament, 12 February 1951).
> 
> &#8220;We have taken the issue to the United Nations and given our word of honour for a peaceful solution. As a great nation, we cannot go back on it. We have left the question for final solution to the people of Kashmir and we are determined to abide by their decision.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Amrita Bazar Patrika, Calcutta, 2 January 1952).
> 
> &#8220;If, after a proper plebiscite, the people of Kashmir said, &#8216;We do not want to be with India&#8217;, we are committed to accept that. We will accept it though it might pain us. We will not send any army against them. We will accept that, however hurt we might feel about it, we will change the Constitution, if necessary.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Parliament, 26 June 1952).
> 
> &#8220;I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir; it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but every where.
> 
> &#8220;I started with the presumption that it is for the people of Kashmir to decide their own future. We will not compel them. In that sense, the people of Kashmir are sovereign.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> (Statement in Indian Parliament, 7 August 1952)
> 
> &#8220;The whole dispute about Kashmir is still before the United Nations. We cannot just decide things concerning Kashmir. We cannot pass a bill or issue an order concerning Kashmir or do whatever we want.
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (The Statesman, 1 May 1953)
> 
> &#8220;Leave the decision regarding the future of this State to the people of the State is not merely a promise to your Government but also to the people of Kashmir and to the world.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (In telegram No. 25 dated 31 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;In regard to accession also it has been made clear that this is subject to reference to people of State and their decision.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (In telegram No.413 dated 28 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;That Government of India and Pakistan should make a joint request to U.N.O. to undertake a plebiscite in Kashmir at the earliest possible date.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> (In telegram No. Primin-304 dated 8 November 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;We have always right from the beginning accepted the idea of the Kashmir people deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..&#8221;
> 
> &#8220;Ultimately, the final decision of settlement, which must come, has first of all to be made basically by the people of Kashmir&#8230;&#8230;.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement at Press Conference in London, 16 January 1951, The Statesman, 18 January 1951).
> 
> &#8220;But so far as the Government of India are concerned, every assurance and international commitment in regard to Kashmir stands.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Council of States; 18 May 1954).
> 
> 
> 
> Faulty constitution or betraying your own leaders?!


Change is Policies with changing circumstances. As with several other policies of the time - India's stand over Kashmir has also evolved. The situation has changes irreversibly. At that time, you were not willing to withdraw troops and tribesmen, now we are not willing to conduct the polls as the situation has changed irreversibly.

All these statements just show that we were serious about conducting referendum back in late 40s till 50's. Nothing more nothing less.

Next you will hold us for betraying our leaders for not sticking to the same economic policies as proposed by Jawahar Lal Nehru....

Get a life this is 2010 for fcuks sake.


----------



## Xeric

Skeptic said:


> Next you will hold us for betraying our leaders for not sticking to the same economic policies as proposed by Jawahar Lal Nehru....





So now you would weigh your economic polices and backing out of an agreed UN proposal equally. Voila!



> Get a life this is 2010 for fcuks sake.



i would suggest you better refrain from BS, i know you people are hard pressed, but this isnt the place for spilling your guts. Next you would do what? Cyber-punch me?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> So you say it and it just happens, right?
> 
> Hmm....so the Jungle raj syndrome still prevails within the indian establishment and the its citizens. Gosh, why is the world fighting terrorism only?!
> 
> *So now you eat your words again. You did that recently when the US kicked the little RAW inside you from Afghanistan. and you come running asking Pakistan to start over the talks. *
> 
> Well this is what you people have been saying, what happened to the constitution now? Just because you are in the habit of running in circles and rhetoric it wont mean that you can just screw around:
> 
> *INDIA'S COMMITMENT OF PLEBISCITE FOR THE PEOPLE OF KASHMIR*
> 
> &#8220;Our view which we have repeatedly made public is that the question of accession in any disputed territory or State must be decided in accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to this view.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram No. 402-Primin-2227 dated 27 October 1947 to Prime Minister of Pakistan repeating telegram addressed to Prime Minister of United Kingdom).
> 
> &#8220;In regard to accession also, it has been made clear that this is subject to reference to people of State and their decision.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram No.413 dated 28 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220; &#8230;&#8230;.the people of Kashmir would decide the question of accession. It is open to them to accede to either Dominion then.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram No.255 dated 31 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;Kashmir should decide question of accession by plebiscite or referendum under international auspices such as those of the United Nations.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Letter No. 368-Primin dated 21 November 1947 to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;We are anxious not to finalize anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately to decide.
> 
> &#8220;And let me make it clear that it has been our policy all along that where there is a dispute about the accession of a state to either Dominion, the accession must be made by the people of that state.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Broadcast to the Nation: &#8220;All India Radio&#8221;: 2 November 1947).
> 
> * &#8220;The issue in Kashmir is whether violence and naked force should decide the future or the will of the people.&#8221; JAWAHARLAL NEHRU
> 
> (Statement in Indian Constituent Assembly; 25 November 1947).
> 
> &#8220;We have not opposed at any time an over-all plebiscite for the State as a whole&#8230;&#8230;.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (in telegram dated 16 August 1950 addressed to the U.N. Representative for India and Pakistan: S/1791 : Anne 1(B).
> 
> &#8220;The most feasible method of ascertaining the wishes of the people was by fair and impartial plebiscite.&#8221;
> *
> * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Joint press communique of the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan issued in Delhi after their meeting on 20 August 1953).
> 
> &#8220;People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a commodity for sale or to be bartered. It has an individual existence and its people must be the final arbiters of their future.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Report to the All-India Congress Committee, 6 July 1951; The Statesman, New Delhi, 9 July 1951).
> 
> &#8220;Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied about between India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of Kashmir.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Parliament, 31 March 1955).
> 
> &#8220;We had given our pledge to the people of Kashmir, and subsequently to the United Nations; we stood by it and we stand by it today. Let the people of Kashmir decide.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Parliament, 12 February 1951).
> 
> &#8220;We have taken the issue to the United Nations and given our word of honour for a peaceful solution. As a great nation, we cannot go back on it. We have left the question for final solution to the people of Kashmir and we are determined to abide by their decision.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Amrita Bazar Patrika, Calcutta, 2 January 1952).
> 
> &#8220;If, after a proper plebiscite, the people of Kashmir said, &#8216;We do not want to be with India&#8217;, we are committed to accept that. We will accept it though it might pain us. We will not send any army against them. We will accept that, however hurt we might feel about it, we will change the Constitution, if necessary.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Parliament, 26 June 1952).
> 
> &#8220;I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir; it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but every where.
> 
> &#8220;I started with the presumption that it is for the people of Kashmir to decide their own future. We will not compel them. In that sense, the people of Kashmir are sovereign.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> (Statement in Indian Parliament, 7 August 1952)
> 
> &#8220;The whole dispute about Kashmir is still before the United Nations. We cannot just decide things concerning Kashmir. We cannot pass a bill or issue an order concerning Kashmir or do whatever we want.
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (The Statesman, 1 May 1953)
> 
> &#8220;Leave the decision regarding the future of this State to the people of the State is not merely a promise to your Government but also to the people of Kashmir and to the world.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (In telegram No. 25 dated 31 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;In regard to accession also it has been made clear that this is subject to reference to people of State and their decision.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (In telegram No.413 dated 28 October 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;That Government of India and Pakistan should make a joint request to U.N.O. to undertake a plebiscite in Kashmir at the earliest possible date.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> (In telegram No. Primin-304 dated 8 November 1947 addressed to Prime Minister of Pakistan).
> 
> &#8220;We have always right from the beginning accepted the idea of the Kashmir people deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..&#8221;
> 
> &#8220;Ultimately, the final decision of settlement, which must come, has first of all to be made basically by the people of Kashmir&#8230;&#8230;.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement at Press Conference in London, 16 January 1951, The Statesman, 18 January 1951).
> 
> &#8220;But so far as the Government of India are concerned, every assurance and international commitment in regard to Kashmir stands.&#8221;
> 
> * * JAWAHARLAL NEHRU*
> 
> (Statement in the Indian Council of States; 18 May 1954).
> 
> 
> 
> *Faulty constitution or betraying your own leaders*?!




Actually niether. Simply a matter of selective documentary /cherry picking/incomplete knowledge on your part. Also once article 370 got implemented in early 1950s, the constitutional stand of India on the state of J&K became what you see today...

Also from your language you seem to be getting a little too flustererd. As I said, get over it.. Its a discussion and not a negotiation. You and I can not decide the future course of events on this forum.. so avoid the contemptuous content of your post or else 




Talk to the Hand...

Anyway, back to the topic, 

You stopped short of the complete timeline of statements on Jammu & Kashmir from GoI. But hey, I am not surprised since you copied it from the site of National assembly of Pakistan.. ...Here's the rest of it...


"India had accepted these resolutions, subject to assurances, (mentioned in para 6) and in the hope of having the matter resolved quickly. Pakistan, however, wrecked the implementation of the resolutions at that time by not fulfilling the preconditions. If an offer is made and it is not accepted at the time it is made, it cannot be held for generations over the heads of those who made it". 


*V.K. Menon * UN Security Council (763 Meeting, 23 January, 1957): 
With Pakistan's intransigence, and passage of time, the offer lapsed and was overtaken by events


"I wish to make it clear on behalf of my Government that under no circumstances can we agree to the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir"

*representative of India (M.C. Chagla) * UN Security Council (1088 meeting, 5 February 1964): 


"Any plebiscite today would by definition amount to questioning the integrity of India. It would raise the issue of secession - an issue on which even the United States fought a civil war not so very long ago. We cannot and will not tolerate a second partition of India on religious grounds"

*Lal Bahadur Shastri *New York, stated on March 31, 1966


----------



## EjazR

*@toxic_pus*

*http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmi...r-seven-possible-solutions-46.html#post663942*

Just to add to your post, I would suggest to focus on the option of granting more autonomy and restoring the A. 370 in its entirety. As you can see that has the least resistance of unacceptable for most people in J&K including non-muslims. It also has lesser resistance among valley muslims compared to other options.


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Actually niether. Simply a matter of selective documentary /cherry picking/incomplete knowledge on your part. Also once article 370 got implemented in early 1950s, the constitutional stand of India on the state of J&K became what you see today...
> 
> Also from your language you seem to be getting a little too flustererd. As I said, get over it.. Its a discussion and not a negotiation. You and I can not decide the future course of events on this forum.. so avoid the contemptuous content of your post or else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talk to the Hand...
> 
> Anyway, back to the topic,
> 
> You stopped short of the complete timeline of statements on Jammu & Kashmir from GoI. But hey, I am not surprised since you copied it from the site of National assembly of Pakistan.. ...Here's the rest of it...
> 
> 
> "India had accepted these resolutions, subject to assurances, (mentioned in para 6) and in the hope of having the matter resolved quickly. Pakistan, however, wrecked the implementation of the resolutions at that time by not fulfilling the preconditions. If an offer is made and it is not accepted at the time it is made, it cannot be held for generations over the heads of those who made it".
> 
> 
> *V.K. Menon * UN Security Council (763 Meeting, 23 January, 1957):
> With Pakistan's intransigence, and passage of time, the offer lapsed and was overtaken by events
> 
> 
> "I wish to make it clear on behalf of my Government that under no circumstances can we agree to the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir"
> 
> *representative of India (M.C. Chagla) * UN Security Council (1088 meeting, 5 February 1964):
> 
> 
> "Any plebiscite today would by definition amount to questioning the integrity of India. It would raise the issue of secession - an issue on which even the United States fought a civil war not so very long ago. We cannot and will not tolerate a second partition of India on religious grounds"
> 
> *Lal Bahadur Shastri *New York, stated on March 31, 1966



Another excllent piece of rant.

i know what the heck happened and when, we all know that the indians have eaten their own words (as they have done now and would always do) and have retracted from the UN resolution. The idea that the State of J&K should be an integral part of india was included in the J&K State Constitution that was adopted by the assembly on 20 Oct 1956 and came into effect from 29 Jan 1957, but that's not the point in case. 

You seem to suffer from xenophobia and tends to derail every thread you drop in. We want to discuss the illegal indian stance of (at your will-we dont even know who that J&K State Government was that approved to convene a constituent assembly) considering J&K its 'integral' part as if it was a Jungle raj (that you people seem to enjoy so much in main land india).

So instead of ranting and yapping and BSing add something to discuss.

We all know what you are upto here. You have trolled in every thread and given it a new direction. i am sure you would be brought to a grinding halt very soon


----------



## EjazR

PAFAce said:


> A study that further backs this claim is one conducted by an Indian journalism network *in the early nineties *whcih listed _only_ merger with Pakistan or India as possible solutions. It was found that the overwhelming majority (do not remember the number) supported merger with Pakistan (the poll was alluded to in the documentary Jashn-e-Azadi).


The key point you mentioned is in the early nineties. You see historically, after the Afridi, Mehsud and Waziri tribesman invading J&K and unleashing loot and plunder among the mainly muslim and in the north shia muslim population, the opinion turned overwhelmingly anti-Pakistan. Sheikh Abdulla the most popular leader in the valley referred to the IA planes airlifting troops as _Ababeels _while the locals defended their towns and cities against the tribesman with whatever weapons they had and later even welcomes the troops. If the plebescite had been conducted right then and Pakistan had been forced to vacate the tribesman and the US and UK had not started playing their coldwar politics over Kashmir this would have been solved most likely in India's favor. However, the FANA was critical for the US to maintain spy outposts against the USSR and the plebiscite was never pushed and a wishy washy UN resolution put in place.

In the early nineties after the widespread rigging of polls, there was a spurt in anti-India sentiment which was no where to be seen before either in the 48, 65 or 71 wars. By '95 JKLF the mainly indigenous rebel group has declared ceasefire. One of the reasons was their leaders were actually being targeted by Pakistani based groups like LeT e.t.c. who wanted Kashmir to join Pakistan. 

But what matters is the sentiment *right now*. The violence perpetrated by Pakistani based groups has had a blowback affect. Just like the support of the Taliban has had a blowback affect among the Afghan populace. The opinion poll was conducted in 2008, in the backdrop of Amarnath agitation, when presumably the opinions would be even more anti-Indian.



PAFAce said:


> Sir, the militant networks are not majority Pakistanis as is being claimed, because such an idea is absurd to say the least. Separatist militant networks _originated_ in Kashmir, and received traning, logistical support and reinforcements from Pakistan. Nobody is denying that Pakistanis are involved in the Valley, but their involvement is exaggerated to spread the false claim that _we_ started this problem. Furthermore, Kashmiri youth has been becoming increasingly militant-minded, according to Eric Margolis, a Canadian expert on this issue. The reason for this is that the youth see little or no other options; they see that in the first 40 years of peaceful and political struggle got them nowhere, whereas the 20 years of militancy forced the Indian government to take notice. Hence, militancy cannot be stopped by Pakistan alone, as it would clearly be seen as withdrawal of support by the people of Kashmir. Militant networks, however, can be _controlled_ or made _passive_ for certain periods of time (as Yasin Malik's JKLF) to allow pro-India politicians and groups to express their opinions freely. For that to happen India will first have to show the resolve to find a solution. All we have been seeing so far is half-hearted participation in meetings where the Kashmir issue is put last on the to-do list.


Yes, I think there is no doubt that the militancy originated in Kashmir. However, they were armed and trained in Pakistan. But even that is understandable. Afterall, these were locals. But post 94-95, the local militancy was all but over and THAT's when the foreign extremist element took over. Initially you had sikh and hindus fighting along with the JKLF. But once the TTP clones came across and targetted religious minorities and any muslim that was not pro-Pakistan or a "spy" for the GoI the entire social fabric was torn.

The aim of the militants was to establish an independent J&K which included Pakistani side. The GoP and security establishment in Pakistan ofcourse did not want that. Infact, Pakistani groups like Hizb, HUJI e.t.c were probably more responsible in breaking the back of JKLF than Indian forces. 

If you go through the poll, even for the valley Muslims violence instigated by Pakistan is in the top 10 problems . violence by IA also figures prominently by the way.

Arif Jamal's *The Untold Story of "Jihad" in Kashmir* is a pretty good book that documents the militancy there. A must read to understand what happened in the armed struggle and why it failed. I could give many anecdotal info shared with me by Kashmiri neighbors who moved to Hyderabad at the height of the militancy to escape the violence there, but this book by a Pakistani journalist was actually a confirmation of what I had only heard about the militancy till now form them.



PAFAce said:


> Thus, the following points will make my solution possible:
> (I) If independence is not an option, the Valley would choose Pakistan, plain and simple. Since self-determination is not something that India is keen on, and since indepence will not be supported in India, Pakistan, Jammu, Ladakh, Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Kashmir, merger with Pakistan remains the only way forward that would be acceptable to the Valley.



But the valley separatists (falsely) give the illusion that Pakistan supports the *Independence of a united J&K*. The valley Kashmiris don't want to segregate from Jammu or Ladakh. Please note that 60-70&#37; of govt. revenue comes from Jammu and these regions are all considered vital for an independent J&K to survive. Why doesn't the GoP clearly state that they are not going to support an independent J&K and remove the confusion? Because the confusion obviously is convenient for GoP but causing problems for the valley Kashmiris.



PAFAce said:


> (II) The militancy began a long time after the occupation began, therefore, it will end once the occupation winds down. You cannot expect Pakistanis and Kashmiris to have blind faith in India's intentions to resolve the issue, mainly because India has given neither of us any reason to do so. Work towards a solution, reach a compromise, and I guarantee, militancy will decline (as it will no longer be seen as a requirement by Pakistanis or Kashmiris).



But I would look at it in the opposite way. Why did it begin after such a long time. Why did the locals fight against Pakistanis (or at most stayed neutral and not "help" Pakistani forces) in '48 or '65 or '71 or even in the most recent Kargil war in '99?



PAFAce said:


> (III) *India has not been serious about discussions at all*, and is quite happy with the status quo


Sir, that is quite false. Since Nehru, India has been trying to resolve the J&K issue. But we had the operation gibralter in 65 followed by the Taskent agreement to resolve the Kashmir issue. After 71, it was again decided to work towards a peaceful settlement of Kashmir. After the militancy peaked and fell in the 90s, the BJP govt. was working on resolving the Kashmir issue when Kargil happened. Even then Vajpayee tried to resolve the Kashmir issue with Musharraf and then you had Singh and Musharraf "an announcement away" from the resolution of Kashmir when the Mumbai attacks happened.

So at least posts 9/11 Both the BJP and the Congress have gone ahead and implemented many CBMs and tried to resolve Kashmir. Now its time to see WHO is sabotaging he efforts. Are groups like LeT and Hizb helping or harming the process? Atleast I think it would be fair to say that GoI has been as sincere as the GoP in resolving the issue.



PAFAce said:


> (IV) The presence of a mountain of Indian armed personnel and the constant human rights abuse are unacceptable to the people of Kashmir, and these factors also greatly hinder peace-building and trust-building. However, since India would be reluctant to decrease the troop-presence by too much before any resolution is reached, and both Pakistanis and Kashmiris would be reluctant to pull back all militant efforts as long as there is a strong Indian military presence, the solution _must_ be reached _before_ either side can de-escalate its military presence in the region.



GoI has been consistently decreasing troop numbers in the past 4 years. Most recently a 30,000 reduction in para-military forces was ordered. Infact, right now there are hardly any IA camps in population centres. There are still paramilitary camps and I agree they should be removed as well.

But at the same time, shouldn't GoP step in and honestly ban and shutdown LeT, JuD Hizb type groups? What sane person believes that these groups are part of the solution? Without these groups being taken head on there will be no way forward in resolving Kashmir as any pro-Indian or even pro-Independence advocate will not be safe as has been the case again and again.


----------



## karan.1970

EjazR said:


> *@toxic_pus*
> 
> *http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmi...r-seven-possible-solutions-46.html#post663942*
> 
> Just to add to your post, I would suggest to focus on the option of granting more autonomy and restoring the A. 370 in its entirety. As you can see that has the least resistance of unacceptable for most people in J&K including non-muslims. It also has lesser resistance among valley muslims compared to other options.



Actually I like the idea All-Green put forth. On the face of it, that seems full of tactical issues, but would really be least disruptive. And if hearts and minds agree to the idea, then tactical difficulties can slowly be sorted out..


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> We all know what you are upto here. You have trolled in every thread and given it a new direction. i am sure you would be brought to a grinding halt very soon



I genuinely dont think so.. Please show me a single off topic comment that I have made here or in any other thread. You started listing the timeline of comments from GoI and I simply completed it. How is that off topic??
The threat of banning a member when you do not have a response is not becoming of a coveted position of a think tank. Rest I am ok letting the Mods decide..


----------



## tiger1313

xeric said:


> Another excllent piece of rant.
> 
> i know what the heck happened and when, we all know that the indians have eaten their own words (as they have done now and would always do) and have retracted from the UN resolution. The idea that the State of J&K should be an integral part of india was included in the J&K State Constitution that was adopted by the assembly on 20 Oct 1956 and came into effect from 29 Jan 1957, but that's not the point in case.
> 
> You seem to suffer from xenophobia and tends to derail every thread you drop in. We want to discuss the illegal indian stance of (at your will-we dont even know who that J&K State Government was that approved to convene a constituent assembly) considering J&K its 'integral' part as if it was a Jungle raj (that you people seem to enjoy so much in main land india).
> 
> So instead of ranting and yapping and BSing add something to discuss.
> 
> We all know what you are upto here. You have trolled in every thread and given it a new direction. i am sure you would be brought to a grinding halt very soon



Sir, I think we all need to understand some things clearly-

1 Status quo is the only solution possible now.
2 Any other solution is possible only in case of a total collapse either in India or Pakistan.
3 Trust me, even the most hardline of Kashmiris realise that and would be amenable with true autonomy.
4 India can never agree to a plebicide now since the sit has changed on ground with demographic changes in your ppart of Kashmir.
5 You have yourself changed the sit by changing the status of Northern Areas which were clearly apart of J & K.
6 Next 50 years will only see an incr in Indian military and eco muscle - so very difficult to force india then.
Once this realisation is there at ur end, i think saner minds can work. Pl do not treat this as a rant, this is the position of most thinking indians. 
Insurgencies are no big deal for the indian state. It has and can carry on and tire the insurgents for the next 1000 yrs.
Cheers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

*You started listing the timeline of comments from GoI and I simply completed it.*

i didnt exactly 'started listing the timeline' instead it was to show you people a mirror and those viewing it that facts that how can a govt blatantly go back its commitment and eat it own words and you werent exactly 'completing the timeline' instead you just ranted (a thing that you have mastered) as you just skipped the issue at hand and diverted your attention towards a futile exercise and the info that is known to all.

i might have appreciated your stance had you argued over the stance change and given reasons over this indian denial.

Do you still need to learn how discussion is furthered at forums?


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

karan.1970 said:


> Actually niether. Simply a matter of selective documentary /cherry picking/incomplete knowledge on your part. Also once article 370 got implemented in early 1950s, the constitutional stand of India on the state of J&K became what you see today...
> 
> Also from your language you seem to be getting a little too flustererd. As I said, get over it.. Its a discussion and not a negotiation. You and I can not decide the future course of events on this forum.. so avoid the contemptuous content of your post or else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talk to the Hand...
> 
> Anyway, back to the topic,
> 
> You stopped short of the complete timeline of statements on Jammu & Kashmir from GoI. But hey, I am not surprised since you copied it from the site of National assembly of Pakistan.. ...Here's the rest of it...
> 
> 
> "India had accepted these resolutions, subject to assurances, (mentioned in para 6) and in the hope of having the matter resolved quickly. Pakistan, however, wrecked the implementation of the resolutions at that time by not fulfilling the preconditions. If an offer is made and it is not accepted at the time it is made, it cannot be held for generations over the heads of those who made it".
> 
> 
> *V.K. Menon * UN Security Council (763 Meeting, 23 January, 1957):
> With Pakistan's intransigence, and passage of time, the offer lapsed and was overtaken by events
> 
> 
> "I wish to make it clear on behalf of my Government that under no circumstances can we agree to the holding of a plebiscite in Kashmir"
> 
> *representative of India (M.C. Chagla) * UN Security Council (1088 meeting, 5 February 1964):
> 
> 
> "Any plebiscite today would by definition amount to questioning the integrity of India. It would raise the issue of secession - an issue on which even the United States fought a civil war not so very long ago. We cannot and will not tolerate a second partition of India on religious grounds"
> 
> *Lal Bahadur Shastri *New York, stated on March 31, 1966


What I see in the above quotes is more evidence of India derailing the process to holding a plebiscite.

What intransigence is VK Menon talking about?

The withdrawal of forces was based on negotiations between India, Pakistan and the UN commission, and India was the one that balked at UN proposals of retaining 18000 troops to Pakistan's 3000 (something Pakistan agreed to).

That was a respectable number of forces that did not pose a major threat to either side while a plebiscite was held. The Indian refusal to do so only solidifies the suspicions of duplicity and the desire to see all Pakistan forces unilaterally vacate Pakistan controlled territory so India could move in and occupy all of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khajur

My final solution for kashmir:

1.divide J&K 
2.Make Jammu a separate state.
3.Make Ladhak an union territory.
4.Restore article 370 for the Kashmir region after its break up .......

This would bring out the political settlement of the autonomy issue.
Regarding pakistan,as the local support for millitancy dies down,pakistan would have no choice ,but to accept the LOC as the international border and stop of the facade of Azad kashmir and Gilgit region by bringing them into pakistan to start development work in those regions.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

karan.1970 said:


> Can't.. Constitutionally not possible and communicated to UN way back in 1960s. Get over it..



The real reason is that you, and the others, don't buy those poll numbers either. Otherwise the GoI would be jumping at the chance to settle the dispute once and for all, and legitimize the Indian position over J&K.

India changed her constitution to incorporate J&K, and if the constitution is an issue it can amend it to conduct the plebiscite.

The fact of the matter is that regardless of what India communicated to the UN, the territory is disputed and recognized as such by the international community. You can bring about a million constitutional amendments in India proclaiming it an Indian State, that does not legitimize the Indian position.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Khajur said:


> My final solution for kashmir:
> 
> 1.divide J&K
> 2.Make Jammu a separate state.
> 3.Make Ladhak an union territory.
> 4.Restore article 370 for the Kashmir region after its break up .......
> 
> This would bring out the political settlement of the autonomy issue.
> Regarding pakistan,as the local support for millitancy dies down,pakistan would have no choice ,but to accept the LOC as the international border and stop of the facade of Azad kashmir and Gilgit region by bringing them into pakistan to start development work in those regions.



addendum to the above;

G-B, Jammu and Laddakh stay with Pakistan and India respectively, while Azad Kashmir and IAK have a plebiscite, which can be district by district or as one region.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Khajur

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> What I see in the above quotes is more evidence of India derailing the process to holding a plebiscite.
> 
> What intransigence is VK Menon talking about?
> 
> The withdrawal of forces was based on negotiations between India, Pakistan and the UN commission, and India was the one that balked at UN proposals of retaining 18000 troops to Pakistan's 3000 (something Pakistan agreed to).
> 
> That was a respectable number of forces that did not pose a major threat to either side while a plebiscite was held. The Indian refusal to do so only solidifies the suspicions of duplicity and the desire to see all Pakistan forces unilaterally vacate Pakistan controlled territory so India could move in and occupy all of it.



Agno,

*for us indians ,UN resolution on kashmir is long dead and immaterial ...totally meaningless piece of paper gone to the dustbin of history after what we went through and what two countries promised to each other over course of last sixty years.*


----------



## Khajur

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> addendum to the above;
> 
> G-B, Jammu and Laddakh stay with Pakistan and India respectively, while Azad Kashmir and IAK have a plebiscite, which can be district by district or as one region.



Agno,

loosing land to pakistan isnt an option at all.
No more partiton can be allowed to occur again as long as indian state is vaible.

To take on ur offer ,the final most gracious concessional solution we two countries can agree up to... is the joint control of Azad Kashmir and indian kashmir minus jammu and Laddhak by both countries with an article 370 like law in place for that both region concerned .


----------



## Xeric

First i am glad that we have someone who can talk about the hard issue and not troll.



tiger1313 said:


> Sir, I think we all need to understand some things clearly-
> 
> 1 Status quo is the only solution possible now.


May be not.

Just because the situation suits india, we cant just say that the status quo is the 'only solution possible now'.
*
If that be the case then;*
-any tom dick and harry in the indian govt can invade Nepal,

-subdue the population there,

-and when the locals kick back the invader's arse and india finds that she would lose further territory, she runs to the UN,

-and works out a cease fire,

-and also agrees to hold a plebiscite,

-but then linger on the issue for long enough,

-and then unilaterally announce that it consider Nepal as an 'integral part of india' and tell the world that the proposal came from the so call State of Nepal (which infact was a disputed territory) Government (or a puppet govt would be a better phrase to be used here) that formed a constituent assembly which debated and gave its reasoned conclusion regarding the accession of the Naplese State to the indian union, (as if the UN resolution meant nothing or should i say they committed a felony by negating a mutually agreed to proposal)

-and then without any logic blatantly and shamelessly announce that as india thinks/considers that now the UN resolution has lost its demeanor so it has decided to accede Nepal to itself! Bravo!! Oh please, spare me the BS!!



> 2 Any other solution is possible only in case of a total collapse either in India or Pakistan.


Not necessarily.

No one wants to annihilate anyone.

The issue is quite lucid, a free and fair plebiscite.



> 3 Trust me, even the most hardline of Kashmiris realise that and would be amenable with true autonomy.


Sorry, i dont trust you.



> 4 India can never agree to a plebicide now since the sit has changed on ground with demographic changes in your ppart of Kashmir.


Yeah right!

Jungle raj, right?



> 5 You have yourself changed the sit by changing the status of Northern Areas which were clearly apart of J & K.


That's what you think.

It's just another lame excuse to confuse the already complicated issue of Kashmir.

If you can call our NAs as 'disputed' (that's funny man) but we cant call an actually disputed area (which the world recognize as disputed) as disputed!

Azad Kashmir was liberated and is a self governing entity. NAs were never in question, until india brought it to thicken the mud!



> 6 Next 50 years will only see an incr in Indian military and eco muscle - so very difficult to force india then.





You first need to give your 80&#37; night blind tanks some eyes, and also stop giving statements that tells us that your military is not battle worthy until 2027.



> Once this realisation is there at ur end, i think saner minds can work. Pl do not treat this as a rant, this is the position of most thinking indians.


i appreciate if we have something on the table to discuss, but if the usual stubbornness and hypocrisy has to continue from the indian side, nothing can be achieved!



> Insurgencies are no big deal for the indian state. It has and can carry on and tire the insurgents for the next 1000 yrs.
> Cheers


Well that's what you think.

Try liberating Kashmir and all of your insurgencies would become a nightmare overnight 

Seriously, i would require a legal size paper only to jot down the acronyms of these insurgencies, and you tell me that it's no bid deal for you people?!

And guess what, armies have never tired off insurgents, but the insurgents definitely have tired off the occupiers and what i like about this phenomenon is that the history concedes to this fact.

May be you need to read history again


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> *You started listing the timeline of comments from GoI and I simply completed it.*
> 
> i didnt exactly 'started listing the timeline' instead it was to show you people a mirror and those viewing it that facts that how can a govt blatantly go back its commitment and eat it own words and you werent exactly 'completing the timeline' instead you just ranted (a thing that you have mastered) as you just skipped the issue at hand and diverted your attention towards a futile exercise and the info that is known to all.



No Sir.. You certainly did list the timeline of all the comments from Pt Nehru and ended you post with the following statement.
" Faulty constitution or betraying your own leaders?! "  (you can check your post) implying that India is not honoring Pt Nehru's committment. That was an inaccurate comment as Pt. Nehru himself withdrew those committments before his death and thats exactly what I illustrated. 




xeric said:


> i might have appreciated your stance had you argued over the stance change and given reasons over this indian denial.


I had certainly begun with that when I wrote that holding a plebiscite is no longer allowed by the constitution of India in response to which you pulled in the timeline of Pt Nehru's comments implying that India is no longer honoring Pt. Nehru's committment or that the constitution is defective which I refuted. plain and simple




xeric said:


> Do you still need to learn how discussion is furthered at forums?


Learning is always a continuous process, but going thru your last few responses , I definitely dont need to learn furthering of a forum discussion from you sir..


----------



## karan.1970

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> India changed her constitution to incorporate J&K, and if the constitution is an issue it can amend it to conduct the plebiscite.
> 
> The fact of the matter is that regardless of what India communicated to the UN, the territory is disputed and recognized as such by the international community. You can bring about a million constitutional amendments in India proclaiming it an Indian State, that does not legitimize the Indian position.



Its not the question of buying or not buying into the poll numbers. India today doees not recognize the disputed status of J&K. The same has been amended into the costitution in 1952. Hence the plebiscite is no longer an option. 

Fair point on constitutional ammendment but going by the sentiments in India, any political party that even mentions this will get lynched publically by the population. 

Today throughout the world, the proponents of a plebstice in Kashmir are significantly lower in number than what there a were 60 years back . Given a choice, virtually whole of the world community will back conversion of LOC to IB. 

As a matter of fact Dr. Frank Graham the UNCIP representative stated the following in 1958

&#8220;&#8230;the execution of the provisions of the resolution of 1948 might create more serious difficulties than were foreseen at the time the parties agreed to that. Whether the UN representative would be able to reconstitute the status quo which it had obtained ten years ago would seem to be doubtful"

Also Highlighting the fact that the UNCIP resolutions did not come under Chapter VII, and were therefore not self enforcing, the UN Secretary General stated at a press conference in Islamabad in March 2001, that &#8220;the two parties discussing these issues and finding a peaceful way out, is the route I recommend&#8221;. 


And we can discuss this to no end, but the crux of the matter is that unless India is beaten militarily, there is no chance in hell that *any * GoI that wishes to survive, will entertain a discussion that results in changing of boundaries.. 

In my view, the only hope for a peaceful kashmir lies in maintaining the status quo wrt the territory with reduction in tensions, increase in cross border trade and treatment of Kashmir (both Indian and Pakistani sides) like normal states of India and Pakistan. All Green had put forward an approach a few posts back which I think holds the most promise..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Khajur said:


> Agno,
> 
> loosing land to pakistan isnt an option at all.
> No more partiton can be allowed to occur again as long as indian state is vaible.
> 
> To take on ur offer ,the final most gracious concessional solution we two countries can agree up to... is the joint control of Azad Kashmir and indian kashmir minus jammu and Laddhak by both countries with an article 370 like law in place for that both region concerned .



Joint control is an acceptable proposition. It would be a workable compromise.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## karan.1970

^^^ True.. will allow political face save in both countries..If the modalities can be worked out, the whole Jammu, Kashmir(whole of it), Ladakh and the Northern Areas will become the most prosperous region in the subcontinent..


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> I had certainly begun with that when I wrote that holding a plebiscite is no longer allowed by the constitution of India in response to which you pulled in the timeline of Pt Nehru's comments implying that India is no longer honoring Pt. Nehru's committment or that the constitution is defective which I refuted. plain and simple



Well you have started behaving now, guud for you.

Anywaz, the constitution that you talk of can be reverted with the same ease as it was enacted.

Dont tell me that your constitution is something that cant be altered, if you can defy the entire UN resolution at your will and can amend your constitution to suite yourself, the same thing can be done again.

Moreover, the solution that you and some other propose (of joint control thingy) is acceptable only if a plebiscite is held both in Azad Kashmir and indian occupied kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RiazHaq

Media reports indicate that India and Pakistan have had several rounds of meetings in Bangkok in the past three weeksrecently as part of the back-channel diplomacy on Kashmir. The dialogue was held between former Pakistan High Commissioner Aziz Ahmed Khan and former RAW chief A S Dullat.

Mirwaiz confirmed to the Indian Express in a recent interview that the four-point formula proposed by former Pakistani President Musharraf is being revived to try and settle the Kashmir issues. The Musharraf formula envisions soft or porous borders in Kashmir with freedom of movement for the Kashmiris; exceptional autonomy or "self-governance" within each region of Kashmir; phased demilitarization of all regions; and finally, a "joint supervisory mechanism," with representatives from India, Pakistan and all parts of Kashmir, to oversee the plans implementation.

India is not ready for the joint-management part of the proposals which talk about joint control of foreign affairs, currency and communications in Kashmir, Mirwaiz told the Indian Express. Theres a broader agreement on the other aspects of this settlement model.

Haq's Musings: China's Growing Role in Afghanistan, Kashmir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Well you have started behaving now, guud for you.
> 
> Anywaz, the constitution that you talk of can be reverted with the same ease as it was enacted.
> 
> Dont tell me that your constitution is something that cant be altered, if you can defy the entire UN resolution at your will and can amend your constitution to suite yourself, the same thing can be done again.
> 
> Moreover, the solution that you and some other propose (of joint control thingy) is acceptable only if a plebiscite is held both in Azad Kashmir and indian occupied kashmir.



Thank you sir for the certificate of good behaviour despite my still posting in the same manner as before. Valid point about the constitution but have already responded on that to Agno..

Dear sir, you can keep repeating this like a chant, but plebiscite option is long dead and buried. Pakistan can not enforce it. Rest of the world including India does not want to.


----------



## karan.1970

RiazHaq said:


> Media reports indicate that India and Pakistan have had several rounds of meetings in Bangkok in the past three weeksrecently as part of the back-channel diplomacy on Kashmir. The dialogue was held between former Pakistan High Commissioner Aziz Ahmed Khan and former RAW chief A S Dullat.
> 
> Mirwaiz confirmed to the Indian Express in a recent interview that the four-point formula proposed by former Pakistani President Musharraf is being revived to try and settle the Kashmir issues. The Musharraf formula envisions soft or porous borders in Kashmir with freedom of movement for the Kashmiris; exceptional autonomy or "self-governance" within each region of Kashmir; phased demilitarization of all regions; and finally, a "joint supervisory mechanism," with representatives from India, Pakistan and all parts of Kashmir, to oversee the plans implementation.
> 
> India is not ready for the joint-management part of the proposals which talk about joint control of foreign affairs, currency and communications in Kashmir, Mirwaiz told the Indian Express. Theres a broader agreement on the other aspects of this settlement model.
> 
> Haq's Musings: China's Growing Role in Afghanistan, Kashmir



Seems promising.. On the lines of the post from All Green.. Is there a media link for the above..


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Thank you sir for the certificate of good behaviour despite my still posting in the same manner as before. Valid point about the constitution but have already responded on that to Agno..
> 
> Dear sir, you can keep repeating this like a chant, but plebiscite option is long dead and buried. Pakistan can not enforce it. Rest of the world including India does not want to.





Sir, Dear sir, Sir, well if that doesnt amount to an change in attitude, i suggest you must go see a doctor.

Anywaz, coming back to the topic; in any case either it either has to be the plebiscite or one of those 'out of the box' options given by Musharraf and Co. Every solution that was put forth by Pakistan and the one that UN proposed (to which you agreed and later ducked) is quite sane and logical. We have been ready to come to the table if any of these are _seriously_ taken seriously by india. But what india probably plan is to falsify the entire process and keep all the fruit. Bringing in the controversial document like the I of A and declaring your constitution as a holy book wont help. Either side has to bend, Pakistan has already done that and now its india's turn.

i assure you, the day india became serious over the Kashmir issue and feel the pain of the genocide that it has committed there for decades, the problem would get solved in a matter of months.

So clinging on with false documents and acting like a wise-guy wouldnt help and doesnt amount to getting serious about the issue, instead it just shows stubbornness and hypocrisy on india's part.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Sir, Dear sir, Sir, well if that doesnt amount to an change in attitude, i suggest you must go see a doctor.


What class do you study in??? Haven't you reached the topic of sarcasm in salutations in you literature classes?? Guess not...Remember Sir Don Quixote (aka Shekh chilli)



xeric said:


> Anywaz, coming back to the topic; in any case either it either has to be the plebiscite or one of those 'out of the box' options given by Musharraf and Co. Every solution that was put forth by Pakistan and the one that UN proposed (to which you agreed and later ducked) is quite sane and logical. We have been ready to come to the table if any of these are _seriously_ taken seriously by india. But what india probably plan is to falsify the entire process and keep all the fruit. Bringing in the controversial document like the I of A and declaring your constitution as a holy book wont help. Either side has to bend, Pakistan has already done that and now its india's turn.
> 
> i assure you, the day india became serious over the Kashmir issue and feel the pain of the genocide that it has committed there for decades, the problem would get solved in a matter of months.
> 
> So clinging on with false documents and acting like a wise-guy wouldnt help and doesnt amount to getting serious about the issue, instead it just shows stubbornness and hypocrisy on india's part.



So ignoring some of your usual jibes, let me say that my vote goes for the out of the box solutions of Mush and Co. I also saw a post from Haq around the same thing being going on for last 3 weeks.. Fingers crossed.. But take it from me (and GoP agrees to this line).. there will be no re drawing of boundaries.. What will work is more autonomy, more cross border movt, may be joint mechanism for things like trade etc. But if that cleanses the violence in the valley, so be it...


----------



## dabong1

If where getting near to some sort of a deal on kashmir then i am pretty sure we can expect some sort of attack to take place in india.


----------



## PAFAce

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Joint control is an acceptable proposition. It would be a workable compromise.


Sir, it would be unacceptable to the people of Azad Kashmir. They have never given anybody any reason to assume they will be satisfied with joint Indian control.

Also, I can see that joint Pak-India control could lead to many issues. Essentially, neither country will give its all and will expect the other to do most of the work. This will only increase pro-independence sentiments.

In other words, though the idea is great, I don't think its pragmatic. I still suggest my original solution, which will require India to lose some land in the Valley and gain land (completely) near Siachen. This, and Pakistan can compromise on the Water treaty if India is willing to settle the Kashmir dispute.

There are ways we can work this out, but I think we need to figure something out ASAP and to everyone's satisfaction. Kashmiris are sick of decades of negotiations with no result.


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Hmmm....
> 
> Why dont hold the plebiscite right now??


Why, have you withdrawn all your 'citizens and tribals' from P0K?

O wait. Its the usual brain barf.


----------



## Hellfire

PAFAce said:


> Sir, it would be unacceptable to the people of Azad Kashmir. They have never given anybody any reason to assume they will be satisfied with joint Indian control.
> 
> Also, I can see that joint Pak-India control could lead to many issues. Essentially, neither country will give its all and will expect the other to do most of the work. This will only increase pro-independence sentiments.
> 
> In other words, though the idea is great, I don't think its pragmatic. I still suggest my original solution, which will require India to lose some land in the Valley and gain land (completely) near Siachen. This, and Pakistan can compromise on the Water treaty if India is willing to settle the Kashmir dispute.
> 
> There are ways we can work this out, but I think we need to figure something out ASAP and to everyone's satisfaction. Kashmiris are sick of decades of negotiations with no result.



any land near Siachen area opens up your gilgit area to negotiations as also the land sold by Pakistan to China .... that shall be another lot of headache

also kashmir is not likely to be given ... for obvious reasons ...

although a safe passage to people to shift to Pakistani Kasmir is very much a good option

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> I still suggest my original solution, which will require India to lose some land in the Valley and *gain land (completely) near Siachen*. This, and Pakistan can *compromise on the Water treaty* if India is willing to settle the Kashmir dispute.




So we give up a huge chunk of Kashmir, stop you from slowly bleeding yourself to death from having to shoulder the holy duty of cross border terrorism and you let us have what we already have? Siachen and Water.

Anyway....

Open border is ideally correct, but practically difficult if not impossible.

Converting LoC into IB is practically possible but ideally incorrect.

Anything else is just good for Internet battles.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Toxic before vomiting ur dirty hate go and see Khalistani militants are raising there heads again in punjab and rajhistan looks like ur india has started to bleed from the rear?As well as from othersides like moaists,nagas,manipuris, ?
17 insurgencies bleedin u BLUE?


----------



## brahmastra

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Toxic before vomiting ur dirty hate go and see* Khalistani militants are raising there heads again in punjab and rajhistan *looks like ur india has started to bleed from the rear?As well as from othersides like moaists,nagas,manipuris, ?
> 17 insurgencies bleedy u BLUE?



give links to back your claim.


----------



## All-Green

karan.1970 said:


> Thank you sir for the certificate of good behaviour despite my still posting in the same manner as before. Valid point about the constitution but have already responded on that to Agno..
> 
> Dear sir, you can keep repeating this like a chant, but plebiscite option is long dead and buried. Pakistan can not enforce it. *Rest of the world including India does not want to*.



Let's stick to India and Pakistan, rest of the world considers it a disputed territory and has never said that plebiscite is no more an option. The UN resolution still stands but it does not mean we cannot work out another way if agreeable to the parties actually affected by this conflict, Pakistan, India and Kashmiris.

I think the joint control option would be best as it would also help in the water dispute since both India and Pakistan would have access to the area through a third party which can also be taken as a mediator.

It shall be a major pain initially to work out a working model but if done sincerely it shall help resolve all possible issues there are between our two countries and ease the life for the Kashmiris.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

brahmastra said:


> *give links to back your claim*.



Alarm Over Pro-Khalistan Posters In Delhi - The Voice of Sikh Youth
Includes statements from Chadam baram.Enjoy.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

self delete


----------



## All-Green

Guys,

Please leave Khalistan out of this thread.
Open a new thread if all are interested in it and debate over there to your heart's content.

Thanks for your understanding.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

brahmastra said:


> give links to back your claim.



The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News
PC: Sikh militancy resurfacing
R Sedhuraman
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, February 7
Home Minister P Chidambaram today said there were signs of re-emergence of Sikh militancy, but sought to downplay the issue saying this was not a serious problem.

There are some signs of militant groups belonging to the Sikh community trying to raise their head in Punjab and Rajasthan, Chidambaram told reporters while addressing the media at the end of a day-long conference of Chief Ministers on internal security here.

He said Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot raised the problem of Sikh militants entering his state at the conference.

The Rajasthan Chief Minister did mention it. But in my assessment that is not a very acute problem The Director-Generals of Police of Punjab as well as Rajasthan assured me that they could handle the problem. The Haryana police chief also held similar views.........


----------



## tiger1313

xeric said:


> First i am glad that we have someone who can talk about the hard issue and not troll.
> 
> 
> May be not.
> 
> Just because the situation suits india, we cant just say that the status quo is the 'only solution possible now'.
> *
> If that be the case then;*
> -any tom dick and harry in the indian govt can invade Nepal,
> 
> -subdue the population there,
> 
> -and when the locals kick back the invader's arse and india finds that she would lose further territory, she runs to the UN,
> 
> -and works out a cease fire,
> 
> -and also agrees to hold a plebiscite,
> 
> -but then linger on the issue for long enough,
> 
> -and then unilaterally announce that it consider Nepal as an 'integral part of india' and tell the world that the proposal came from the so call State of Nepal (which infact was a disputed territory) Government (or a puppet govt would be a better phrase to be used here) that formed a constituent assembly which debated and gave its reasoned conclusion regarding the accession of the Naplese State to the indian union, (as if the UN resolution meant nothing or should i say they committed a felony by negating a mutually agreed to proposal)
> 
> -and then without any logic blatantly and shamelessly announce that as india thinks/considers that now the UN resolution has lost its demeanor so it has decided to accede Nepal to itself! Bravo!! Oh please, spare me the BS!!
> 
> No one wants to annihilate anyone.
> 
> The issue is quite lucid, a free and fair plebiscite.
> 
> It won't happen, even u know it.
> Sorry, i dont trust you.
> 
> 
> Yeah right!
> 
> Jungle raj, right?
> 
> 
> That's what you think.
> 
> It's just another lame excuse to confuse the already complicated issue of Kashmir.
> 
> If you can call our NAs as 'disputed' (that's funny man) but we cant call an actually disputed area (which the world recognize as disputed) as disputed!
> 
> Azad Kashmir was liberated and is a self governing entity. NAs were never in question, until india brought it to thicken the mud!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You first need to give your 80&#37; night blind tanks some eyes, and also stop giving statements that tells us that your military is not battle worthy until 2027.
> 
> Thanks for the concern, we 're workin on it.
> i appreciate if we have something on the table to discuss, but if the usual stubbornness and hypocrisy has to continue from the indian side, nothing can be achieved!
> 
> 
> Well that's what you think.
> 
> Try liberating Kashmir and all of your insurgencies would become a nightmare overnight
> 
> Seriously, i would require a legal size paper only to jot down the acronyms of these insurgencies, and you tell me that it's no bid deal for you people?!
> 
> And guess what, armies have never tired off insurgents, but the insurgents definitely have tired off the occupiers and what i like about this phenomenon is that the history concedes to this fact.
> 
> May be you need to read history again



Sir, u cannot compare the two scenarios u depicted. Pakistan's invasion of Baluchaistan is closer to the scenario u mentioned. KASHMIR ACCEDED TO INDIA LEGALLY. Thats not BS.
Not necessarily.


NA were always a part of J & K. Pl read history - real history.

I will read history, I do not claim to be mr know all. However, solution can only be found after one realises what is possible to achieve and what is not.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## karan.1970

All-Green said:


> Let's stick to India and Pakistan, rest of the world considers it a disputed territory and has never said that plebiscite is no more an option. The UN resolution still stands but it does not mean we cannot work out another way if agreeable to the parties actually affected by this conflict, Pakistan, India and Kashmiris.
> 
> I think the joint control option would be best as it would also help in the water dispute since both India and Pakistan would have access to the area through a third party which can also be taken as a mediator.
> 
> It shall be a major pain initially to work out a working model but if done sincerely it shall help resolve all possible issues there are between our two countries and ease the life for the Kashmiris.



I agree that the world does not say that its no longer an option but its also true that any one hardly brings it up as an option except Pakistan. Most players in the international arena consider IB=LOC as the easiest option. 

I fully agree with your last paragraph around initial difficulties and the fact that they can be surmounted if approached sincerely. Fingers crossed.. Something seems to be brewing up if I go by Haq's note on back channel talks..


----------



## EjazR

Before denouncing the www.peacepolls.org report it would be a good idea to look at the Israel-Palestine report as well for comparison

*For example*
80&#37; of Palestinians consider suicide bombings in Israel as essential or desirable

While in Kashmir 80+% want violence to stop on all sides including the militants. The opposite sentiment compared to Palestinians.


The J&K that is disputed in the UN resolutions was the entire state of J&K that also includes Gilgit-Balitistan. And I don't see why the GoI should be defensive on the UN resolutions and its probably just a lack of diplomatic skills and their hesitance in tackling the problem.

What the opinions polls in the valley suggest is clearly that indepenace of the entire J&K is what they want. They don't want to segregate from Jammu or Ladakh or GB. But the residents of other parts don't agree with the valley majority opinion. So what will the plebiscite solve? Particularly because it doesn't have the option for independence.

Here is a good read on what the UN resolutions really require.
*http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmir-war/37724-bogey-un-resolutions-jammu-kashmir.html*

Infact, I might go ahead and say that why doesn't the GoP conduct a plebescite in its area of J&K to put pressure on India. We all know that it was only last year that politcal rights were given in GB, so there is certainly more political freedom in India than in Pakistan when it comes to expressing pro-Independence viewpoints. 

Here is a UNHCR report on Pakistan Kashmir which ironically declares Azad Kashmri as "Not free"
*UNHCR | Refworld | Freedom in the World 2009 - Kashmir [Pakistan]*

Note that it mentions the presence of pro-independence groups in Pakistan as well.

The Indian report for comparison
*UNHCR | Refworld | Freedom in the World 2009 - Kashmir [India]*

Like I mentioned before, the day GoP will clearly spell out its stand on wether it support the independence of a united J&K that will include GB as well, will be the day the separatist movement will fail to confuse the locals anymore.

If you want to resolve the valley in line with the aspirations of ONLY the valley separatists, then a significant number will want independence. Is Pakistan willing to cede GB and Kashmir on its side to the new state? GoP has never clarified this.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## dabong1

EjazR said:


> Before denouncing the www.peacepolls.org report it would be a good idea to look at the Israel-Palestine report as well for comparison
> 
> *For example*
> 80% of Palestinians consider suicide bombings in Israel as essential or desirable
> 
> While in Kashmir 80+% want violence to stop on all sides including the militants. The opposite sentiment compared to Palestinians.
> 
> 
> The J&K that is disputed in the UN resolutions was the entire state of J&K that also includes Gilgit-Balitistan. And I don't see why the GoI should be defensive on the UN resolutions and its probably just a lack of diplomatic skills and their hesitance in tackling the problem.
> 
> What the opinions polls in the valley suggest is clearly that indepenace of the entire J&K is what they want. They don't want to segregate from Jammu or Ladakh or GB. But the residents of other parts don't agree with the valley majority opinion. So what will the plebiscite solve? Particularly because it doesn't have the option for independence.
> 
> Here is a good read on what the UN resolutions really require.
> *http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmir-war/37724-bogey-un-resolutions-jammu-kashmir.html*
> 
> Infact, I might go ahead and say that why doesn't the GoP conduct a plebescite in its area of J&K to put pressure on India. We all know that it was only last year that politcal rights were given in GB, so there is certainly more political freedom in India than in Pakistan when it comes to expressing pro-Independence viewpoints.
> 
> Here is a UNHCR report on Pakistan Kashmir which ironically declares Azad Kashmri as "Not free"
> *UNHCR | Refworld | Freedom in the World 2009 - Kashmir [Pakistan]*
> 
> Note that it mentions the presence of pro-independence groups in Pakistan as well.
> 
> The Indian report for comparison
> *UNHCR | Refworld | Freedom in the World 2009 - Kashmir [India]*
> 
> Like I mentioned before, the day GoP will clearly spell out its stand on wether it support the independence of a united J&K that will include GB as well, will be the day the separatist movement will fail to confuse the locals anymore.
> 
> If you want to resolve the valley in line with the aspirations of ONLY the valley separatists, then a significant number will want independence. Is Pakistan willing to cede GB and Kashmir on its side to the new state? GoP has never clarified this.




No problem......lets get the NA-AJK-IOK to have a vote......either freedom...join pakistan or india.......ru guys willing to have a vote under the UN or international observers?


----------



## PAFAce

dabong1 said:


> No problem......lets get the NA-AJK-IOK to have a vote......either freedom...join pakistan or india.......ru guys willing to have a vote under the UN or international observers?


No they're not, and we know why.



toxic_pus said:


> Open border is ideally correct, but practically difficult if not impossible.
> 
> Converting LoC into IB is practically possible but ideally incorrect.
> 
> Anything else is just good for Internet battles.


In the rest of your usual feces-spillage, this was refreshing. Compromise can be reached between these two ideas. Semi-open border with 50/50 split of the Valley (or something like that). Allow the people to choose which part they would like to reside in. Everything happens under international observers, the UN and a joint Indo-Pak party.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> Why, have you withdrawn all your 'citizens and tribals' from P0K?
> 
> O wait. Its the usual brain barf.



Hey smarta$$, can you show me a 'tribal' in Kashmir?

Prove it to me, phulease!

You claim to have started the genocide in Kashmir in late 80s, right? So how many tribals have you killed/captured since then? Let's see how many you can bring up out of those 80K that you have massacred in Kashmir.

Also did you forget it was india that backed out from the 'troops withdrawal' BS!

Gosh, you have a thicker skull than i thought!


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> No they're not, and we know why.


No you don't. You do pretend to know though.



> In the rest of your usual feces-spillage...


You mean your arguments have finally lost their legs to stand on? Not that they had any.



> Compromise can be reached between these two ideas. Semi-open border with 50/50 split of the Valley (or something like that). Allow the people to choose which part they would like to reside in. Everything happens under international observers, the UN and a joint Indo-Pak party.


What is 'semi-open border'. Either border is closed or its open. Closed means, crossing the border would require permission, e.g. passport or visa. If border can be crossed without permit then it is open.

There can't be any compromise between open border and LoC=IB. It is an either/or choice. 

Your option is basically your previous option, dressed to look different.


----------



## Xeric

^^ That's it?


----------



## sur

Bezerk said:


> *How do YOU see the future of Kashmir?*


I see it becoming part of Pakistan..... around 2022 InshALLAH (Link)


----------



## Hellfire

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News
> PC: Sikh militancy resurfacing
> R Sedhuraman
> Tribune News Service
> 
> New Delhi, February 7
> Home Minister P Chidambaram today said there were signs of re-emergence of Sikh militancy, but sought to downplay the issue saying this was not a serious problem.
> 
> There are some signs of militant groups belonging to the Sikh community trying to raise their head in Punjab and Rajasthan, Chidambaram told reporters while addressing the media at the end of a day-long conference of Chief Ministers on internal security here.
> 
> He said Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot raised the problem of Sikh militants entering his state at the conference.
> 
> The Rajasthan Chief Minister did mention it. But in my assessment that is not a very acute problem The Director-Generals of Police of Punjab as well as Rajasthan assured me that they could handle the problem. The Haryana police chief also held similar views.........



residual and more on nuisance value .....

best ignored and only certain quarters who have nothing much to do are giving it any import

even Indian News Channel need to find things to sell their channels .... ever had the chance to watch India TV/Aaj Tak? It gives out more crap even on Pakistan than one can digest ......

its like giving credence to a group of few men in Texas wanting independence from US!!!!!

The issue is dead ..... and its not valid anymore ..... so dont derail the thread please


----------



## Hellfire

xeric said:


> Well you have started behaving now, guud for you.
> 
> Anywaz, the constitution that you talk of can be reverted with the same ease as it was enacted.
> 
> Dont tell me that your constitution is something that cant be altered, *if you can defy the entire UN resolution at your will and can amend your constitution to suite yourself, the same thing can be done again.*
> Moreover, the solution that you and some other propose (of joint control thingy) is acceptable only if a plebiscite is held both in Azad Kashmir and indian occupied kashmir.



for the highlighted part : Pakistan did the same ... it refused to follow condition one ... of removal of all military and paramiltary personnel inclusive of civillians of Pakistani origin from the whole area of J&K .... 

rest you know is history so lets not go that ways again 

as for azad kashmir - the issue is the change in the demographic composition there with active settlement of retired pakistani army regulars in the region which has changed the population content of the region ..... save for pockets in Norther Area/Gilgit where you have some unrest (insignificant for now) ... so the question of plebiscite is also defunct and non-workable

the only issue is bifurcation of the territories in line with present holdings ie recognition of the LC as IB and end to the whole debate

as for support for muslim brethren, straight forward, give them the option to stay put in India or give a safe passage to Pakistan, as they desire

Am sure that will be a very suitable option .... but not even GoP will want the population ONLY ....

in the end ... its the question of territory and the religious affinities and brotherhood are mere tools ..........


----------



## PAFAce

toxic_pus said:


> Hey dumba$$


Shows your class, really. Just a childish troll, that is all you are. An embarrassment to your own countrymen.


----------



## karan.1970

^^^



xeric said:


> Hey smarta$$



and is this the same???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

^^ It's funny how these guys rush saving others back.

And Karan, i think you also need lessons in inglish.


----------



## karan.1970

dabong1 said:


> No problem......lets get the NA-AJK-IOK to have a vote......either freedom...join pakistan or india.......ru guys willing to have a vote under the UN or international observers?



Its like a broken record... Not going to happen... India will not allow pakistan to dictate its policies in a state of India..A 60 year old resolution that even UN does not believe in finds credence only in Pakistan.. Instead of getting into the ideology of right and wrong, its pretty simple.. Pakistan can not enforce this... Rest of the world is not interested...

Pakistan realized this in 1965. Tried to execute a military solution and lost. What ever credibility Pakistan's stance of plebiscite existed before 1965 was lost along with the policitcal objectives of the war. And validation of that can be seen in the fact that since then there have been not a single UN resolution on the substantive aspects of the Jammu and Kashmir issue

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> ^^ It's funny how these guys rush saving others back.


Didnt I see 3 comments on TP's original??.. hmm...




xeric said:


> And Karan, i think you also need lessons in inglish.




I certainly do sir.. Inglish is a language I have not yet learnt..


But if you are referring to the meaning of smarta$$, then dumba$$ is as colloquial as smarta$$, isnt it??


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Its like a broken record... Not going to happen... India will not allow pakistan to dictate its policies in a state of India.




We already did, when you came running to us with _moo mai ram ram_, you forgot your country's U-turn on its rigid stance, boy.



> A 60 year old resolution that even UN does not believe in finds credence only in Pakistan.. Instead of getting into the ideology of right and wrong, its pretty simple.. Pakistan can not enforce this... Rest of the world is not interested...


Resolutions doesnt find discredibility in 'years'.

And it is only india that is not interested because it knows it would received a face-palm to it. The world still stands by the resolution, just by someone saying that new option must be sought on Kashmir issue doesnt exactly mean the world is 'not interested'. But still, you may keep on soothing your brains.



> Pakistan realized this in 1965. Tried to execute a military solution and lost. What ever credibility Pakistan's stance of plebiscite existed before 1965 was lost along with the policitcal objectives of the war. And validation of that can be seen in the fact that since then there have been not a single UN resolution on the substantive aspects of the Jammu and Kashmir issue


The first resolution stays orphaned and you are expecting more?

It is only this rigidness that india has been displaying that has always hindered the process. Just because india 'thinks' she can do whatever she likes, doesnt necessarily means that it is also right.

Dont worry, we wont be requiring another '65. Hint: india's 'friendship' offer.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> We already did, when you came running to us with _moo mai ram ram_, you forgot your country's U-turn on its rigid stance, boy.



The stance on Kashmir doesnt change. Post pakistan's multiple requests to resume talks and Pakistan govt's movement on prosecution of some of the 26/11 accused, India has agreed to reinitiate talks about terrorism and water dispute. I anyway dont see much hope for these talks as they will be more of a photo Op than anything else. 25th is really not that far off.. No point in speculating.. 

Indian offer of limited talks dismays Pakistan - Yahoo! News





xeric said:


> Resolutions doesnt find discredibility in 'years'.
> 
> And it is only india that is not interested because it knows it would received a face-palm to it. The world still stands by the resolution, just by someone saying that new option must be sought on Kashmir issue doesnt exactly mean the world is 'not interested'. But still, you may keep on soothing your brains.



While resolutions dont find discredibility in 'years' they do lose their practicality. By the way are there any other such resolutions (60 years old) that have neither been fulfilled not been followed up by subsequent resollutions by the UN

The end result does not change no matter how you interpret it. You can not enforce the change you want. You tried once and failed in 1965. Rest of the world is not supporting you to do that anymore beyond a lip service from some Arab countries when your dignitories go visiting.. 




xeric said:


> The first resolution stays orphaned and you are expecting more?



Dead is more like it. btw in UN, resolutions when not fulfilled are generally followed by stricted resolutions and then sometimes sanctions.. See Iran, Iraq, even Israel (221 UNSC resolutions since 1948)..Do you see any regarding Kashmir post 1954 critisizing India ?? Or any resolution at all after 1965?? 




xeric said:


> It is only this rigidness that india has been displaying that has always hindered the process. Just because india 'thinks' she can do whatever she likes, doesnt necessarily means that it is also right.


Xeric, unfortunately the perspectives of both the parties in this issue are with a phase lag of 180 degrees and you are expecting India to go the whole 180 degree shift. I have said it before .. will say it again.. either beat down india militarily or get off the horse of redrawing the boundaries because you will never get the 2nd without the 1st. Any thing inbetween these 2 extremes is definitely solvable by discussions, like the option suggested by All Green



xeric said:


> Dont worry, we wont be requiring another '65. Hint: india's 'friendship' offer.



I hope Pakistan has the far sightedness to accept it and India has the statesmanship to not withdraw it.. Will be very happy if it happens but am not too hopeful at this time...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EjazR

Those advocating a plebescite have still not tried to deliberate on the point I raised earlier. As per the opinion poll, a plebescite will deliver a fractured verdict, with the Pakistani side of GB and Kashmir option of Pakistan, Jammu and Ladakh option of India and the valley for Indepedance.

Then what will the plebescite achieve? Because of the higher population of Jammu and Ladakh combined (including their significant muslim population). It is quite likely that in just a Pakistan India poll, India would win. But does that mean we force the 5 million people living in GB and PAkistani Kashmir to join India? Similarly, can we force Jammu or Ladakh or GB or Azad Kashmir to become independant when they clearly don't want that?

And what about the majority opinion (even in the valley) that the J&K should be secular. Will the Hizb and similar groups or the likes of Geelani agree to that?

Let me quote again from the report summary on the constitutional solution survey


> Remarkably, when it came to the critical issues of the constitution the top priority (from a list of 29) was 'J and K should be a secular state' at 68&#37; 'essential or desirable'. *And although it will come as no surprise that 63% of Muslims in the Kashmir Valley reject the constitutional status quo of remaining with India as 'totally unacceptable' 69% of that same population also considered a merger with Pakistan to be 'totally unacceptable'. So a UN plebiscite that is limited to these two options (a priority for Muslims at 71% 'essential or desirable') can not solve the problem of Kashmir. *The only way forward is negotiation and that is what the people want. Not the corrupt street politics of sectarian division and communal strife.



I personally think that the most practical solution may not be the most ideal. We can't wait or delay to get the BEST solution if we can get a more practical solution pushed forward. And we also have to keep in mind that not everyone will be happy. Some will vehemently oppose it, but staekholders should be broadbased and confident enough to push the solution through.

The closest we have been to getting a solution was during Musharraf-Singh era. If we are to believe the media reports, it was only an announcement away. Then that would probably the most practical solution if both govt. had agreed to it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> The stance on Kashmir doesnt change. Post pakistan's multiple requests to resume talks and Pakistan govt's movement on prosecution of some of the 26/11 accused, India has agreed to reinitiate talks about terrorism and water dispute. I anyway dont see much hope for these talks as they will be more of a photo Op than anything else. 25th is really not that far off.. No point in speculating..
> 
> Indian offer of limited talks dismays Pakistan - Yahoo! News



We dont care if fails. That wouldnt be anything new. The only new thing this time being the U-turn by india.

You have been backing out of dialogues on one pretext or the other in the past, i dont mind that doing this time again.

For any dialouge to be successfyl there has to sincerity and seriousness. If the talks are just a drama, as this one is, there's no fun in initiating them. We would love to talk when issues like Water are also solved. Sticking to your side of the story and harping on your own tunes doesnt benefit us. i would once again repeat, the _bagal mai chori moo mai ram ram_ wont work this time. Either india should be dead serious or it else can carry on with it rigidness and we dont seem to be caring




> While resolutions dont find discredibility in 'years' they do lose their practicality. By the way are there any other such resolutions (60 years old) that have neither been fulfilled not been followed up by subsequent resollutions by the UN


So here we have a blatant refusal of UN resolutions. Is that your foreign policy or what? How shameless one needs to be to come out in open and declare that they give a tosh to an organizations decisions whom you want to give you a permanent seat?

i find it surprising that none of you have the neutrality to atleast admit that india has negated the resolution which indeed doesnt bore guud on a country's part.



> The end result does not change no matter how you interpret it. You can not enforce the change you want. You tried once and failed in 1965. Rest of the world is not supporting you to do that anymore beyond a lip service from some Arab countries when your dignitories go visiting..


Why dont you take back what you lost in 47-48?

The end result would ofcourse not change, you dream of eating Kashmir wont last much longer and you know that and that's why we see so much movement within your establishment.

You probably are mistaken that the world doesnt support us, you probably have not gone through: DAWN.COM | World | Why India came back to the negotiating table

It is this 'support' of the world in general and the US in particular that you have have come running up to us. You need to get out that little hole that you have cuddled up in and think big.



> Dead is more like it. btw in UN resolutions when not fulfilled are generally followed by stricted resolutions and then sometimes sanctions.. See Iran, Iraq, even Israel (221 UNSC resolutions since 1948)..Do you see any regarding Kashmir post 1954 critisizing India ?? Or any resolution at all after 1965??




So now you compare us with Iran, great!

No stricter resolutions have two reasons to it; one, UN still holds up its resolution and have not accepted the fringing amendment in your constitution; two, they know soon tides would turn when the US leaves Afg and something would automatically get cooked between the two countries.

So dont jump over your 'victory', it's only short lived.




> Xeric, unfortunately the perspectives of both the parties in this issue are with a phase lag of 180 degrees and you are expecting India to go the whole 180 degree shift. I have said it before .. will say it again.. either beat down india militarily or get off the horse of redrawing the boundaries because you will never get the 2nd without the 1st. Any thing inbetween these 2 extremes is definitely solvable by discussions, like the option suggested by All Green


Lolz...we'll beat up india the day Kashmir becomes an indian state, till now we and the world consider it a disputed area, but guess what, you are welcome you live in your la la land and believe that you have annexed the state.

As for the option, well i have already said that the many a options given by Musharraf are viable, we need to get on to any of them and move further, but this stubbornness wont let it work. With guys like you who suggest 'beat us and take it' i dont think we can ever reach an amicable solutions. So stop oscillating between the options. Either agree to have a compromise (both of us) or you are free to harp and yap about Pakistan attacking india and liberating Kashmir.




> I hope Pakistan has the far sightedness to accept it and India has the statesmanship to not withdraw it.. Will be very happy if it happens but am not too hopeful at this time...



The issue was sent to the background since 9/11 but guess what, it has resurfaced. Just wait and see. The signs have already started showing when india ate its own words and more would be shown with the passage of time. And we are waiting as the time elapses!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

Ejaz

Even before i read through your entire post i would like to say, just because the results would not be india's favor or what india have desired doesnt mean that the 'plebiscite would achieve nothing' You people have known from the start that a free and fair plebiscite would make you lose almost everything there, so what's the roar about?

i have given the reasons over that poll which none of you have countered, let me assure you in actuality the results would be different if not opposite. If you are actually so much for the people's voice and choice, let it happen, and the world would see it for itself.


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> So here we have a blatant refusal of UN resolutions. Is that your foreign policy or what? How shameless one needs to be to come out in open and declare that they give a tosh to an organizations decisions whom you want to give you a permanent seat?
> 
> i find it surprising that none of you have the neutrality to atleast admit that india has negated the resolution which indeed doesnt bore guud on a country's part.


Since UN is divine, here is what Gunnar Jarring, had to say about the resolutions, in his report to the Council in *1957*. This might give you an indication of what *karan* meant by 'lose their practicality'.

_'In dealing with the problem under discussion as extensively as I have during the period just ended, *I could not fail to take note for the concern expressed in connection with the changing political, economic and strategic factors surrounding the whole of the Kashmir question, together with the changing pattern of power relations in West and South Asia*.(para 20)

The Council will, furthermore, be aware of the fact that the *implementation of international agreements of an ad hoc character, which has not been achieved fairly speedily, may become progressively more difficult because the situation with which they were to cope has tended to change.* (para 21)'_

Also, since the resolutions are under Chapter VI, these are merely 'recommendatory' and is nowhere close to being 'binding'. Additionally, Pakistan's naked aggression in 1965 has officially made the resolutions defunct.


----------



## Xeric

^^ If it's actually for you to understand that a yap from J & K State Government means nothings more than a localized move and not an international decree, you must wonder why didnt the UN retract the resolution at the first place.


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> ...why didnt the UN retract the resolution at the first place.


I am not sure if there is any legal provision for UN to retract any resolution once it is passed. Or if there is one, under what circumstances can it be done.

Besides the resolutions have lost their practical application not their legal existence.


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> I am not sure if there is any legal provision for UN to retract any resolution once it is passed. Or if there is one, under what circumstances can it be done.
> 
> Besides the resolutions have lost their practical application not their legal existence.



Hmm..so now you are getting into legalities... i like that.

Ever wondered under what 'legality' did india over-ruled the damn resolution? The puppet J&K govt perhaps, right?


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Hmm..so now you are getting into legalities... i like that.
> 
> Ever wondered under what 'legality' did india over-ruled the damn resolution? The puppet J&K govt perhaps, right?


India didn't 'over-rule' any damn resolution. Not one. If you are by any chance referring to not holding of plebiscite, then it was not held because the preconditions to the plebiscite were not fulfilled.

Isn't it fun to go in circles.


----------



## Xeric

You should have also mentioned the reasons to why those conditions were not fulfilled, perhaps it would get you out of the circles.

Hint: india didnt agree over the number of troops, whereas it suggested to stay there with its boots and bought this part of the resolution hook, line and sinker!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> You should have also mentioned the reasons to why those conditions were not fulfilled, perhaps it would get you out of the circles.
> 
> Hint: india didnt agree over the number of troops, whereas it suggested to stay there with its boots and bought this part of the resolution hook, line and sinker!


Firstly it is irrelevant why those conditions were not fulfilled in the context of determining whether not holding of plebiscite was a 'violation' of UN resolution. The fact is that the conditions were not fulfilled. Hence there was no 'over-ruling' or 'violation' of UN resolutions.

Secondly, it is called negotiation, not dictation. India was within rights not accept what India perceived to be detrimental to its interest. Pakistan did the same.

Thirdly, regarding that generous 'hint' of yours, what you don't know is that even Pakistan didn't agree to the numbers when it mattered. While India demanded that after the demilitarization, she should be allowed to retain 21,000 of her troops together with armour, and Azad Kashmir should be left with a civil force of 4,000 troops of which 2,000 should be unarmed, Pakistan on the other hand demanded that 4,000 troops shall remain on either side, but agreed a 'slight disparity in favour of India'. (_refer Dr Graham's 5th Report_)

Pakistan agreed much later when she had already reinforced Azad Kashmir force.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> We dont care if fails. That wouldnt be anything new. The only new thing this time being the U-turn by india.
> 
> You have been backing out of dialogues on one pretext or the other in the past, i dont mind that doing this time again.
> 
> For any dialouge to be successfyl there has to sincerity and seriousness. If the talks are just a drama, as this one is, there's no fun in initiating them. We would love to talk when issues like Water are also solved. Sticking to your side of the story and harping on your own tunes doesnt benefit us. i would once again repeat, the _bagal mai chori moo mai ram ram_ wont work this time. Either india should be dead serious or it else can carry on with it rigidness and we dont seem to be caring


So this time around IMO there will be no holding back on any issue from India except Kashmir.. I mean IWT, Saichin, Sir Creek etc will all be on the table along with cross border terrorism from Pakistan. If Pakistan will be willing to proceed with the agenda, the talks will move forward, else they will fizzle out but at least deny Pakistan the high moral ground of showing that India is not accepting its offers of talks.. On U turn, its really not an ego war.. The only thing that should be prime is the national interest.. They dont call Diplomacy the patriotic art of lying for one's country for nothing..



xeric said:


> So here we have a blatant refusal of UN resolutions. Is that your foreign policy or what?


On Kashmir, Yes



xeric said:


> How shameless one needs to be to come out in open and declare that they give a tosh to an organizations decisions whom you want to give you a permanent seat?


Anything for national interest. C'mon Xeric, if one can die for his country, being shameless is not even in the same league



xeric said:


> i find it surprising that none of you have the neutrality to atleast admit that india has negated the resolution which indeed doesnt bore guud on a country's part.


How many times have I said in this thread itself that India and its leaders have negated this resolution from 1954 onwards. The chapter was closed anyway 1965



xeric said:


> Why dont you take back what you lost in 47-48?


Because we understand that its niether practical nor desirable at this time. It will result in more national loss (can lead to nuclear war as well) than is acceptable. The day Pakistan realizes the same, the problems in S Asia will get over.. Dont see hope for that in near future though..






xeric said:


> The end result would ofcourse not change, you dream of eating Kashmir wont last much longer and you know that and that's why we see so much movement within your establishment.


We dont eat our states.. As far as movement is concerned, we are a very dynamic country.. Something or the other is always on the move.. Some time good, some time bad



xeric said:


> You probably are mistaken that the world doesnt support us, you probably have not gone through: DAWN.COM | World | Why India came back to the negotiating table
> 
> It is this 'support' of the world in general and the US in particular that you have have come running up to us. You need to get out that little hole that you have cuddled up in and think big.


Yeah! Indian media is unreliable and I will take a report in Dawn as an indiacation of world's support to your lost cause??
Well, here is the view from the other side of the border

US ties India-Pak talks to Afghanistan - India - The Times of India

I will replicate a statement from US (who supports you as you say on Kashmir)

_While some US analysts have suggested resolving the Kashmir issue is central to US success in Afghanistan, Holbrooke declined to endorse the line of thinking, in keeping with the counter-view that Kashmir was just a symptom of Pakistan dysfunction, not the cause. Asked how important Kashmir is for reducing tension between 
India and Pakistan, Holbrooke dismissed the issue from the US agenda while declining to even mention the K-word at a time when Pakistan is poised to put it back on the front-burner. 

''On the specific you talked about, we are not going to negotiate or mediate on that issue. And I'm going to try to keep my record and not even mention it by name, Holbrooke said, adding, But I want to be clear that anything that the two countries do to reduce tensions or improve relations will be something we would applaud and encourage. 

But we are not going to act as intermediaries between Islamabad and New Delhi. That is not what we are here to do. I'm not just talking about myself, Holbrooke maintained, suggesting that it was broadly the policy of the Obama administration and a continuation of the Bush White Houses policy of not highlighting the Kashmir issue_




xeric said:


> So now you compare us with Iran, great!
> 
> No stricter resolutions have two reasons to it; one, UN still holds up its resolution and have not accepted the fringing amendment in your constitution; two, they know soon tides would turn when the US leaves Afg and something would automatically get cooked between the two countries.


No I dont compare you with Iran at all. It is a much larger economy. The point was with examples that when a UNSC resolution is not executed and the UN thinks its sufficiently important and the situation is not right, UN follows up with multiple resolutions (stricter every time) to enforce the original resolution which you do not find in this case. I am not saying that makes the 1948 resolution defunct, but it certainly shows how the world percieves it..




xeric said:


> So dont jump over your 'victory', it's only short lived.


If you say so.. Let me know when its life is over..



xeric said:


> Lolz...we'll beat up india the day Kashmir becomes an indian state, till now we and the world consider it a disputed area, but guess what, you are welcome you live in your la la land and believe that you have annexed the state.


all the best for that...




xeric said:


> As for the option, well i have already said that the many a options given by Musharraf are viable, we need to get on to any of them and move further, but this stubbornness wont let it work. With guys like you who suggest 'beat us and take it' i dont think we can ever reach an amicable solutions. So stop oscillating between the options. Either agree to have a compromise (both of us) or you are free to harp and yap about Pakistan attacking india and liberating Kashmir.


And most of Musharraf's solutions did not require the boundaries to be redrawn. And those are the kind of solutions that will work. And my statement of beat us and take it only applies where you talk of plebiscite and Pakistan taking Indian part of Kashmir. Compromise is always good, but by definition it has to be both ways.. Just like India is not asking Pakistan to return the areas captured by it in 1947-48, Pakistan should also forget about territory transfer and focus on how given the territorial stand of both nations, situation can be made better for the residents of the state..




xeric said:


> The issue was sent to the background since 9/11 but guess what, it has resurfaced. Just wait and see. The signs have already started showing when india ate its own words and more would be shown with the passage of time. And we are waiting as the time elapses!



pipe dreams...


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> Firstly it is irrelevant why those conditions were not fulfilled in the context of determining whether not holding of plebiscite was a 'violation' of UN resolution. The fact is that the conditions were not fulfilled. Hence there was no 'over-ruling' or 'violation' of UN resolutions.


Not exactly.

i am more interested in the forced/unilateral/illegal accession of the State by india by just fiddling with its constitutions, as if the world was run the the indian constitution.

That's what we consider as being 'over-ruled'. How can you take a decision once we all (to include the world) recognize the issue as DISPUTED?! Jungle raj?



> Secondly, it is called negotiation, not dictation. India was within rights not accept what India perceived to be detrimental to its interest. Pakistan did the same.


Pakistan didnt exactly do the same. Just because you wanted to keep your bite tightened on that part of Kashmir sure would imply that you wanted to uphold your interests, even at the cost of over-ruling the resolution.



> Thirdly, regarding that generous 'hint' of yours, what you don't know is that even Pakistan didn't agree to the numbers when it mattered. While India demanded that after the demilitarization, she should be allowed to retain 21,000 of her troops together with armour, and Azad Kashmir should be left with a civil force of 4,000 troops of which 2,000 should be unarmed, Pakistan on the other hand demanded that 4,000 troops shall remain on either side, but agreed a 'slight disparity in favour of India'. (_refer Dr Graham's 5th Report_)
> 
> Pakistan agreed much later when she had already reinforced Azad Kashmir force.





A civil forces against well armed regular troops. That's where common sense comes into play. We all know what the demands were on both the sides, but then one needs to be careful of not crossing the threshold of absurdness and idiocity and not to present nonsensical and cockeyed demands.


----------



## Xeric

*I will replicate a statement from US (who supports you as you say on Kashmir)*

^^ Allow me yo skip the remainder of your yapping and stick to this one line of yours. Well, in actuality the US just exempted itself from becoming a mediator between Pakistan and india and you think we have lost the support.

Too much extrapolation, i would say.

Halbrook's statement doesnt suggest that india can over-rule the UN resolution, instead he talks about the connection between Kashmir and Afg (as all indians have been connecting the two, as if the day US would leave Afg, all the talibans would pack up and rush towards srinagar..), he indeed tells us that Kashmir has nothing to do with Afg and india should get over with the obsession, no Pathan is going to Kashmir as there are already enough local freedom fighters to make india kneel.

BTW, Karan, you missed this statement from the US:

Not to mediate on Kashmir issue: US - GEO.tv

"We understand the importance of the Kashmir issue to both Pakistan and India, and it is something that we do discuss with both countries," state department spokesman PJ Crowley told reporters Thursday when asked to comment on such a suggestion by Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari.

"But obviously, at the end of a process that has to be something that is resolved ultimately between Pakistan and India with the *active involvement of the people of Kashmir."*


Perhaps he was again referring to the right of self-determination a.k.a UN resolution?!!


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

A quick blurb on the issue of 'constitutional restrictions' that prevent India from applying any meaningful solutions to resolving the dispute - India still officially claims all of J&K as its territory. Chidambaram just reiterated that.

That being the case, for those who argue that the constitution is an obstacle, the Indian constitution would not allow India to accept the status quo as a solution either. So the constitution as a pretext for not holding a plebiscite is a poor excuse, since the constitution would only be satisfied if India were able to militarily wrest all of J&K from Pakistan or Pakistan just hand it over.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> *I will replicate a statement from US (who supports you as you say on Kashmir)*
> 
> ^^ Allow me yo skip the remainder of your yapping and stick to this one line of yours. Well, in actuality the US just exempted itself from becoming a mediator between Pakistan and india and you think we have lost the support.
> 
> Too much extrapolation, i would say.


A country comes out and says that we will not interfere in the issue to the extent that we will not even utter the word Kashmir and you think you still have their support.. Dont know who is extrapolating. .



xeric said:


> Halbrook's statement doesnt suggest that india can over-rule the UN resolution, instead he talks about the connection between Kashmir and Afg (as all indians have been connecting the two, as if the day US would leave Afg, all the talibans would pack up and rush towards srinagar..), he indeed tells us that Kashmir has nothing to do with Afg and india should get over with the obsession, no Pathan is going to Kashmir as there are already enough local freedom fighters to make india kneel.


Talk about extrapolating... you converted this to above
_Holbrooke declined to endorse the line of thinking, in keeping with the counter-view that Kashmir was just a symptom of Pakistan dysfunction, not the cause. Asked how important Kashmir is for reducing tension between 
India and Pakistan, Holbrooke dismissed the issue from the US agenda _



xeric said:


> BTW, Karan, you missed this statement from the US:
> 
> 
> Perhaps he was again referring to the right of self-determination a.k.a UN resolution?!!




We think he was refering to the participation in the electoral mandate of National and state elections ..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

*We think he was refering to the participation in the electoral mandate of National and state elections *

Another of your la la land stories nothing else. God! more inglish!


----------



## karan.1970

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> A quick blurb on the issue of 'constitutional restrictions' that prevent India from applying any meaningful solutions to resolving the dispute - India still officially claims all of J&K as its territory. Chidambaram just reiterated that.
> 
> That being the case, for those who argue that the constitution is an obstacle, the Indian constitution would not allow India to accept the status quo as a solution either. So the constitution as a pretext for not holding a plebiscite is a poor excuse, since the constitution would only be satisfied if India were able to militarily wrest all of J&K from Pakistan or Pakistan just hand it over.



A very good point Agno.. However a small issue with the same..

Treatment of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and Northern areas is like a territory lost in war. There is not much India can do about it short of waging a war. And the constitution does not require the GoI to continuously wage a war to win back lost territory. 

However it does prohibits the govt to handover a part of existing territory to another country or hold polls that do not comply with the writ of election commission of India.. 

Having said that, as I said in my earlier post too , "Constitution can always be ammended but going by the sentiments in India, any political party that even mentions the amendment to give away territory, will get lynched publically by the population". 

Giving up Pakistan Occupied Kashmir as a part of the solution will be no cake walk either for the GoI with opposition baying for their blood, just as the same problem will be there for GoP if they go down the path of giving up their 60 year old Kashmir policy. But there in is the difference between Political risk and Political suicide.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> *We think he was refering to the participation in the electoral mandate of National and state elections *
> 
> Another of your la la land stories nothing else. God! more inglish!



As promised, in response to a rant







talk to the hand


----------



## Xeric

^^ Gosh! i never knew inglish was racist!!

i never knew you are one of those who signed the petition against the _hindu jihaniyat_ comment by Asif

See i told ya, you seriously need lessons in inglish, you proved that again.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> ^^ Gosh! i never knew inglish was racist!!
> 
> i never knew you are one of those who signed the petition against the _hindu jihaniyat_ comment by Asif
> 
> See i told ya, you seriously need lessons in inglish, you proved that again.



Ok.. My bad.. didnt know about Inglish project.. 

Though in New England area, Connecticut Inglish is a term at times used derogatorily for the incorrect English spoken by Indians..


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Not exactly.
> 
> i am more interested in the forced/unilateral/illegal accession of the State by india by just fiddling with its constitutions, as if the world was run the the indian constitution.
> 
> That's what we consider as being 'over-ruled'. How can you take a decision once we all (to include the world) recognize the issue as DISPUTED?! Jungle raj?


Pathetic attempt to deflect. What you wrote earlier was


> You should have also mentioned the reasons to why those conditions were not fulfilled, perhaps it would get you out of the circles.





> Pakistan didnt exactly do the same. Just because you wanted to keep your bite tightened on that part of Kashmir sure would imply that you wanted to uphold your interests, even at the cost of over-ruling the resolution.




On another thread AM is arguing that the whole thing was subject to negotiation and Pakistan had the right to be satisfied before making any move. Given that Pakistan hasn't made any move till date, it would appear, to a person with even average intellect, that Pakistan wasn't satisfied. And continues to be not satisfied. 'At the cost of over-ruling the resolution'.





> A civil forces against well armed regular troops. That's where common sense comes into play. We all know what the demands were on both the sides, but then one needs to be careful of not crossing the threshold of absurdness and idiocity and not to present nonsensical and cockeyed demands.




You have no clue what you are talking about. Do you?

_'Pending a final solution the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commission.'_ (Part II, A.3 of Truce Agreement)

The demand that India made was in respect of 'the local authorities' with respect to which Pakistan was supposed to have no _locus standi_. I suggest you start reading the UN resolutions, explanatory notes to the resolutions, letters between commission and the both countries and finally the reports.


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> Ejaz
> 
> Even before i read through your entire post i would like to say, just because the results would not be india's favor or what india have desired doesnt mean that the 'plebiscite would achieve nothing' You people have known from the start that a free and fair plebiscite would make you lose almost everything there, so what's the roar about?


Well I'm not sure if you have read my port afterwards. What I said was the people in the valley (about 5.5million - the total J&K population is 11million) have around 70% populace who desire an INDEPENDENT J&K. That means Pakistan will ALSO lose its part of J&K including Northern Areas. Is the GoP ready to accept this? Obviously not. Since it was the GoP in the 1948 sponsored resolution for the plebiscite that asked for the removal of the independence option citing Mountbattens plan to ask all kingdoms in British India to choose either of the two dominions India or Pakistan. 
More recently it was Pakitani based groups that assassinated secular pro-independence groups and leaders of the JKLF to undermine the pro-Independence group.



xeric said:


> i have given the reasons over that poll which none of you have countered, let me assure you in actuality the results would be different if not opposite. If you are actually so much for the people's voice and choice, let it happen, and the world would see it for itself.



I did not address you specifically but I did mention that if you think this is prejudiced, you can check the history of the organisation. They have done peace polls in many conflict areas. And for comparison check out the Israel Palestine poll.

Moreover, there are the UNHCR reports, the recent EU parliament report on Kashmir all that indicates the similar findings. I can give you anecdotal info as well of what many of Kashmiri neighbors and friends have said to me that confirm a similar on ground situation as these reports and polls mention. 

Like I mentioned earlier, we can't deny consultation and discussion to the Kashmiri people in the political process to resolve this issue. But they should be able to decide this in a honest environment free from fear and also with full knowledge of what is the respective stands of GoP and GoI. Because, there is a small but significant section who don't even know that GoP is against Independence of Kashmir and that its not an option in the plebiscite either. They are thus made fools by bested separatists politicians who take advantage of their ignorance.


----------



## thebrownguy

metalfalcon said:


> Read it again "He said he will never drop the demand for Azaadi"



just a question .. wat do u think .. by "azaadi" does he mean joining pakistan?... be honest..


----------



## Abhiras

its ironic that Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is called Azad Kashmir


----------



## Omar1984

Abhiras said:


> its ironic that Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is called Azad Kashmir



Unlike Inda Occupied Kashmir, I dont see any protests or anyone demanding to get away from the country their land is made a territory of in Azad Kashmir.

You can not compare the things that happen in India Occupied Kashmir to Azad Kashmir. Almost everyone in India Occupied Kashmir want either independence or want Kashmir to merge with Pakistan. In Azad Kashmir, no one wants to be part of India most want to stay with Pakistan and a few want total independence.


----------



## super_star

Omar1984 said:


> Unlike Inda Occupied Kashmir, I dont see any protests or anyone demanding to get away from the country their land is made a territory of in Azad Kashmir.
> 
> You can not compare the things that happen in India Occupied Kashmir to Azad Kashmir. Almost everyone in India Occupied Kashmir want either independence or want Kashmir to merge with Pakistan. In Azad Kashmir, no one wants to be part of India most want to stay with Pakistan and a few want total independence.



Thats your perception. I heard that there is no democratic election to choose the leader in P O K. Please conduct free and fair election under no media restriction and let us know.


----------



## Abhiras

Omar1984 said:


> ..................................... want Kashmir to merge with Pakistan.



huh?? how can you think that,,i do not think even 1% kashmiris of india want to join pakistan

There are 2 main parts of Jammu & kashmir(excluding leh & laddakh region which is accepted as pro-indian) 
about same (roughly 50% lives in jammu & 50% in kashmir valley)
1.Jammu region -almost everyone is pro indian..this region is influenced by indian punjab as it share border with it.{i m from punjab & i have visited this region many times ,some of my relatives lives there}

2.Kashmir valley region - some want to be united with india & some are asking for independence,,,,,,,,,but one thing is sure they do not want terrorism
{{{{A staggering 82 per cent of the people in Kashmir support a Hizbul Mujahideen-type ceasefire while 70 per cent want Pakistan to stop supporting terrorism in the valley, indicating a significant shift in Kashmiri peoples attitude towards Islamabad. }}}}


----------



## PAFAce

super_star said:


> Thats your perception. I heard that there is no democratic election to choose the leader in P O K. Please conduct free and fair election under no media restriction and let us know.


"You heard", that says it all. If I were you, I'd go read-up on the elections in 1987 in IOK, and every election since then. Don't throw stones when you live in a glass house, buddy.



Abhiras said:


> huh?? how can you think that,,i do not think even 1&#37; kashmiris of india want to join pakistan


Then I doub't that you know any Kashmiris at all. What you think is very different from reality, maybe you should research some opinion polls or, better still, actually meet people from the area.



> There are 2 main parts of Jammu & kashmir(excluding leh & laddakh region which is accepted as pro-indian)
> about same (roughly 50% lives in jammu & 50% in kashmir valley)


The Valley is the most populated region of Kashmir, outnumbering the populations of Ladakh, Jammu and Azad Kashmir. I is also the only Muslim majority area in Kashmir, making it the _only_ Muslim majority state of India. If that weren't the case, India would have absolutely no hesitations conducting a referendum on their side of Kashmir.



> 2.Kashmir valley region - some want to be united with india & some are asking for independence,,,,,,,,,but one thing is sure they do not want terrorist


Extremely ill-researched data. The Valley is pretty much unanimously against Indian occupation. The question has always been, merge with Pakistan or become an independent country. Apart from that, all other parts of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir are happy with the status quo.

Also, nobody wants terrorists. However, there is a difference between those who fight for their own freedom and those who fight to impose a twisted ideology on a people. By your definitions, your ancestors and my ancestors were also terrorists, because they resisted the British and fought for a free India/Pakistan. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't think my ancestors were terrorists.

Lastly, the only reason the people took up arms is because they tried the peaceful way for 40 years and got nowhere. In 1987 the militancy started, the struggle for freedom began in 1947. Do the math.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## super_star

PAFAce said:


> "You heard", that says it all. If I were you, I'd go read-up on the elections in 1987 in IOK, and every election since then. Don't throw stones when you live in a glass house, buddy.
> 
> 
> Then I doub't that you know any Kashmiris at all. What you think is very different from reality, maybe you should research some opinion polls or, better still, actually meet people from the area.
> 
> 
> The Valley is the most populated region of Kashmir, outnumbering the populations of Ladakh, Jammu and Azad Kashmir. I is also the only Muslim majority area in Kashmir, making it the _only_ Muslim majority state of India. If that weren't the case, India would have absolutely no hesitations conducting a referendum on their side of Kashmir.
> 
> 
> Extremely ill-researched data. The Valley is pretty much unanimously against Indian occupation. The question has always been, merge with Pakistan or become an independent country. Apart from that, all other parts of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir are happy with the status quo.
> 
> Also, nobody wants terrorists. However, there is a difference between those who fight for their own freedom and those who fight to impose a twisted ideology on a people. By your definitions, your ancestors and my ancestors were also terrorists, because they resisted the British and fought for a free India/Pakistan. I don't know about you, but I certainly don't think my ancestors were terrorists.
> 
> Lastly, the only reason the people took up arms is because they tried the peaceful way for 40 years and got nowhere. In 1987 the militancy started, the struggle for freedom began in 1947. Do the math.



Where is the independent opinion poll or election in P O K? can you point some links.


----------



## PAFAce

super_star said:


> Where is the independent opinion poll or election in P O K? can you point some links.


There is no such place as P O K. The people of Azad Kashmir got what they wanted in 1948, didn't you ever "hear" that? The question you should be asking is, did the people of the Valley ever get what _they_ wanted? The answer will be inconvenient. In fact, if every Indian devoted even 1&#37; of the energy spent on reinforcing theirdenial to actually _understanding_ the will of the people of the Valley, this thread would be useless.

Thanks. Now read the rest of my post above and stop trying to come up with "smart" answers.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## super_star

PAFAce said:


> There is no such place as P O K. The people of Azad Kashmir got what they wanted in 1948, didn't you ever "hear" that? The question you should be asking is, did the people of the Valley ever get what _they_ wanted? The answer will be inconvenient. In fact, if every Indian devoted even 1% of the energy spent on reinforcing theirdenial to actually _understanding_ the will of the people of the Valley, this thread would be useless.
> 
> Thanks. Now read the rest of my post above and stop trying to come up with "smart" answers.



I am not smart. you smartly avoiding the question.

here the election process in p o k.

despite the official categorisation of P o K as a "disputed" area, candidates are required to sign an affidavit of allegiance to Kashmir's accession to Pakistan. This is a mixed curse for pro-independence parties such as the Amanullah Khan faction of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front.

The Hindu : Opinion / Leader Page Articles : What the elections in Azad Kashmir mean

now don't ban me for asking question.


----------



## Cynic Waheed

I hope I manage to get my message across without aggravating and provoking any one. Having come across quite a few Kashmir people, I was surprised when the majority of them would not even want to be called Pakistani. I mean over here they would say I am from Kashmir instead of Pakistan or India. What really pissed me off was that we fought three wars for them and this is the sort of response we get back from them. I don't know if it is merely due to the prevailing conditions from the past half century but its sad. Particularly, because we have given Kashmiri's exceptional rights in our country. They even get to chose their own Prime minister in the Azad area. And they should not forget that Pak has suffered a lot due to the 'K' problem right from the time of its birth! And therefore I naturally expect the Kashmir people to at least understand the repercussions that we have had to face due to our stance.

I dont know what the future of Kashmir will be. But I know it s strategically very important for both nuclear powers and therefore I don't see it becoming completely Independent somehow. It could become a demilitarized zone and maybe come under some sort of shared policing by both India and Pak. But if Kashmiri people see it as a seprate country altogether and want to get it. I feel it is going to amazingly difficult or perhaps next to impossible given its geo-political and its strategic importance!


----------



## PAFAce

super_star said:


> I am not smart. you smartly avoiding the question.
> here the election process in p o k.
> 
> despite the official categorisation of P o K as a "disputed" area, candidates are required to sign an affidavit of allegiance to Kashmir's accession to Pakistan. This is a mixed curse for pro-independence parties such as the Amanullah Khan faction of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front.
> 
> now don't ban me for asking question.


This is not BR or Indian Defence Forum or some other cheapskate web forum, so don't worry, you won't get banned for asking questions. You might, however, get a warning for repeating the same questions that've been answered on this very thread time and again. If you take the time (which I'm guessing you won't), you'll find the answers on the previous pages.

Also, all pro-independence parties in IOK agree on one key thing, that the Valley must separate from India. This is why the APHC includes both pro-Pakistan and pro-Independence parties, because they agree on the main point. Since India has continually denied any hint of a referendum or plebiscite in the region, even the pro-Independence parties have agreed to temporary accession to Pakistan, at which point, a plebiscite shall be held to determine the fate of the Valley. This solution was proposed by Yasin Malik and some others, and is accepted by many of the pro-independence parties. However, all this is just semantics as long as there is massive Indian troop presence in Kashmir and the forceful occupation continues.

I'm tired of repeating this, so I'll say it for the final time. There is one sentiment that is pretty much unanimous in the Valley, they _do not_ want to remain a part of India. What's so difficult to understand about that?

Hearsay will get you nowhere.


Cynic Waheed said:


> I hope I manage to get my message across without aggravating and provoking any one. Having come across quite a few Kashmir people, I was surprised when the majority of them would not even want to be called Pakistani. I mean over here they would say I am from Kashmir instead of Pakistan or India. What really pissed me off was that we fought three wars for them and this is the sort of response we get back from them.


That is not an uncommon reply from Kashmiris who've lived under Indian rule, I have experienced the same. However, you will find that anytime you meet a Kashmiri from the Valley, they will have a soft spot for Pakistan _exactly_ because of the fact that we've fought wars with them (we're not saints, we did it for our own reasons). See, the Kashmiris don't owe us their allegiance, they are free to choose their allegiance as they see fit. This is exactly why they want to separate from India, because the Indians want to force them to swear allegiance to them, something they will absolutely never do. As Pakistanis, we must realize that Kashmiris have the right to choose what is best for them. Until very recently, the opinions were massively pro-Pakistan, but right now independence seems more popular, and that's fine because that is their right. However, rest assured, if forced to choose between India and Pakistan, the Valley will overwhelmingly choose the latter and be very happy with that.

I've met more people from IOK than from Azad Kashmir in my lifetime. Those from Azad Kashmir have always identified themselves as Pakistanis, and I've never met a Pakistani Kashmiri who wasn't patriotic (there's quite a few of them at my Uni). People from IOK, on the other hand, rarely ever identify themselves as Indians in my experience.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## super_star

PAFAce said:


> This is not BR or Indian Defence Forum or some other cheapskate web forum, so don't worry, you don't get banned for asking questions. You might, however, get banned for repeating the same shiz that's been answered on this very thread time and again. If you take the time (which you won't), you'll find it.
> 
> Also, all pro-independence parties agree on one thing, that there must be secession from India. This is why the APHC includes both pro-Pakistan and pro-Independence parties. Since India has continually denied any hint of a referendum or plebiscite in the region, even the pro-Independence parties have agreed to temporary accession to Pakistan, at which point, Pakistan will hold a plebiscite. This solution was proposed by Yasin Malik and some others. However, all this is void as long as there is massive Indian troop presence and the occupation continues.
> 
> I'm tired of repeating this. There is one sentiment that is pretty much unanimous in the Valley, they _do not_ want to remain a part of India. What's so difficult to understand about that?



Please hold plebiscite first in pakistan part of kashmir and show the result to the world. That will put pressure on india. If you people are concerned about kashmir. 

What is your answer is that india also doing the same thing without answering the question  

Give me the honest answer why candidates are required to sign an affidavit of allegiance to Kashmir's accession to Pakistan for election?


----------



## Cynic Waheed

PAFAce said:


> That is not an uncommon reply from Kashmiris who've lived under Indian rule, I have experienced the same. However, you will find that anytime you meet a Kashmiri from the Valley, they will have a soft spot for Pakistan _exactly_ because of the fact that we've fought wars with them (we're not saints, we did it for our own reasons). See, the Kashmiris don't owe us their allegiance, they are free to choose their allegiance as they see fit. This is exactly why they want to separate from India, because the Indians want to force them to swear allegiance to them, something they will absolutely never do. As Pakistanis, we must realize that Kashmiris have the right to choose what is best for them. Until very recently, the opinions were massively pro-Pakistan, but right now independence seems more popular, and that's fine because that is their right. However, rest assured, if forced to choose between India and Pakistan, the Valley will overwhelmingly choose the latter and be very happy with that.
> 
> I've met more people from IOK than from Azad Kashmir in my lifetime. Those from Azad Kashmir have always identified themselves as Pakistanis, and I've never met a Pakistani Kashmiri who wasn't patriotic (there's quite a few of them at my Uni). People from IOK, on the other hand, rarely ever identify themselves as Indians in my experience.



umm .. I was reffering to the Kashmiri people from AK! My sis in law is from there so u can imagine they are family to me. Where u may be correct that a significant number of Azad Kashmir calls themselves as Pakistani and are proud of it. Still there are an equal number of Pakistani Kashmiris who hate being called Pakistanis. Esp the ones who have got split families on both side of the LOC! I am not against there right of independence if that is what they want. I just find it extremely heart breaking when I hear people say. particularly because of our immense involvement and support that we have been providing them all along! frankly, sometimes I feel betrayed!!


----------



## policecontrolroom

> There is no such place as P O K. The people of Azad Kashmir got what they wanted in 1948, didn't you ever "hear" that? The question you should be asking is, did the people of the Valley ever get what they wanted? The answer will be inconvenient. In fact, if every Indian devoted even 1&#37; of the energy spent on reinforcing theirdenial to actually understanding the will of the people of the Valley, this thread would be useless.
> 
> Thanks. Now read the rest of my post above and stop trying to come up with "smart" answers.




Azad Kashmir was created within two months of Pakistan&#8217;s independence with high expectations. Nestled in the mountainous western region that abuts the vale of Kashmir, it forms an archer&#8217;s bow that is about 100 miles long and about 20-40 miles wide. 

The Pakistani security elite hoped that an arrow fired from the bow would bring about the instant liberation of the vale of Kashmir from Indian occupation. The first arrow was fired almost within days of creation. 

It plunged the entire region of Kashmir into armed conflict. Fourteen months later, a ceasefire sponsored by the United Nations took effect on Jan 1, 1949. The ceasefire line remained stationary despite several attempts to move it. But after the 1971 war which saw the secession of East Pakistan, it was renamed the Line-of-Control (LoC). That militaristic designation persists to this day since the line which separates the two Kashmirs has not been formalised as an international border. 

&#8216;Azad&#8217; means free and Azad Kashmir was supposed to serve as a model state whose liberty and freedom would inspire rebellion in Indian-administered Kashmir. That did not happen for several reasons. Constitutionally, Azad Kashmir is not a part of Pakistan. But neither is it an independent state. For its entire 62-year history, it has depended on Pakistan for its economic and political survival. It does not even issue its own postage stamps. 

Because Islamabad has always exercised its claim on the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, Azad Kashmir is not counted as a fifth province of Pakistan. But for all practical purposes, Muzaffarabad lives under Islamabad&#8217;s shadow. Its first government was established on Oct 24, 1947 with Sardar Mohammed Ibrahim as president. On Nov 3, 1947, Azad Kashmir sought unsuccessfully to join the United Nations as a member state. 

In March 1949, after the dust had settled along the ceasefire line, Azad Kashmir signed a power-sharing arrangement with the Government of Pakistan ceding all authority related to defence, foreign affairs, refugees and the plebiscite to Pakistan. 

Pakistan created a Ministry for Kashmir Affairs to look after its newest asset. However, as events would show, the ministry was soon preoccupied with influencing political direction in Azad Kashmir. Not surprisingly, the ministry&#8217;s directives were not always well received by Azad Kashmiris. At times, they were met with stiff resistance. 

In 1955, Pakistan declared martial law in some parts of Azad Kashmir to suppress street violence triggered by the Kashmir Act. In 1957, Pakistan resorted to police action to quell a public meeting that was seeking direct action to create a united and liberated Kashmir. In 1961, President Ayub Khan carried out indirect elections in Azad Kashmir through a Basic Democracies Ordinance which legally only applied to Pakistan, further straining ties with the Azad Kashmiris. 

Subsequently, faced with Islamabad&#8217;s dominance in their day-to-day affairs, several Azad Kashmiri leaders started a movement for liberating Indian-held Kashmir not for Pakistan but for creating a separate Kashmiri state. This further aggravated ties with Pakistan. While all this was happening, Jammu and Kashmir was inducted into the Indian union. 

In 1965, the Pakistani army launched a covert war inside Indian Kashmir seeking to instigate a popular rebellion. This arrow too missed its target. Instead, it enraged India which launched a strong counter-offensive along the international border with West Pakistan. 

Under the weight of the Indian elephant, the Pakistani military hastily called of its operations in Kashmir. The war ended in an UN-brokered ceasefire along the international border with minimal changes in the Kashmiri line. After the war, Pakistan lost its urge to light a fire across the Line of Control (LoC). Matters changed in 1979 when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and the Pakistani military, with US and Saudi assistance, began training legions of Mujahideen to evict the godless communists. 

After a bruised and battered Red Army pulled out of Kabul in 1989, Indian Jammu and Kashmir found itself in the grip of a large-scale revolt. Whether this was a purely indigenous movement or a corollary to events in Kabul continues to enrich scholarly volumes. 

Regardless of the cause, the uprising in the vale provided the Kashmir hawks in Pakistan&#8217;s security elite yet another opportunity to press on with their objective. They reactivated their bases in Azad Kashmir and once again decided to fire arrows into Indian Jammu and Kashmir. Soon, &#8216;freedom fighters,&#8217; armed and trained allegedly by the Pakistan Army, were rolling across in droves across the LoC. 

Azad Kashmir was again in the cross-hairs of armed conflict. Against this backdrop, Pakistan under Gen Ziaul Haq decided to legally separate the geographically much larger Northern Areas of Gilgit and Baltistan from Azad Kashmir. This caused almost as much consternation in the latter as it did in India. The separation of the Northern Areas by Pakistan eliminated all doubts about the sovereignty of Azad Kashmir. With the reactivation of conflict across the Line-of-Control, the quality of life of the Azad Kashmiris was trammelled. Those who did not want to take part in the proxy war became pariahs. 

Most of the cross-border infiltration was halted in the wake of 9/11 and the US invasion of Afghanistan. The attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001 was designed to reinvigorate the Kashmir issue but all it did was bring India and Pakistan to the brink of full-scale war in 2002. For a while the Musharraf regime sought to differentiate the struggle for freedom in Kashmir from political acts of terror but its spin failed to gain traction with the world community. Cross-border terrorism was quiet for several years. 

The attacks on Mumbai by a group linked to militant activities in Kashmir in November 2008 were an attempt to reignite the conflict but succeeded only in drawing widespread opprobrium. During the past 62 years, the people of Azad Kashmir have been unable to arise out of poverty in large measure because they are caught in the crossfire between India and Pakistan. The land which their elders knew as a mountain paradise has been turned into a living hell. 

Of the four million people who inhabit the region, nine of 10 live in extremely impoverished conditions in rural areas. Population growth is excessive, at 2.4 per cent per year, and the average house holds no fewer than seven people. Sadly, Azad Kashmir&#8217;s future is as murky today as it was in 1947. And the objective for its creation, the liberation of the vale of Kashmir, seems increasingly remote.


by dawn news

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> There is no such place as P O K. *The people of Azad Kashmir got what they wanted in 1948*, didn't you ever "hear" that? The question you should be asking is, did the people of the Valley ever get what _they_ wanted? The answer will be inconvenient. In fact, if every Indian devoted even 1% of the energy spent on *reinforcing theirdenial* to actually _understanding_ the will of the people of the Valley, this thread would be useless.
> 
> Thanks. Now read the rest of my post above and stop trying to come up with "smart" answers.


Denial? Lets see what EU report on Kashmir says about P0K (oh yes it's there no matter how much you emulate those three mythical monkeys).

_'B. much of Jammu and Kashmir, *in particular Gilgit and Baltistan*, suffers from extreme poverty and neglect, with enormous deficiencies in basic literacy and numeracy and in access to healthcare, a lack of democratic structures and major deficiencies in the rule of law and justice; and whereas the whole of Jammu and Kashmir suffers from exceptional economic decline.

2. Draws attention to the fact that India is the world's largest secular democracy and has devolved democratic structures at all levels, whereas *Pakistan still lacks full implementation of democracy in AJK and has yet to take steps towards democracy in Gilgit and Baltistan*

3. ...stresses the overwhelming need for a secure and independent justice system to address the situation of the people of Pakistan and particularly those of AJK and Gilgit and Baltistan.


18. Regrets, however, that Pakistan has consistently *failed to fulfill its obligations to introduce meaningful and representative democratic structures in AJK*; notes in particular the *continuing absence of Kashmiri representation* in the Pakistan National Assembly, the fact that AJK is governed through the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs in Islamabad, that *Pakistan officials dominate the Kashmir Council* and that the Chief Secretary, the Inspector-General of Police, the Accountant-General and the Finance Secretary *are all from Pakistan*; disapproves of the provision in the 1974 Interim Constitution which forbids any political activity that is not in accordance with the doctrine of Jammu and Kashmir as part of Pakistan and *obliges any candidate for a parliamentary seat in AJK to sign a declaration of loyalty to that effect*; is concerned that *the Gilgit-Baltistan region enjoys no form of democratic representation whatsoever*; furthermore, draws attention to the fact that the Government of Pakistans 1961 Jammu and Kashmir (Administration of Property) Ordinance transferred the land controlled by Pakistan and which belonged to the State of Jammu and Kashmir on 15 August 1947 to the Federal Government;

19. Very much regrets the continuing ambivalence of the current Government of Pakistan with regard to the ethnic identity of Gilgit and Baltistan, whereby statements made by the President are contradicted by official government communications; strongly recommends that the Government of Pakistan endorse and implement the judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan of 28 May 1999 which validates the Kashmiri heritage of the people of Gilgit and Baltistan and states that the Government should implement their fundamental human rights, democratic freedoms and access to justice;

20. [...]

- deeply regrets that the lack of a sufficient political will to address basic needs provision, political participation and the rule of law in AJK has left women there in a desperate situation following the earthquake;

- recalls the signature of the EC-Pakistan 3rd Generation Cooperation Agreement in 2001, Article 1 of which includes respect for human rights and democratic principles as an essential element, and urges the EU to play its part in upholding those principles when implementing the Agreement; is particularly concerned, therefore, *that the people of Gilgit and Baltistan are under the direct rule of the military and enjoy no democracy*;

- remains concerned about the difficult situation faced by all minorities throughout the region

22. Expresses concern regarding the lack of freedom of expression in AJK and reports of torture and mistreatment, of discrimination against refugees from Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir and of corruption amongst government officials, and calls on the Pakistani Government to ensure that the people of AJK can exercise their fundamental civil and political rights in an environment free from coercion and fear;

23. Further calls on Pakistan to ensure free and fair elections in AJK, considering that the general elections of 11 July 2006 were characterised by fraud and vote rigging on a massive scale, and that *any candidate who refused to uphold the position of the accession of Kashmir to Pakistan was barred from running*; also calls on Pakistan to hold elections for the first time in Gilgit and Baltistan;

41. Deplores documented human rights violations by Pakistan including in Gilgit and Baltistan, where allegedly violent riots took place in 2004, and the all too frequent incidents of terror and violence perpetrated by armed militant groups; urges Pakistan to revisit its concepts of the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of religious practice in AJK and Gilgit and Baltistan, and notes with concern allegations by human rights associations such as Amnesty International of torture and detention without due process; strongly urges all parties involved to do all they can to address these violations

60. Is appalled that the already minimal basic living conditions experienced in AJK before the earthquake (in terms of food, water, shelter, sanitation, schools and barely adequate health-centres) have been seriously affected as a consequence of the earthquake'
_

As you can see no one is falling for your sales pitch.


----------



## Abhiras

PAFAce said:


> The Valley is the most populated region of Kashmir, outnumbering the populations of Ladakh, Jammu and Azad Kashmir. I is also the only Muslim majority area in Kashmir, making it the _only_ Muslim majority state of India. If that weren't the case, India would have absolutely no hesitations conducting a referendum on their side of Kashmir.



You should do research yaar

acc. to 2001 Census 
valley contribute (53.9%) 
& Jammu region contribute (43.7%)

its 9 yrs back census ....& the d/w would have further reduced..
let us check the 2011 survey next year


----------



## jarnee

Omar1984 said:


> Unlike Inda Occupied Kashmir, I dont see any protests or anyone demanding to get away from the country their land is made a territory of in Azad Kashmir.
> 
> You can not compare the things that happen in India Occupied Kashmir to Azad Kashmir. Almost everyone in India Occupied Kashmir want either independence or want Kashmir to merge with Pakistan. In Azad Kashmir, no one wants to be part of India most want to stay with Pakistan and a few want total independence.



Indian Kashmir was also peaceful w/o protest or anything till 1989, i mean 40 years is it not enough. It all started when Pakistan started the Proxy war, having created Mulla omar to defeat Russians in Afganistan, with US blessing. They created JKLF and others like JUD and LET. Pakistan did a smart thing , however since the demise of USSR equations turned against her.

As far as Agitations are concerned you just need to have money to pay and start, India did not do it in Pakistan side of Kashmir, but can if needed, you only blame us for fueling Baluchistan, if that is the case with Money and US behind us today we can very well do the same ****. But is it worth it??? screwing up each other?

I think by policies adopted by Pakistan rulers (short term goals) like Musharraff etc, they have compromised on long term benefit for the country. 
Politicians cant do that , but dictators can, that what happened with you.
Now there is no way out ..Pakistan cannt leave Kashmir issue ..neither can digest it (Tum isse nahi thuk sakte ho na nigal sakte ho)


----------



## ejaz007

*United Jihad Council says talks are Indian ploy *
Monday, March 01, 2010
By Mazhar Tufail


ISLAMABAD: The foreign secretary-level talks between Pakistan and India are nothing but an Indian ploy to defuse the international pressure, the United Jihad Council (UJC) has claimed.

No progress whatsoever could be made in the talks between the foreign secretaries of Pakistan and India on Thursday so it could be stated that talks have been unsuccessful, said Syed Salahuddin, chairman of the UJC  a conglomerate of Kashmiri organisations struggling against the Indian occupation, while talking to The News.

The core issues, including the Kashmir imbroglio, were not discussed by the foreign secretaries of the two countries, he said. The UJC chairman said that seriousness of the much-trumpeted talks could be judged from the statement of the Pakistani interior minister wherein he said that terrorism would also be discussed during the talks. According to our information, the talks have not been successful, he said.

When asked whether Pakistan is under pressure for talks with India, Syed Salahuddin said that at the moment there is no pressure on Pakistan because the United States wants Islamabads help in the Afghan war. On the other hand, he added, the international pressure for talks with Pakistan is growing on India.

The world pressure on India is growing, so New Delhi has staged the drama of talks to hoodwink the international community and waste time. India is not serious in resolving the genuine issues with Pakistan, the UJC chairman said, adding: India is not only occupying Kashmir and subjecting the Kashmiri people to barbarism but has now also resorted to water aggression against Pakistan.

When asked whether the Pakistan government took the Kashmiri leadership into confidence on the foreign secretary-level talks with India, Salahuddin said that the stage of taking Kashmiri leaders into confidence had still not arrived. He said that Pakistan would definitely take the Kashmiri leaders into confidence but only after India makes some serious progress towards the settlement of this longstanding dispute.

United Jihad Council says talks are Indian ploy


----------



## Skies

Is it possible to solve Kashmir issue by discussion unless Pakistan create pressure on India by creating internal troubles in India or attack India?


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Abhiras said:


> its ironic that Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is called Azad Kashmir



hmmmm

where is all the curfews, tear-gassing, house-arrests, and detention of political figures


Muzzafarabad or Sri Nagar???

i wonder why they wave Pakistani flags in your occupied Kashmir






what a stupid question. We've granted full autonomy to Azad Kashmiris. This annoys the standard indian.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## desiman

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> hmmmm
> 
> where is all the curfews, tear-gassing, house-arrests, and detention of political figures
> 
> 
> Muzzafarabad or Sri Nagar???
> 
> i wonder why they wave Pakistani flags in your occupied Kashmir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what a stupid question. We've granted full autonomy to Azad Kashmiris. This annoys the standard indian.



Hmmm i dont mean to burst you bubble but there are enough articles and videos out there talking about how free and well to do " Azad Kashmir" is. Before you accuse India, please look after what you already have first.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

where is there more unrest? I still heard of protests months after the Shopian incident

that is mere example



in the end, indian wont allow Kashmiris to determine their fate. Why?

Because it is 99.9&#37; guaranteed that Occupied Kashmiris want to seceed from hindoostan's forced grip.


----------



## Hulk

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> hmmmm
> 
> where is all the curfews, tear-gassing, house-arrests, and detention of political figures
> 
> 
> Muzzafarabad or Sri Nagar???
> 
> i wonder why they wave Pakistani flags in your occupied Kashmir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what a stupid question. We've granted full autonomy to Azad Kashmiris. This annoys the standard indian.



Abu I was not aware that you do not know your own flag?


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

indianrabbit said:


> Abu I was not aware that you do not know your own flag?












the flag is a holy one to us --and our brothers/sisters across LoC under occupation

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## sab

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the flag is a holy one to us --and our brothers/sisters across LoC under occupation



Abu have you noticed one thing....no men in the picture is wearing traditional Kashmiri dress...(I forgot what it is called). Want to see how it looks like????

Election in Kashmir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hulk

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the flag is a holy one to us --and our brothers/sisters across LoC under occupation



You completly missed me, the flag you pointed is not Pakistani check again. Green color is commonly used by Muslims that does not mean it's Pakistani flag.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

desi jatt said:


> Nice observation Indian rabbit.I think Abuhas wek memory really need to have some nuts to increase his memory we can send some as we grow it in abundance in our kashmir.



and meanwhile, you can receive a basic lesson in "inglish" and grammar 

the flag looks pretty Pakistani to me. I'm disappointed that in some of the flags, they forgot to include the white portion for non-Muslims. But it's the thought that counts.

If only you could read the slogans calling for "Azady"


they are wearing jeans and t-shirts. What they wear is their own business; or do you want to control that aspect of their lives as well

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyde

actually what always confuse me is that if you ever visit Azad Kashmir....... You will not find one person asking for freedom....... they are more patriotic than us....... trust me i have never seen one person in my whole life from Azad Kashmir asking for "Azaadi"

But when you see Indian part........ you see like in thousands in 1 pictures

And then still Indian fellows using the word "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir" and accusing our patriotic Pakistanis living in Azad Kashmir that they want Freedom?

1-2 uncofirmed video on Indian media taking an interview of one unknown man in so-called P.O.K is sufficient for indians to believe that they want freedom  but when they see Thousands and hundreds of thousands of peoples in I.O.K they neglect it


----------



## Hulk

If they want to merge with Pakistan why do they call Azadi not Pakistan. Why do they not shout Pakistan Pakistan instead.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Challenge of the day for the hindustanys here:



find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri waving a hindostan flag


find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri burning the Pakistani flag


find me ONE (1) instance where Azad Kashmiris openly challenged Pakistan and demanded an end to Pakistani "occupation"


(since you indians claim they are 'occupied' by us)



I patiently wait for javab.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyde

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Challenge of the day for the hindustanys here:
> 
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri waving a hindostan flag
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri burning the Pakistani flag
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) instance where Azad Kashmiris openly challenged Pakistan and demanded an end to Pakistani "occupation"
> 
> 
> (since you indians claim they are 'occupied' by us)
> 
> 
> 
> I patiently wait for javab.



but it has to be from Nuteral Source................... No source from biased Indian media is acceptable to me 

and in response if you challenge the samething........ we will show you in Thousands


----------



## Hulk

Zaki said:


> but it has to be from Nuteral Source................... No source from biased Indian media is acceptable to me
> 
> and in response if you challenge the samething........ we will show you in Thousands



I never denied that there is a large section in J&K that wants Azadi and some section that wants to join Pakistan. I however feel that people wanting Azadi outnumber people who want to merge with Pakistan.

However there is no way to determine what is exact percentage of such people.

I always support solution of Kashmir through talks, but I also feel terrorism should not be used as a tool to get to talks. That way we will never move forward as every-time there will be some incidence people will have strong feelings against Pakistan which will not help in talks.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

indianrabbit said:


> I never denied that there is a large section in J&K that wants Azadi and some section that wants to join Pakistan. I however feel that people wanting Azadi outnumber people who want to merge with Pakistan.
> 
> However there is no way to determine what is exact percentage of such people.
> 
> I always support solution of Kashmir through talks, but I also feel terrorism should not be used as a tool to get to talks. That way we will never move forward as every-time there will be some incidence people will have strong feelings against Pakistan which will not help in talks.



the possibility of attacks against indian army would decrease manifold if the area were de-militarized and the people were free to choose their fate.

this is what sets us both apart on this issue. You can't call Occupied Kashmir an "integral part of india" when majority of the people do not feel affiliation with india

and you are right, there are existing elements who want to join neither Pakistan nor hindustan. Quite frankly, if that were majority opinion -- I would have no problem with it at all. 

This is about human dignity, honour, and justice. Whatever mistakes Pakistan may have made in the past are bygons. This issue will remain forever until it is solved; it is already known that Pakistan will never back down from her stance on this issue. 


it's a promise.


----------



## Hulk

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the possibility of attacks against indian army would decrease manifold if the area were de-militarized and the people were free to choose their fate.
> 
> this is what sets us both apart on this issue. You can't call Occupied Kashmir an "integral part of india" when majority of the people do not feel affiliation with india
> 
> and you are right, there are existing elements who want to join neither Pakistan nor hindustan. Quite frankly, if that were majority opinion -- I would have no problem with it at all.
> 
> This is about human dignity, honour, and justice. Whatever mistakes Pakistan may have made in the past are bygons. This issue will remain forever until it is solved; it is already known that Pakistan will never back down from her stance on this issue.
> 
> 
> it's a promise.



I agree 100% that it should be solved but I feel the way forward is develop better relationship. How many time have you seen a issue being peacefully resolved when 2 brothers were fighting.

I remember the time when General Musharraf started better relationship with India, there was lot of acceptance of each other.

After 26/11 fanboys are high on both side, sharing hate will get hate in return. I feel Kashmir should be settled.


----------



## karan.1970

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> *in the end, indian wont allow Kashmiris to determine their fate. Why?*
> Because it is 99.9% guaranteed that Occupied Kashmiris want to seceed from hindoostan's forced grip.



The same reason why India did not allow Khalistan in the 80s. If there was a plebiscite in Punjab in 80s, in all probability, they would have wanted to seperate as well.. Try that now and you wont have even 1% going that way...

So the reason India will not do a plebiscite in Kashmir, is because Pakistan has been successful in stroking the fires of anti India sentiments in the valley so far. Like Khanistan, once this move of Pakistan in the valley is countered, the Plebiscite issue will become as reedundant.


PS: Anyone wanting to respond to this with bogus articles about Khalistan movt starting again, do that in the the Khalistan thread pls...


----------



## hamza the lion

i think not only kashmir we want all india becose india belone to all musliams peopels pakistan shoud atack india and controle over all contry


----------



## third eye

hamza the lion said:


> i think not only kashmir we want all india becose india belone to all musliams peopels pakistan shoud atack india and controle over all contry



Now now..

Its this something. For a start, it would do Pk good to control itself.


----------



## desiman

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the possibility of attacks against indian army would decrease manifold if the area were de-militarized and the people were free to choose their fate.
> 
> this is what sets us both apart on this issue. You can't call Occupied Kashmir an "integral part of india" when majority of the people do not feel affiliation with india
> 
> and you are right, there are existing elements who want to join neither Pakistan nor hindustan. Quite frankly, if that were majority opinion -- I would have no problem with it at all.
> 
> This is about human dignity, honour, and justice. Whatever mistakes Pakistan may have made in the past are bygons. This issue will remain forever until it is solved; it is already known that Pakistan will never back down from her stance on this issue.
> 
> 
> it's a promise.



So wont India my friend,

Its a promise also


----------



## desiman

hamza the lion said:


> i think not only kashmir we want all india becose india belone to all musliams peopels pakistan shoud atack india and controle over all contry



Your new here, so please avoid trolling straight away.


----------



## desiman

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Challenge of the day for the hindustanys here:
> 
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri waving a hindostan flag
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri burning the Pakistani flag
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) instance where Azad Kashmiris openly challenged Pakistan and demanded an end to Pakistani "occupation"
> 
> 
> (since you indians claim they are 'occupied' by us)
> 
> 
> 
> I patiently wait for javab.



Sir there was a whole thread with videos and articles from "Azad Kashmir" but it was rapidly closed for you know why. Posting these videos is asking for a ban here and they are also quickly deemed as "Indian Propaganda". The thing is that logical debate is only possible here until and unless you dont start showing someone the other side of the story. Posting articles and videos talking about anything negative from "Azad Kashmir is quickly deemed as trolling so really there is no use. We all shall continue to lives in our own little boxes and this meaningless solution thread shall go on forever.


----------



## PAFAce

*Abu Zolfiqar*, the standard Indian, as you put it, wants to hear nothing about the occupation in the Valley of Kashmir. They would much rather talk about their fantasies of popular support for India or that there are poor people in Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan (as ironic as it may be for an Indian to criticize widespread poverty in another country). It burns them on the inside that the people of Kashmir choose to call Pakistan's part of Kashmir "Azad" and theirs "occupied", and when you're burning on the inside, you will do whatever you can to return the favor. That's what you're seeing here, baseless, pointless yapping without so much as a passing thought given to the real issue of occupation. When they see pictures and videos of lrage crowds supporting Pakistan, and even larger crowds demanding cecession, they point to things like "look at what they're wearing" or "this is staged". When you show them examples of attrocities commited by their forces in Kashmir, they say "they are terrorists and deserve that". A dude on this forum recently claimed "We haven't killed any Kashmiris in a long time", and when I posted the articles about the deaths of 4 people in the recent protests, not including the 14-year-old and 17-yeas-old, he said "Well, that's what they deserve". When all else fails, they resort to, "Well, they don't want to be with Pakistan either, so they have to stay with us".

Seriously, is there any doubt as to why they want to separate from India? There is no convincing these people, even after 60 years they are blind and deaf to the causes of Kashmir. They claim to be followers of a man like Gandhi, and yet they continue to hold an entire people and their territory occupied against his teachings. You can't teach empathy or neutrality, you can't even convince them to go and actually _talk_ to people of Srinagar and surrounding areas. I wasn't that passionate about the issue until I met a few people from Srinagar, and they told me first hand accounts of what was happening there. I hope against hope some of these people will do the same.

My friend, who is a member of the Board of Directors at our Student's Union, is from Srinagar. At a recent Students Union awards meeting, the Pakistan Student's Federation won an award, but there were no members present to receive it. So the announcer asked for any Pakistanis to come up and receive it, and my buddy went up to the stage and got it. This isn't the first time he's done something like that, _despite_ being pro-Independence, he's always been extremely pro-Pakistan in all matters. When he speaks of Azadi he uses the word "when" and not "if", something I've noticed in all my Kashmiri friends in the past, and even recent Yasin Malik interviews. He says, clearly, that he will be more than satisfied with joining Pakistan, but there is no future of the Valley of Kashmir with India. Now I don't claim that he represents everyone in Kashmir, but really, the evidence out there is overwhelming and can only be ignored if someone is in a complete state of denial. I always say, you can't occupy a people forever, and we will save a lot of bloodshed if we could, _somehow_, convince the Indians of this.



desiman said:


> We all shall continue to lives in our own little boxes and this meaningless solution thread shall go on forever.


I've learned a lot on this thred. Yes, as far as the objective of the thread goes, nobody sporting an Indian flag has ever shown any desire to stick to the topic. However, it is not true that it is meaningless. There are probably many people around the World that long onto this page every day, and read what we have to say. What they read speaks volumes as to the stands and intentions of the people of the two countries involved. They'll see denial and desperation on one side, and passionate support on another. That in itself is worth every minute I spend arguing unendingly on this thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## desiman

PAFAce said:


> *Abu Zolfiqar*, the standard Indian, as you put it, wants to hear nothing about the occupation in the Valley of Kashmir. They would much rather talk about their fantasies of popular support for India or that there are poor people in Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan (as ironic as it may be for an Indian to criticize widespread poverty in another country). It burns them on the inside that the people of Kashmir choose to call that part of Kashmir "Azad". That's what you're seeing here. When they pictures and videos of lrage crowds supporting Pakistan, and even larger crowds demanding cecession, they point to hings like "look at what they're wearing". When you show them examples of attrocities commited by their forces in Kashmir, they say "they are terrorists". A dude on this forum recently said "we haven't killed any Kashmiris", and when I posted the articles about the deaths of 4 people in the recent protests, he said "well, that's what they deserve". Whe all else fails, they resort to, "Well, they don't want to be with Pakistan either, so they have to stay with us".
> 
> Seriously, is there any doubt as to why they want to separate from India? There is no convincing these people, even after 60 years they are blind and deaf to the causes of Kashmir. They claim to be followers of a man like Gandhi, and yet they continue to hold an entire people and their territory occupied. You can't teach empathy or neutrality, you can't even convince them to go and actually _talk_ to people of Srinagar and surrounding areas. I wasn't that passionate about the issue until I met a few people from Srinagar, and they told me first hand accounts of what was happening there.
> 
> My friend, who is a Board of Director at our Student's Union, is from Srinagar. At a recent UTSU awards meeting, the Pakistan Student's Association won an award, but there were no members present to receive it. So the announcer asked for any Pakistanis to come up and receive it, and my buddy went up to the stage and got it. This isn't the first time he's done something like that, _despite_ being pro-Independence. When speaks of Azadi he uses the word "when" and not "if", something I've noticed in all my Kashmiri friends in the past, and even recent Yasin Malik interviews. He says, clearly, that he will be more than satisfied with joining Pakistan, but there is no future of the Valley of Kashmir with India. I hope he, and all the others, get what they want.



PAFAce i have been reading through your comments for sometime now and i must say i am very disappointed. A man with your level of education and studying at one of Canada's best universities still has such a boxed view of things is nothing but sad. You arguments are very good on paper and the long essay's about all the negative things that India does is nothing but sad. Now let me give you the Indian point of view and point of view from a person who has many more Kashmiri friends than you do &#8211;
1)	I am kind of sick of repeated post here about Indian domination in the valley or Indian this and that. As per the recent independent surveys not only is Indian Kashmir more free but the rate of growth more than double than that of &#8220;Azad Kashmir&#8221; . The GDP has now grown from a measly 11,860 crores in the 1980&#8217;s to over 540900 crores last year. The Indian government spends over $ 850 million each year on Kashmir&#8217;s improvement and economy. Kashmir has only a 4&#37; incidence of poverty, which is one of the lowest in India itself. 


Where on the other hand your so called &#8220;Azad Kashmir&#8221; still remain lower on the freedom scale and no where even near in the economic scale. Largely dependent on external aid, money had to be taken from International Aid agencies when the GOP failed to deliver even the basic needs after the 2006 earthquake. A fact that is verified by my friend who is a Afghani with family in &#8220;Azad Kashmir&#8221;. As per him nothing makes it down to the people and rich landlords continue to eat away from what little is given to the troubled state. 


2)	Education &#8211; boosting over 9 state universities, as well as a robust secondary education system, Indian Kashmiri&#8217;s have access to the whole of India when it comes to employment. From government jobs, to the armed forces, to the private sector, Kashmiri&#8217;s have can work in any sector without problem. The recent reduction in terrorism in the state has allowed many people to pursue post-secondary education and move out to the metropolitan cities of India. A huge community of Kashmiri&#8217;s in Delhi, Chandigarh and Mumbai is testament to that. Where on the other hand education in &#8220;Azad Kashmir&#8221; is nonexistent. With over a 38% illiteracy rate as well as limited post-secondary system, getting an education is nothing but an uphill battle for them. 
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_17-4-2005_pg7_37.

I can really go on and on about Kashmir but I don&#8217;t want to write a 10000 word essay. My request is to members to please stop posting stupid pics of misguided youth burning flags and protesting with no reason. The only reason the Indian army is there is to kill the million of terrorist that are either from across the border or are misguided Kashmiri youth. The valley has a significant Hindu population as well and calling them not-Kashmiris is no ones right. Kashmir belongs to everyone, Hindu, Muslim, sikh or Buddhist. Recently with the growth of amazing leaders such as Farukh Abdullah and Omar Abdullah, Kashmiris have found another role model for them, people who want the benefit of the Kashmiri people but also understand the pro-independence propaganda that influences many over there. The fact on the ground is that the issue is slowly dying down and Pakistan likes it or not Kashmir will always stay a part of India. Pakistan has much more to think about than Kashmir right now, you can leave the worrying part to us, we are quite good at solving problems lol So again im sure ill get a rebuttal from you Pakace but make it sensible and let me see some UofT brilliance in you. Quoting old stories and carefully manipulated pics is not something UofT graduates are known for, I really expect something better than that from you.






And just for your info his wife is a hindu


----------



## toxic_pus

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Challenge of the day for the hindustanys here:
> 
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri waving a hindostan flag
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) picture of an Azad Kashmiri burning the Pakistani flag
> 
> 
> find me ONE (1) instance where Azad Kashmiris openly challenged Pakistan and demanded an end to Pakistani "occupation"
> 
> 
> (since you indians claim they are 'occupied' by us)
> 
> 
> 
> I patiently wait for javab.


Once again, the relevant parts of EU resolution of Kashmir:

_2. Draws attention to the fact that India is the world's largest secular democracy and has devolved democratic structures at all levels, whereas *Pakistan still lacks full implementation of democracy in AJK and has yet to take steps towards democracy in Gilgit and Baltistan*

18. Regrets, however, that Pakistan has consistently failed to fulfill its obligations to introduce meaningful and representative democratic structures in AJK; notes in particular the continuing absence of Kashmiri representation in the Pakistan National Assembly, the fact that *AJK is governed through the Ministry of Kashmir Affairs in Islamabad, that Pakistan officials dominate the Kashmir Council* and that the Chief Secretary, the Inspector-General of Police, the Accountant-General and the Finance Secretary are all from Pakistan; disapproves of the provision in the 1974 Interim Constitution which *forbids any political activity that is not in accordance with the doctrine of Jammu and Kashmir as part of Pakistan and obliges any candidate for a parliamentary seat in AJK to sign a declaration of loyalty to that effect*; is concerned that the Gilgit-Baltistan region enjoys no form of democratic representation whatsoever; 

20. ...particularly concerned, therefore, that t*he people of Gilgit and Baltistan are under the direct rule of the military and enjoy no democracy*;

22. Expresses concern regarding the *lack of freedom of expression in AJK* and reports of torture and mistreatment, of discrimination against refugees from Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir and of corruption amongst government officials, and calls on the Pakistani Government to ensure that the people of AJK can exercise their fundamental civil and political rights in an environment free from coercion and fear;

23. Further calls on Pakistan to ensure free and fair elections in AJK, considering that the general elections of 11 July 2006 were characterised by fraud and vote rigging on a massive scale, and that *any candidate who refused to uphold the position of the accession of Kashmir to Pakistan was barred from running*; also calls on Pakistan to hold elections for the first time in Gilgit and Baltistan;_

Anybody in 'Azad' Kashmir or GB, harbouring the thought of independence, wouldn't be outside a prison for too long. Forget waving a 'hindostan flag' or burning Pakistani flag or challenging Pakistan. 

PS: It is really pathetic how you want to pass off the party pennants as Pakistani flag.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

PAFAce said:


> It burns them on the inside that the people of Kashmir choose to call Pakistan's part of Kashmir "Azad" and theirs "occupied"...


Just a clarification. It was GoP which started calling that narrow strip of Kashmir as 'Azad'. People of that area had no say in it. They still don't have any. Thanks to you.



> That's what you're seeing here, baseless, pointless yapping without so much as a passing thought given to the real issue of occupation.


You calling it an 'occupation' will not make it an occupation. 



> You can't teach *empathy* or neutrality...


A Pakistani talking about 'empathy' has got to be the joke of several millennia to come. And come to think of it. Its been only 39 years since 1971. Apparently, we are supposed to be in denial.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

PAFAce said:


> *Abu Zolfiqar*, the standard Indian, as you put it, wants to hear nothing about the occupation in the Valley of Kashmir. They would much rather talk about their fantasies of popular support for India or that there are poor people in Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan (as ironic as it may be for an Indian to criticize widespread poverty in another country)



that's the thing....I'd be lying if I were to say that Azad Kashmir/Northern Areas are most developed in terms of infrastructure; that the jobs/tech market is booming there etc. etc.

But this is about a sense of belonging, and identity. To the credit of indians, they have tried to invest in the occupied territories ---but still the vast majority of the people there are against indian rule.

the standard indian believes that they can buy out the Kashmiris. I don't think it will work, because I see the opposite happening.


.


> It burns them on the inside that the people of Kashmir choose to call Pakistan's part of Kashmir "Azad" and theirs "occupied", and when you're burning on the inside, you will do whatever you can to return the favor. That's what you're seeing here, baseless, pointless yapping without so much as a passing thought given to the real issue of occupation. When they see pictures and videos of lrage crowds supporting Pakistan, and even larger crowds demanding cecession, they point to things like "look at what they're wearing" or "this is staged".



it seems the more jingoist indian element likes to propogate their false Kashmiri Maharaja Stories; trying to dupe people with this kind of lame stories which potrays Maharajas' as true warrior.We all know history very well and we know about these Maharajas' during British Rule over India.how they were acting during British rein. They rode on Elephants and Horses, they traveled on Motor-carts but in reality they could hardly stand on their own feet when facing Britishers. The British rulers used them as tools to rule over us in past times. 

It really is simple. Look where most of the social unrest is. Pakistan Kashmir or iok. It really isnt hard to see.




> When you show them examples of attrocities commited by their forces in Kashmir, they say "they are terrorists and deserve that". A dude on this forum recently claimed "We haven't killed any Kashmiris in a long time", and when I posted the articles about the deaths of 4 people in the recent protests, not including the 14-year-old and 17-yeas-old, he said "Well, that's what they deserve". When all else fails, they resort to, "Well, they don't want to be with Pakistan either, so they have to stay with us".



rule of the 'daanda' will prove futile. I have read rubbish about how the Muslims were imported there. The truth is, india wants to grasp onto Kashmir for the very reason that it is a Muslim majority state, among other things. So far, it's a very artificial setup; majority of the people in this disputed territory want freedom and its obvious. 





> Seriously, is there any doubt as to why they want to separate from India? There is no convincing these people, even after 60 years they are blind and deaf to the causes of Kashmir.



It would be clever for the Indian planners to start thinking of a free Kashmir and how they will deal with such a nation, as they too have lost Pakistan not that many decades back. Had the indian Politicans been prepared and planned for a free Pakistan they would not have had so many problems as they face today - as far as relations are concerned. Then again, we must look at all india's other neighbours and see how they are "co-existing" with them




> I wasn't that passionate about the issue until I met a few people from Srinagar, and they told me first hand accounts of what was happening there. I hope against hope some of these people will do the same.



exact same situation for me. In fact, even amongst my own family we are mixed on the issue. We can all agree, however, that in the end --Kashmiris should decide their fate collectively. Hold a referendum. 



> My friend, who is a member of the Board of Directors at our Student's Union, is from Srinagar. At a recent Students Union awards meeting, the Pakistan Student's Federation won an award, but there were no members present to receive it. So the announcer asked for any Pakistanis to come up and receive it, and my buddy went up to the stage and got it. This isn't the first time he's done something like that, _despite_ being pro-Independence, he's always been extremely pro-Pakistan in all matters.



this is a real heart-warmer.....Bless him for doing this deed



> When he speaks of Azadi he uses the word "when" and not "if", something I've noticed in all my Kashmiri friends in the past, and even recent Yasin Malik interviews. He says, clearly, that he will be more than satisfied with joining Pakistan, but there is no future of the Valley of Kashmir with India.



Actually I have also been hearing about calls for total independence for both. I'm not a double-standard person, nor are many Pakistanis who are pragmatic about the issue. Hold a referendum, let them decide based on majority vote.

indian are very scared about this, simply because they know what the ground realities are and it is unbearable to them --especially after our blessed seperation and new homeland away from them. 




> They'll see denial and desperation on one side, and passionate support on another. That in itself is worth every minute I spend arguing unendingly on this thread.



we are here to talk; we are here to learn.


your input is highly valued on here


----------



## karan.1970

PAFAce said:


> *Abu Zolfiqar*, the standard Indian, as you put it, wants to hear nothing about the occupation in the Valley of Kashmir. They would much rather talk about their fantasies of popular support for India or that there are poor people in Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan (as ironic as it may be for an Indian to criticize widespread poverty in another country). It burns them on the inside that the people of Kashmir choose to call Pakistan's part of Kashmir "Azad" and theirs "occupied", and when you're burning on the inside, you will do whatever you can to return the favor. That's what you're seeing here, baseless, pointless yapping without so much as a passing thought given to the real issue of occupation. When they see pictures and videos of lrage crowds supporting Pakistan, and even larger crowds demanding cecession, they point to things like "look at what they're wearing" or "this is staged". When you show them examples of attrocities commited by their forces in Kashmir, they say "they are terrorists and deserve that". A dude on this forum recently claimed "We haven't killed any Kashmiris in a long time", and when I posted the articles about the deaths of 4 people in the recent protests, not including the 14-year-old and 17-yeas-old, he said "Well, that's what they deserve". When all else fails, they resort to, "Well, they don't want to be with Pakistan either, so they have to stay with us".
> 
> Seriously, is there any doubt as to why they want to separate from India? There is no convincing these people, even after 60 years they are blind and deaf to the causes of Kashmir. They claim to be followers of a man like Gandhi, and yet they continue to hold an entire people and their territory occupied against his teachings. You can't teach empathy or neutrality, you can't even convince them to go and actually _talk_ to people of Srinagar and surrounding areas. I wasn't that passionate about the issue until I met a few people from Srinagar, and they told me first hand accounts of what was happening there. I hope against hope some of these people will do the same.
> 
> My friend, who is a member of the Board of Directors at our Student's Union, is from Srinagar. At a recent Students Union awards meeting, the Pakistan Student's Federation won an award, but there were no members present to receive it. So the announcer asked for any Pakistanis to come up and receive it, and my buddy went up to the stage and got it. This isn't the first time he's done something like that, _despite_ being pro-Independence, he's always been extremely pro-Pakistan in all matters. When he speaks of Azadi he uses the word "when" and not "if", something I've noticed in all my Kashmiri friends in the past, and even recent Yasin Malik interviews. He says, clearly, that he will be more than satisfied with joining Pakistan, but there is no future of the Valley of Kashmir with India. Now I don't claim that he represents everyone in Kashmir, but really, the evidence out there is overwhelming and can only be ignored if someone is in a complete state of denial. I always say, you can't occupy a people forever, and we will save a lot of bloodshed if we could, _somehow_, convince the Indians of this.
> 
> 
> I've learned a lot on this thred. Yes, as far as the objective of the thread goes, nobody sporting an Indian flag has ever shown any desire to stick to the topic. However, it is not true that it is meaningless. There are probably many people around the World that long onto this page every day, and read what we have to say. What they read speaks volumes as to the stands and intentions of the people of the two countries involved. They'll see denial and desperation on one side, and passionate support on another. That in itself is worth every minute I spend arguing unendingly on this thread.



Extremely emotional but seems to be bypassing supporting facts in the name of creative liberty. See how the same could be turned around on its head when sources and evidence is not required to be included...

*PAFAce*, the standard Pakistani, as you put it, wants to hear nothing about the the dismal state of its country due to support for terror. They would much rather talk about their fantasies of popular support for Pakistan in the Indian state of J&K or that there are terrorists all over in India(as ironic as it may be for a Pakistani to criticize widespread terrorism in another country). It burns them on the inside that the the state of J&K is today growing at a rate 2.5 times that of Pakistan and when you're burning on the inside, you will do whatever you can to return the favor. That's what you're seeing here, baseless, pointless yapping without so much as a passing thought given to the real issue of terrorism. When they see pictures and videos of militants running rampant in Pakistan, and videos of Balochistani people demanding freedom, they point to things like "this is staged". When you show them proofs of terror acts of their nationals, they hide behind the excuse of "evidence not credible for court of law" When all else fails, they resort to, "Well, India is also formenting terrorism in Balochistan and NWFP" 

Seriously, is there any doubt that Pakistan is an International hub of terror? There is no convincing these people, even after 60 years they are blind and deaf to the perils of promoting terror as a state policy. They claim to be followers of Islam (a peace loving religion) and yet they continue to hold the whole world at ransom thru their nuclear proliferation and support for terrorists. You can't teach empathy or neutrality. I wasn't that passionate about the issue until I met some one who lost a friend in Mumbai carnage. 

---see what i mean

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## desiman

karan.1970 said:


> Extremely emotional but seems to be bypassing supporting facts in the name of creative liberty. See how the same could be turned around on its head when sources and evidence is not required to be included...
> 
> *PAFAce*, the standard Pakistani, as you put it, wants to hear nothing about the the dismal state of its country due to support for terror. They would much rather talk about their fantasies of popular support for Pakistan in the Indian state of J&K or that there are terrorists all over in India(as ironic as it may be for a Pakistani to criticize widespread terrorism in another country). It burns them on the inside that the the state of J&K is today growing at a rate 2.5 times that of Pakistan and when you're burning on the inside, you will do whatever you can to return the favor. That's what you're seeing here, baseless, pointless yapping without so much as a passing thought given to the real issue of terrorism. When they see pictures and videos of militants running rampant in Pakistan, and videos of Balochistani people demanding freedom, they point to things like "this is staged". When you show them proofs of terror acts of their nationals, they hide behind the excuse of "evidence not credible for court of law" When all else fails, they resort to, "Well, India is also formenting terrorism in Balochistan and NWFP"
> 
> Seriously, is there any doubt that Pakistan is an International hub of terror? There is no convincing these people, even after 60 years they are blind and deaf to the perils of promoting terror as a state policy. They claim to be followers of Islam (a peace loving religion) and yet they continue to hold the whole world at ransom thru their nuclear proliferation and support for terrorists. You can't teach empathy or neutrality. I wasn't that passionate about the issue until I met some one who lost a friend in Mumbai carnage.
> 
> ---see what i mean



Beautifully written, amazing thoughts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

karan.1970 said:


> the standard Pakistani, as you put it, wants to hear nothing about the the dismal state of its country due to support for terror.



you are now implying that the standard Pakistani supports terrorism. Great convincing. 



> They would much rather talk about their fantasies of popular support for Pakistan in the Indian state of J&K .



We provide moral support to people who want freedom, belonging to a disputed territory. We want them to seek self-determination; it is evident that there is widespread disdain for indian occupation in ioK



> or that there are terrorists all over in India(as ironic as it may be for a Pakistani to criticize widespread terrorism in another country)



even though the naxalite issue doesnt really affect Pakistan, it is an alarming development. How many naxal affected areas are there? (forget about the other armed outfits and religious extremist groups/politicians in your country)

We are more concerned about terrorism affecting us; that is why our Armed Forces and police are doing all in their power to fix the situation. Incidentally, there are external enemies who are supporting our enemies -- i.e. blatantly anti-Pakistan forces -trained to sabotage and disrupt peace, and wage war against Pakistan nation.



> It burns them on the inside that the the state of J&K is today growing at a rate 2.5 times that of Pakistan



elaborate



> and when you're burning on the inside, you will do whatever you can to return the favor.



???????

who is burning on the inside every time somebody drops the "K-bomb" (as your media calls it)




> When they see pictures and videos of militants running rampant in Pakistan, and videos of Balochistani people demanding freedom, they point to things like "this is staged".



indian keep making the mistake of forgetting that Baluchestan is not disputed territory. Do you see Pakistanis calling for West Bengal to unite with Bangladesh? 

Nevertheless, the Baluch have had some grievances with the federal government (not the state). Many of them are genuine concerns, and a lot is being done to solve the problems there. More could be done, and it requires political will of a battered administration. 

We never say the "pictures and videos of militants running rampant" are staged. Why? Because we are living and dealing with their actions, and have lost many friends/family/comrades. We Pakistanis know they aren't staged. But we do recognize that a lot of dirty games are being imposed on Pakistan from outside; we are angry about it but we wont let it control our lives.

We will move on with our lives; hopefully this time, be more vigilant and remain united against our enemies. Elect the right leaders, etc.



> When you show them proofs of terror acts of their nationals, they hide behind the excuse of "evidence not credible for court of law"



Yes we are aware that indians are never satisfied, nor do they respect the rulings of our sovereign courts. What can we (or, of course, YOU) do about it? Those are court rulings. Apply for visa to Pakistan and come view the proceedings yourself, if you so desire.



> When all else fails, they resort to, "Well, India is also formenting terrorism in Balochistan and NWFP"



not when all else fails.....we've been saying it since the beginning




> Seriously, is there any doubt that Pakistan is an International hub of terror? There is no convincing these people, even after 60 years they are blind and deaf to the perils of promoting terror as a state policy.



Pakistan does not promote "terror as a state policy"

try to look beyond the sensationalist headlines on your newspapers




> They claim to be followers of Islam (a peace loving religion) and yet they continue to hold the whole world at ransom thru their nuclear proliferation and support for terrorists.



Nuclear proliferation is moot point. It isn't going on anymore. Pakistan is not supporting any terrorist groups.




> You can't teach empathy or neutrality. I wasn't that passionate about the issue until I met some one who lost a friend in Mumbai carnage



Same way there are Pakistanis who are passionate on similar issues after they lost friends/loved ones in Samjhota express bombing




> ---see what i mean



do you want me to answer it honestly?


----------



## desiman

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you are now implying that the standard Pakistani supports terrorism. Great convincing.
> 
> 
> 
> We provide moral support to people who want freedom, belonging to a disputed territory. We want them to seek self-determination; it is evident that there is widespread disdain for indian occupation in ioK
> 
> 
> 
> even though the naxalite issue doesnt really affect Pakistan, it is an alarming development. How many naxal affected areas are there? (forget about the other armed outfits and religious extremist groups/politicians in your country)
> 
> We are more concerned about terrorism affecting us; that is why our Armed Forces and police are doing all in their power to fix the situation. Incidentally, there are external enemies who are supporting our enemies -- i.e. blatantly anti-Pakistan forces -trained to sabotage and disrupt peace, and wage war against Pakistan nation.
> 
> 
> 
> elaborate
> 
> 
> 
> ???????
> 
> who is burning on the inside every time somebody drops the "K-bomb" (as your media calls it)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> indian keep making the mistake of forgetting that Baluchestan is not disputed territory. Do you see Pakistanis calling for West Bengal to unite with Bangladesh?
> 
> Nevertheless, the Baluch have had some grievances with the federal government (not the state). Many of them are genuine concerns, and a lot is being done to solve the problems there. More could be done, and it requires political will of a battered administration.
> 
> We never say the "pictures and videos of militants running rampant" are staged. Why? Because we are living and dealing with their actions, and have lost many friends/family/comrades. We Pakistanis know they aren't staged. But we do recognize that a lot of dirty games are being imposed on Pakistan from outside; we are angry about it but we wont let it control our lives.
> 
> We will move on with our lives; hopefully this time, be more vigilant and remain united against our enemies. Elect the right leaders, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes we are aware that indians are never satisfied, nor do they respect the rulings of our sovereign courts. What can we (or, of course, YOU) do about it? Those are court rulings. Apply for visa to Pakistan and come view the proceedings yourself, if you so desire.
> 
> 
> 
> not when all else fails.....we've been saying it since the beginning
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan does not promote "terror as a state policy"
> 
> try to look beyond the sensationalist headlines on your newspapers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nuclear proliferation is moot point. It isn't going on anymore. Pakistan is not supporting any terrorist groups.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same way there are Pakistanis who are passionate on similar issues after they lost friends/loved ones in Samjhota express bombing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you want me to answer it honestly?





ok mr. Zolfiqar you seem like a smart man so lets discuss this properly &#8211; 
1.	Yes I support you there, the standard/Middle class Pakistani does not support terrorism. I have been to Pakistan myself so I know. But if you tell me that the government of Pakistan or the army or the ISI or whoever is in charge of Pakistan does not support &#8220;Terror as a state policy&#8221;, then you are wrong. I don&#8217;t know how can even say that, as this is a fact that is verified by many past presidents and prime ministers of Pakistan. Most recently being Mr.Zardari - Zardari admits terrorism nurtured by govt for tactical use - Pakistan - World - The Times of India

Sponsoring the so called &#8220;Freedom Fighters&#8221;, who indulge in terrorism related activities is also called using terror as a state policy. The GOP has provided much more than just &#8220;Moral &#8220;support to anti-social organizations in Kashmir. This is a fact that you must accept as to be frank it is the truth. 

2.	I can see that you have lots of info about Naxals and extremist organizations in India. Im sure you would also have the same kind of knowledge about similar organizations in Pakistan. Bhaijan its time you worry about Pakistan and I worry about India. Its when we both switch roles is when problems are created. India the most diverse country on this planet by far and there are bound to be issues between different school of thoughts. But even after your so called &#8220;Freedom movements&#8221; India has managed to not only hold itself to together but also grow at a amazing pace. Where on the other hand Pakistan who started at the same time as us, has way less problems, only one religion, 10 maybe 20 different language and cultures is suffering quite a lot. Really either my perception is wrong or your state policy is. One of us has to change his ways bhaijan. 


3.	Now lets come to the big Baluchistan issue, as we can see its become routine for Pakistani members to put all the blame for everything that is wrong with Pakistan on India. Do you really think every problem in Pakistan is because of us ? The fact is that the Taliban was created by people such as Hamid Gul and the isi to fight the Russians during the Soviet-Afghan war. Now after many year that same tiger is coming bite you, it becomes quite easy to blame the other guy. Its people like Hamid Gul who you should blame as they are the cause of all the troubles. Such disturbed individuals have washed away they honesty by putting the blame on India so that no one comes after them. People like him still advocate the victory of the Taliban which is a very scary prospect for Pakistan. Its time to introspect rather than blame India. I don&#8217;t want to stress more on the Baluch issue as that is Pakistan&#8217;s internal matter and I don&#8217;t claim to be an &#8220;Expert&#8221;, on it. 


Look my friend, I am not against Pakistan and specially not against Pakistani&#8217;s, but I am against the thinking that does not allow both countries to grow. Terrorism in the name of a freedom movement will not benefit anyone and will only drive both countries closer to pushing the nuclear button. Pakistan has not achieved anything from the Kashmir issues and all of its strategic goals are still where they were 60 years ago. A country with the potential of Pakistan could have been on a different level but because of the continuous stress on Kashmir has stopped all growth. What do you think, will India just get up one day and give up Kashmir. Common Bhaijan we both know that is never going to happen and as India grows stronger it becomes even less likely. There are many kids here who claim to be &#8220;Very Passionate&#8221;, about the Kashmir issue without even knowing what it is all about. By reading articles or looking at cleverly taken pics or readings blogs, one cannot get the actual story. My father was in the MOD and my mother was in the civilian section of the Navy, I have seen war and Kashmir more closely than most people here. All I can say is that the only thing they want is for everyone to leave them alone and let them live in peace. Its time for Pakistan to stop focusing its resources on Kashmir as its seriously hampering its growth. For a country the size of India putting a few thousand soldiers and diverting resources towards Kashmir isn&#8217;t a tough thing. India and Indian have been the victims of terror way longer than anyone else in the world. What many Indian have sacrificed or lost is incomparable to anything else. Living in the constant fear of death while visiting a theatre or shopping at a market is not pleasant to live with bhaijan. Rather than behaving like kinds and comparing each other passion we must realize whats better for our future generations. Anyways I can go on and on but I hope you get my point and I can change you point of view even in the slightest way.


----------



## Azam Eagle

Only solution 2 is accepted for us.
and it is the real solution for the peace in this area.
all other solutions did not assure peace in the area.
India's occupation over Kashmir should be ende by force,it is only the language indians understand.
Kashmir is throughout a part of Pakistan.
It became an disputed territory due to injustice of Bratians.
Kashmir is allover Pakistan......


----------



## desiman

Azam Eagle said:


> Only solution 2 is accepted for us.
> and it is the real solution for the peace in this area.
> all other solutions did not assure peace in the area.
> India's occupation over Kashmir should be ende by force,it is only the language indians understand.
> Kashmir is throughout a part of Pakistan.
> It became an disputed territory due to injustice of Bratians.
> Kashmir is allover Pakistan......



Brother your new here, dont get over emotional over things, take it easy and use your head before you reply


----------



## karan.1970

Azam Eagle said:


> Only solution 2 is accepted for us.
> and it is the real solution for the peace in this area.
> all other solutions did not assure peace in the area.
> *India's occupation over Kashmir should be ende by force,it is only the language indians understand.*Kashmir is throughout a part of Pakistan.
> It became an disputed territory due to injustice of Bratians.
> Kashmir is allover Pakistan......





Please try...


----------



## karan.1970

My reply was to PAFAce on how you can wordsmith any thing if you do not have to back it up with solid data.. But since you decided to take it literally and respond, here goes....




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you are now implying that the standard Pakistani supports terrorism. Great convincing.


Not every Pakistani, but all those who support violent targetting of innocents in India in the name of Kashmir...



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> We provide moral support to people who want freedom, belonging to a disputed territory. We want them to seek self-determination; it is evident that there is widespread disdain for indian occupation in ioK



I dont think want of freedom is dependent on a territory being disputed or not. In that sense, we morally support the freedom struggle of people of Balochistan.We want them to seek self-determination; it is evident that there is widespread disdain for Pakistani rule in Balochistan




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> even though the naxalite issue doesnt really affect Pakistan, it is an alarming development. How many naxal affected areas are there? (forget about the other armed outfits and religious extremist groups/politicians in your country)


Quite a few actually, but thanks for your concern.. We are doing all right in progressing despite them.. Your alarm bells will be better utilized evaluating whats happening in Pakistan and why there are terror strikes in areas that have been declared cleared of TTP..



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> We are more concerned about terrorism affecting us; that is why our Armed Forces and police are doing all in their power to fix the situation.


Congrats and all the best.. These terrorists need to be wiped out completely and not selectively..



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Incidentally, there are external enemies who are supporting our enemies -- i.e. blatantly anti-Pakistan forces -trained to sabotage and disrupt peace, and wage war against Pakistan nation.


You should treat them as you would treat these terrorists. If they are foreign non state actors, ask their country to prosecute them based on the credible evidence that you provide that can be used in that country's court of law



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> elaborate


 
Jammu and Kashmir's GDP grew this year by over 6 percents as compared to 2.4 &#37; of Pakistan



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ???????
> 
> who is burning on the inside every time somebody drops the "K-bomb" (as your media calls it)


It seems to me that its only folks in Pakistan that are obsessed with this world. Kashmir is not part of our state policy (Its a state of ours). Its only Pakistan whose purpose of existence seems to be Kashmir...




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> indian keep making the mistake of forgetting that Baluchestan is not disputed territory. Do you see Pakistanis calling for West Bengal to unite with Bangladesh?


Go ahead and call for whatever.. As if it makes a difference.. You will not decide the rules (I mean outside this forum) on what Indians can and can not do. Pakistan raises Kashmir, India will raise Balochistan and turn the screws on IWT. Rules of engagement are not defined by one party...




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Nevertheless, the Baluch have had some grievances with the federal government (not the state). Many of them are genuine concerns, and a lot is being done to solve the problems there. More could be done, and it requires political will of a battered administration.


Great.. Remember, India's support to them is only moral. If they get happy with Pakistani govt and stop demanding freedom, well and good...




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> But we do recognize that a lot of dirty games are being imposed on Pakistan from outside; we are angry about it but we wont let it control our lives.


A bit of introspection about your past policies of supporting terrorists attacks in India may also help here.. Mostly the problem is intrinsic and simple playing golf doesnt solve it..



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Yes we are aware that indians are never satisfied, nor do they respect the rulings of our sovereign courts. What can we (or, of course, YOU) do about it? Those are court rulings. Apply for visa to Pakistan and come view the proceedings yourself, if you so desire.


No need to.. The results were known before the trials started...



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> not when all else fails.....we've been saying it since the beginning


Ok




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Pakistan does not promote "terror as a state policy"
> 
> *try to look beyond the sensationalist headlines *on your newspapers


Arent you doing the same now




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Nuclear proliferation is moot point. It isn't going on anymore. Pakistan is not supporting any terrorist groups.



It may have stopped now but does not gaurantee that it wont happen again when Pakistan needs money/technology/or any other thing from one of the nuclear aspirants in the world..



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Same way there are Pakistanis who are passionate on similar issues after they lost friends/loved ones in Samjhota express bombing


And they should be




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> do you want me to answer it honestly?


Your call


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

desiman said:


> 1.	Yes I support you there, the standard/Middle class Pakistani does not support terrorism. I have been to Pakistan myself so I know.



I hope you enjoyed your stay.



> But if you tell me that the government of Pakistan or the army or the ISI or whoever is in charge of Pakistan does not support Terror as a state policy, then you are wrong.



I'm afraid I will have to disagree with you. None of the above supports terrorist groups. There may have been a few rotten apples in the past ---civilian/government/military/etc. that may have involved themselves in shady groups ---but it has no bearing or representativeness of the State of Pakistan.

Pakistan is a responsible country.



> I dont know how can even say that, as this is a fact that is verified by many past presidents and prime ministers of Pakistan. Most recently being Mr.Zardari -



Pakistanis don't support terrorism.

And I can almost say with full conviction that Pakistanis don't support Zardari either!!




> Sponsoring the so called Freedom Fighters, who indulge in terrorism related activities is also called using terror as a state policy.



We support political figures in Kashmir. It is our responsibility to heed to their calls and provide moral support to them, as we have been doing. As we will continue to do. 



> The GOP has provided much more than just Moral support to anti-social organizations in Kashmir. This is a fact that you must accept as to be frank it is the truth.



again, there's 2 sides to this. Most of the insurgency in iok is purely Kashmiri phenomenon. Those are mostly locals who are doing the fighting against indian security forces --whom they perceive as occupiers. To them, and to some in and outside of Pakistan --it is a legitimate cause. 

Supporting Kashmiris doesnt make Pakistan state/citizens "terrorist"

sectarian groups; non-state individuals who carried out massacres like Mumbai tragedy; those that aim to wage war and chaos on nation -- those are terrorists. A good example would be Al-Zulfiqar group of the late Murtaza Bhutto; he was supported by certain nearby countries. Kind of like BLA 



> 2.	I can see that you have lots of info about Naxals and extremist organizations in India. Im sure you would also have the same kind of knowledge about similar organizations in Pakistan. Bhaijan its time you worry about Pakistan and I worry about India.



re-read my post please




> Its when we both switch roles is when problems are created. India the most diverse country on this planet by far and there are bound to be issues between different school of thoughts. But even after your so called Freedom movements India has managed to not only hold itself to together but also grow at a amazing pace.



good for you......iron out the differences that do exist. Many of which there are. Of course we wont worry about your affairs, as long as you dont embroil yourselves in ours. Simple as that.

i think india is more guilty of this crime, but I wont resort to tit-for-tat cross-talk




> Where on the other hand Pakistan who started at the same time as us, has way less problems, only one religion, 10 maybe 20 different language and cultures is suffering quite a lot.



indian civilian institutions are stronger and much better founded than our own. That in itself is an advantage for you. 

In Pakistan, we are dealing with the greater effects of a war along our northern border. We are dealing with neglect stemming from 1980s, when a problem was allowed to grow bigger and bigger. Pakistan federation is still strong, and the people are united now more than ever. 



> Really either my perception is wrong or your state policy is. One of us has to change his ways bhaijan.



I never said we havent also made mistakes. I think leadership is very important. There needs to be mutual trust and respect. We will not accept being bullied or cornered. History has shown this. Why dont we just sincerely resolve all outstanding issues and not let a few unruly non-state actors do all the talking and ..... acting...




> 3.	Now lets come to the big Baluchistan issue, as we can see its become routine for Pakistani members to put all the blame for everything that is wrong with Pakistan on India. Do you really think every problem in Pakistan is because of us ?



Who said we are blaming everything on you. As far as you (indian) are concerned --yes there are major outstanding issues. But we also have our own priorities and obligations to meet, and india has nothing to do with them.



> The fact is that the Taliban was created by people such as Hamid Gul and the isi to fight the Russians during the Soviet-Afghan war.



who provided weapons and funding? Fact of the matter is, it was in our interests to not have the Soviets at our doorstep. There is a new gathering of people in Pakistan who are asking --was it worth it???

I still say, yes it was. Many agree with me; some don't. We helped create taleban because our northern neighbour was being occupied and the people resisting were being attacked. Millions of Afghan refugees were pouring en-masse into Pakistan. We had a crisis on ours own hands.



> Now after many year that same tiger is coming bite you, it becomes quite easy to blame the other guy. Its people like Hamid Gul who you should blame as they are the cause of all the troubles.



I want to know why indians resort to poster-boy syndromes like these. You attribute something like this to a specific figure (e.g. Lt. Gen [r] Gul or Zaid Hamid etc.).

Quick reality check: Lt. Gen. [r] Gul is very limited in his means at this time. To say he supports taleban now is beyond ridiculous. When you retire from the Army in Pakistan --- the honour of having served the motherland is so great. People respect you. Peers, neighbours, everybody respects you....... but bank account and means of living remains quite modest. How in hell would he be supporting them?

He has made his views quite clear on the matter. Just because the West abandoned Pakistan after the cold war, it means we should just abandon the people who liberated Afghanistan from occupation?

Those people began their in-fighting, and the taleban stopped the war; stopped the drugs; and united the tribes; ended the mass rapes and killings of rival factions. To do that in Afghanistan is quite the feat. I wouldnt attribute this success solely to a Retired Lt. Gen.



> Such disturbed individuals have washed away they honesty by putting the blame on India so that no one comes after them. People like him still advocate the victory of the Taliban which is a very scary prospect for Pakistan.



I don't see Pakistanis lining up and anxious to listen to him speak. Do you?

I personally think he's a patriot. He's charismatic and speaks well. He loves the soil. He served the country well while in uniform. I don't agree with some things he says. I do think America and the West feel threatened by him because he is basically the "man who knows too much"



> Its time to introspect rather than blame India. I dont want to stress more on the Baluch issue as that is Pakistans internal matter and I dont claim to be an Expert, on it.



we arent blaming india for all the problems......it would be stupid and unpatriotic to do so. 



> Pakistan has not achieved anything from the Kashmir issues and all of its strategic goals are still where they were 60 years ago.



No, I beg to differ. Patience is an important virtue. I think more and more Pakistanis are realizing this. At least I hope so.




> A country with the potential of Pakistan could have been on a different level but because of the continuous stress on Kashmir has stopped all growth.



would a mother stop worrying about her child simply because she gets tired and worn out by doing so?




> What do you think, will India just get up one day and give up Kashmir. Common Bhaijan we both know that is never going to happen and as India grows stronger it becomes even less likely.



the worlds biggest democracy should do the most democratic and brave thing - and take Kashmir issue to the spotlight and be willing to resolve it, based on will of Kashmiris.




> Its time for Pakistan to stop focusing its resources on Kashmir as its seriously hampering its growth.



out of the question....




> India and Indian have been the victims of terror way longer than anyone else in the world.



I don't think so. This is an exaggeration. 



> What many Indian have sacrificed or lost is incomparable to anything else. Living in the constant fear of death while visiting a theatre or shopping at a market is not pleasant to live with bhaijan.



by now, after 2 very tumultuous and testing years -- we know.

But whatever happens, happens. You could die crossing the street tomorrow. Can't let fear or emotions control your life, can you?





> Anyways I can go on and on but I hope you get my point and I can change you point of view even in the slightest way.



in the end, we reach no settlement.

But I appreciate that we can at least talk and agree on a few things.


We both want to see our countries succeed.....economically, politically, militarily etc. We want to lift the poor out of their desperate positions, we want modern facilities, modern infrastructure., favourable trade position, self-sufficiency etc. etc. 

Unfortunately, sir, we have many diverging interests. The question is, how to narrow the gap. 

I'm not an old fart yet 

so maybe in my lifetime I will see an end to the instability and unpredictable nature of this sub-continent.


----------



## Hulk

Azam Eagle said:


> Only solution 2 is accepted for us.
> and it is the real solution for the peace in this area.
> all other solutions did not assure peace in the area.
> India's occupation over Kashmir should be ende by force,it is only the language indians understand.
> Kashmir is throughout a part of Pakistan.
> It became an disputed territory due to injustice of Bratians.
> Kashmir is allover Pakistan......



Short reply to your take away Kashmir by force, if you could you could have done it already. In 1999 you started but did not moved ahead due to some reason.

Now serious discussion.
Kashmir solution by force.
Lets admit Pakistan cannot win India by force, no for another 2 decades.

Kashmir with help of terrorism
Lets assume terrorist activities take upward trend in India, few blast every month, some important leader killed.
What will be the result, Will India give Kashmir? No.
India Pakistan war? possible 
Does this solve anything? nothing

Kashmir with help of international community
Will not work, as it has not worked so far, I guess will not work in future.

Now only option left is talk
India's stand is it will not give up Kashmir, now there is a reason for that. No leader can take a decision that does not have a mass support. Same goes with Pakistan, they cannot give up on Kashmir either

So the best way forward is give and take.
Now what can be that give and take without changing the boundary, can there be something which we can trade. Do you guys have anything in mind.

if nothing is there then I guess this will continue the same way.


----------



## Abhiras

strictly speeking(political scientifically) ; Kashmir problem is the zero-sum situation for india & pakistan.........therefore there are very less chances for the solution of kashmir problem
zero-sum is a situation in which a one participant's gain or loss is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the other participant.

if one gains, another loses

some win-win situation of kashmir must be suggested .... in which both can agree with negotiations


----------



## Skies

indianrabbit said:


> Short reply to your take away Kashmir by force, if you could you could have done it already. In 1999 you started but did not moved ahead due to some reason.
> 
> Now serious discussion.
> Kashmir solution by force.
> Lets admit Pakistan cannot win India by force, no for another 2 decades.
> 
> Kashmir with help of terrorism
> Lets assume terrorist activities take upward trend in India, few blast every month, some important leader killed.
> What will be the result, Will India give Kashmir? No.
> India Pakistan war? possible
> Does this solve anything? nothing
> 
> Kashmir with help of international community
> Will not work, as it has not worked so far, I guess will not work in future.
> 
> Now only option left is talk
> India's stand is it will not give up Kashmir, now there is a reason for that. No leader can take a decision that does not have a mass support. Same goes with Pakistan, they cannot give up on Kashmir either
> 
> So the best way forward is give and take.
> Now what can be that give and take without changing the boundary, can there be something which we can trade. Do you guys have anything in mind.
> 
> if nothing is there then I guess this will continue the same way.



After considering the big stealth of India, I would like to say you that you should not be sure that Pakistan will be beaten with India in war. Although it seems to us apparently that Pakistan is not likely to win with India in war but to me Pakistan will win (90% possibility) with India if they attack India for Kashmir desperately. Because India is not capable to beat Pakistan abruptly and if the war will continue then India will ultimately leave Kashmir to avoid more destruction of its economy and lives as India is a highly prosperous and developing country. Also Pakistan will not attack India to conquer the whole India but only for Kashmir portion. So when India will see that the both Kashmir and Pakistan is not letting them to stay in peace then India will leave Kashmir as its mere headache. Then India will think that we no need to suffer just for dominating Kashmiris, so let&#8217;s build India and leave Kashmir. Lastly, size dose not any matter and it&#8217;s not any Bollywood crap where India always wins and says those people terrorist who fight legally for independent. So Pakistan just needs to be desperate if they want Kashmir truly and I&#8217;m waiting to see Pakistan&#8217;s success over Kashmir issue by attacking India where apparently no other choice is remained as you said.


----------



## Abhiras

brotherbangladesh said:


> After considering the big stealth of India, I would like to say you that you should not be sure that Pakistan will be beaten with India in war. Although it seems to us apparently that Pakistan is not likely to win with India in war but to me Pakistan will win (90% possibility) with India if they attack India for Kashmir desperately. Because India is not capable to beat Pakistan abruptly and if the war will continue then India will ultimately leave Kashmir to avoid more destruction of its economy and lives as India is a highly prosperous and developing country. Also Pakistan will not attack India to conquer the whole India but only for Kashmir portion. So when India will see that the both Kashmir and Pakistan is not letting them to stay in peace then India will leave Kashmir as its mere headache. Then India will think that we no need to suffer just for dominating Kashmiris, so lets build India and leave Kashmir. Lastly, size dose not any matter and its not any Bollywood crap where India always wins and says those people terrorist who fight legally for independent. So Pakistan just needs to be desperate if they want Kashmir truly and Im waiting to see Pakistans success over Kashmir issue by attacking India where apparently no other choice is remained as you said.





are you serious...when you talking about Pakistan winning over India....
we are not backed by bollywood films 
we are backed by better tactics & army & everything


----------



## manglasiva

brotherbangladesh said:


> Because India is not capable to beat Pakistan abruptly and if the war will continue then India will ultimately leave Kashmir to avoid more destruction of its economy and lives as India is a highly prosperous and developing country. .



In what way ?


----------



## amoverlord

talks r the only way to solve the matter.......a military conflict will not settle the issue,never........i myself will favor any decision taken by the kasmiris....cause this has gone too long.they r the one who r suffering.
but the decision should not just include only present kasmiris but those also who fled kashmir during the rise of militancy.....and moreover an environment should be created at first...which will ensure that if any such voting is conducted then all three parties r satisfied whatever be the result............

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## desiman

brotherbangladesh said:


> After considering the big stealth of India, I would like to say you that you should not be sure that Pakistan will be beaten with India in war. Although it seems to us apparently that Pakistan is not likely to win with India in war but to me Pakistan will win (90% possibility) with India if they attack India for Kashmir desperately. Because India is not capable to beat Pakistan abruptly and if the war will continue then India will ultimately leave Kashmir to avoid more destruction of its economy and lives as India is a highly prosperous and developing country. Also Pakistan will not attack India to conquer the whole India but only for Kashmir portion. So when India will see that the both Kashmir and Pakistan is not letting them to stay in peace then India will leave Kashmir as its mere headache. Then India will think that we no need to suffer just for dominating Kashmiris, so lets build India and leave Kashmir. Lastly, size dose not any matter and its not any Bollywood crap where India always wins and says those people terrorist who fight legally for independent. So Pakistan just needs to be desperate if they want Kashmir truly and Im waiting to see Pakistans success over Kashmir issue by attacking India where apparently no other choice is remained as you said.



Please keep your nose our of matters that you have no Idea about, this issue is between Indian's and Pakistani's and we will solve it between us. Thank you for pearls of wisdom but they are not required.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Bangladesh is an independent, sovereign nation. We respect their sovereignty, and enjoy cordial relations with Bangladesh and Bengali people.




"occupied again"


----------



## amoverlord

mr. zolfiqar...d thread is long ,am new witout reading it all....can i request ur views on this matter...because u r think tank......

p.s. one of my most respected seniors(shaheed da) name is same as urs.. so will not take it....he n me r from same village.......


----------



## NWO

I would like to see Pakistan get all of Kashmir, but realize that is highly unlikely. However, I think that we should stop worrying about India and just focus on Azad Kashmir. We need to introduce a free-market economy there, and try to fully intergrate that part of Kashmir. Once Azad Kashmir is much more developed and much better security, rest of Kashmir would want to go with Pakistan, when you consider the Muslim majority overall. 

The best way to turn Azad Kashmir into a thriving, modern state is to introduce a free-market economy there. It has worked for the United States, why not there. Plus, if Azad Kashmir develops into a modern state, more countries might be willing to give Pakistan more of Kashmir in a settlement with India.

I hope that I don't come off as too anti-Indian. I have nothing against India nor hold any bias agianst them. (Or at least try not to.) Hopefully, Pakistan and India can establish a international boundary and stop the bickering.


----------



## amoverlord

no ...its alsight......actually we should also do same......................


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

amoverlord said:


> mr. zolfiqar...d thread is long ,am new witout reading it all....can i request ur views on this matter...because u r think tank......
> 
> p.s. one of my most respected seniors(shaheed da) name is same as urs.. so will not take it....he n me r from same village.......



Kashmiris should seek their self determination.....all Kashmiris on both sides of the militarized LoC


Zolfiqar isn't my real name. It is the sword of Imam Ali A.S.

It's only an alias I am using


----------



## amoverlord

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Kashmiris should seek their self determination.....all Kashmiris on both sides of the militarized LoC
> 
> 
> Zolfiqar isn't my real name. It is the sword of Imam Ali A.S.
> 
> It's only an alias I am using






its not zolfiqar ......its the first name u use..........
anyway i expect somethng more frm u......... not suggesting that what u said is not concurred by me... but question how is it possible in context of present scenario.........even if u agree on my self presented scenario of mutual trust,then atleast suggest how to get it...........waiting for your answer Mr.zolfiqar


----------



## Hulk

brotherbangladesh said:


> After considering the big stealth of India, I would like to say you that you should not be sure that Pakistan will be beaten with India in war. Although it seems to us apparently that Pakistan is not likely to win with India in war but to me Pakistan will win (90% possibility) with India if they attack India for Kashmir desperately. Because India is not capable to beat Pakistan abruptly and if the war will continue then India will ultimately leave Kashmir to avoid more destruction of its economy and lives as India is a highly prosperous and developing country. Also Pakistan will not attack India to conquer the whole India but only for Kashmir portion. So when India will see that the both Kashmir and Pakistan is not letting them to stay in peace then India will leave Kashmir as its mere headache. Then India will think that we no need to suffer just for dominating Kashmiris, so lets build India and leave Kashmir. Lastly, size dose not any matter and its not any Bollywood crap where India always wins and says those people terrorist who fight legally for independent. So Pakistan just needs to be desperate if they want Kashmir truly and Im waiting to see Pakistans success over Kashmir issue by attacking India where apparently no other choice is remained as you said.



I was expecting more worthwhile reply to my post then fanboy stuff.
Any serious takers.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

amoverlord said:


> its not zolfiqar ......its the first name u use..........



what




> anyway i expect somethng more frm u......... not suggesting that what u said is not concurred by me... but question how is it possible in context of present scenario.........even if u agree on my self presented scenario of mutual trust,then atleast suggest how to get it...........waiting for your answer Mr.zolfiqar



I think NWO said it nicely. From an official and personal Pakistani standpoint, it seems most likely in our favour; most realistic.

Militarily, I'd rather not go into that. 


hindustan is a democracy since independence. Pakistan is an "embryonic" democracy at the moment. 

lets do the most democratic and decent thing and let the Kashmiris hold referendum and decide their fate


----------



## Skeptic

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> what



I think he means Abu



> I think NWO said it nicely. From an official and personal Pakistani standpoint, it seems most likely in our favour; most realistic.
> 
> Militarily, I'd rather not go into that.
> 
> 
> hindustan is a democracy since independence. Pakistan is an "embryonic" democracy at the moment.
> 
> lets do the most democratic and decent thing and let the Kashmiris hold referendum and decide their fate


Referendum is no longer a practical solution. irreparable damage has been done to the demography. Kashmiri Pandits have been driven out, demography of Northern Areas and even "Azad Kashmir" have been altered drastically. It was again a legible options in the 40s and even 50s, to resolve the issue new formulaes will be needed. I think International border at LOC is a good starting point for negotiations, from thereon slight give and take can possibly sort out the issues. And these give and takes can be conducted at a later stage and in the mean while region of "Azad Kashmir" and Kashmir Valley can be co-governed with a neutral arbitrator to oversee demilitarization of the region with local law enforcement agencies. Additionally we can have the valley as a no arms zone - Afterall the region deserves peace for development of its true tourism potential - giving way to lasting peace.

But again this would be a long long road and trust deficit will make it vastly difficult to tread - To me it seems as the only way forward.

Again emphasis on the words practical and lasting solution, not idealistic and revisiting the failed methods.


----------



## mehru

I will pick scenario 1. This is the only way to move forward. It's better to accept the current Line of control but i think it's more important to know Kashmiris point of view.


----------



## amoverlord

mehru said:


> I will pick scenario 1. This is the only way to move forward. It's better to accept the current Line of control but i think it's more important to know Kashmiris point of view.




no ,i don,t think this is a long time solution...yaha india me maan bhi liya to aapke yaha manenge...i doubt it.....
voting is a must...........


----------



## amoverlord

mehru said:


> I will pick scenario 1. This is the only way to move forward. It's better to accept the current Line of control but i think it's more important to know Kashmiris point of view.




no ,i don,t think this is a long time solution...yaha india me maan bhi liya to aapke yaha manenge...i doubt it.....
voting is a must to solve this once n for all..........


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

de-militarize and let both sides interact with eachother.....no fly zone/no arms zone etc. etc. sure fine.

who enforces it?




I had a MUCH longer and very detailed post, but this goddam bloody load-shedding made me lose everything


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

^^^ Sir time to buy UPS


----------



## karan.1970

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> what
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think NWO said it nicely. From an official and personal Pakistani standpoint, it seems most likely in our favour; most realistic.
> 
> Militarily, I'd rather not go into that.
> 
> 
> hindustan is a democracy since independence. Pakistan is an "embryonic" democracy at the moment.
> 
> lets do the most democratic and decent thing and let the Kashmiris hold referendum and decide their fate



Democracy allows its citizens to form their govt within the boundaries of the nation. It does not advocate referendums to seperate from a nation. It does however allow people who do not want to live in a country to leave and go settle in a country of their choice if it would have them...Kashmir belongs to the people of India and not only those living in Kashmir. So a small subset of India's population can not vote on giving away a part of the country.. And before we jump on the disputed status and so on, please understand that India constitution does not recognize Kashmir as a disputed territory....


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

we have 2 of them setup in conjunction with a standard honda generator ... both UPS are down at the moment


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

karan.1970 said:


> please understand that India constitution does not recognize Kashmir as a disputed territory....



what's your point? Does that make it binding?


----------



## third eye

NWO said:


> I would like to see Pakistan get all of Kashmir, but realize that is highly unlikely. However, I think that we should stop worrying about India and just focus on Azad Kashmir. We need to introduce a free-market economy there, and try to fully intergrate that part of Kashmir. Once Azad Kashmir is much more developed and much better security, rest of Kashmir would want to go with Pakistan, when you consider the Muslim majority overall.
> 
> The best way to turn Azad Kashmir into a thriving, modern state is to introduce a free-market economy there. It has worked for the United States, why not there. Plus, if Azad Kashmir develops into a modern state, more countries might be willing to give Pakistan more of Kashmir in a settlement with India.
> 
> I hope that I don't come off as too anti-Indian. I have nothing against India nor hold any bias agianst them. (Or at least try not to.) Hopefully, Pakistan and India can establish a international boundary and stop the bickering.



This is how ppl who leave the sub continent see the problem that has bedeviled us since 47.

A dispassionate an clear headed approach.Development will replace resentmentand help us to move on.

However, once back in the region, we all change.


----------



## saheeen

Kashmir joins Pakistan
, it will become a part of pakistan with their choice what they have made already.


----------



## desiman

saheeen said:


> Kashmir joins Pakistan
> , it will become a part of pakistan with their choice what they have made already.



Bhaijan aap naye ho aur abhi se suru, take your time and think before posting


----------



## NWO

Hey, can Pakistan and India both own all of Kashmir? Kind of like a common wealth, where both countries must give aid and military assistance to the region, but may also tax it to get revenue and have full trade access. Kashmir could form their own armed forces and elect their own officials. 

Wouldn't this '8th option' be the best one?


----------



## desiman

NWO said:


> Hey, can Pakistan and India both own all of Kashmir? Kind of like a common wealth, where both countries must give aid and military assistance to the region, but may also tax it to get revenue and have full trade access. Kashmir could form their own armed forces and elect their own officials.
> 
> Wouldn't this '8th option' be the best one?



I dont know how long that will work though, at one point one country will try to assert itself more and everything will fall apart. It would be a very tough option to work with.


----------



## NWO

Yes, but that's why Pakistan and India must help Kashmir build up their own armed forces. Pakistan could help with the Air Force, India could help the land forces, and with no coast, a navy would not be necessary. Or something like that.

This way, if Pakistan or India tries to assert them self more, the Kashmirs could have a reliably defense which may not match up to Pakistan/India, but could seriously slow them down and cost many lives, making them think twice before doing anything.

I was also think that some nukes could be put under their control, so they could easily take out Pakistan or India. Don't give them the technology or materials to build more, but just a few dozen to wipe India or Pakistan. Just in case.


----------



## ejaz007

*BJP accuses Singh govt of planning secret Kashmir deal *

** Advani describes talks of IHK autonomy as smokescreen for secession * Warns of mass protest if govt strikes a deal on Kashmir *

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Indias main opposition party, on Wednesday accused the Indian government of planning a secret Kashmir deal with Pakistan. 

During Lok Sabha proceedings, BJP leader LK Advani accused Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of preparing for a clandestine deal with Pakistan for secession of Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) in the garb of giving it autonomy.

Smokescreen: Describing the talk of autonomy as nothing but a smokescreen for secession, he warned that even restoring Kashmirs pre-1953 constitutional status would be surrender, clear and simple. 

This has precisely been the aim and objective of Pakistans use of terror as a state policy to achieve IHKs secession, he added. 

The ruling benches protested and entered into a verbal spat with BJP members after Advani claimed the government deliberately wanted to say as little as possible on what it was doing and planning with Pakistan.

Greatest ever protest: The BJP leader said the governments approach towards Pakistan was deeply flawed and warned the PM of the greatest ever nationwide mass protest in independent India if he made any deal that diluted Indias already diluted sovereignty over IHK  or any part thereof.

Referring to resuming secretary-level talks with Pakistan in spite of the February 12 Pune bomb blast, he said the Indian government had made up its mind to de-link the issue of terrorism from the bilateral talks as was reflected in the July 2009 joint India-Pakistan statement issued at Sharm el-Sheikh.

Talking about contradictory statements made by Delhi after the Pune blast, he asked Singh to explicitly spell out what the governments strategy was on the dialogue with Pakistan. Parliament has a right to know the PMs stance on this vital issue, Advani said, adding that the Indian government was being pressurised by foreign quarters to engage in a dialogue with Pakistan.

The governments thought process in this regard is guided by three beliefs, all of which are flawed. Firstly, Delhi thinks both India and Pakistan are equally victims of terrorism, and therefore need to cooperate. Then it believes the threat of terrorism comes from non-state actors in Pakistan, therefore, continuation of talks with the government of Pakistan should not be bracketed with the issue of terrorism. Finally, Delhi thinks the solution to the instability in Afghanistan and Pakistan is linked to solving the Kashmir dispute. Therefore, India should be willing to discuss and settle Kashmir if it wants an end to the menace of terrorism, Advani said, adding that the belief that terrorism was exclusively carried out by non-state actors was in contradiction to India asking Islamabad last Thursday to hand over two army officers suspected to be involved in the 26/11 terror attack. 

It would be a sad day for India if the government accepted the argument that the road to peace in Kabul runs through Kashmira theory put forward by some quarters in Washington and Islamabad, the BJP leader said. 

Turning to Indias defence preparedness, Advani said Delhi must not remain excessively dependent on imports for the countrys defence needs. Apart from a drain on our precious national resources, it is also not good for our defence preparedness, he said.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## zeus

Advani just wants to know whats cooking ,even he knows that if such a deal ever occurs ,congress will never get elected again for years to come ,


----------



## Skeptic

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> de-militarize and let both sides interact with eachother.....no fly zone/no arms zone etc. etc. sure fine.
> 
> who enforces it?



Police.

J&K Kashmir police has a local Kashmiris. They can be trained under joint training camps by India and Pakistan. Obviously we can write and propose any solution in seconds (despite load shedding) but it will take yeas to implement. 

First step would be to sign a document to accept sovereignty of each other's nation. Jammu and Ladakh as part of India and NA as Pakistan and a phase wise time bound De-militarization of "Azad Kashmir" and the valley, with police taking over.

Ofcourse India will emphasize shutting down of entire militant training network in the region and if Musharraf could do it so could others. As mentioned will pover and restrain from both side would be required and public should be taken into confidence. 



> I had a MUCH longer and very detailed post, but this goddam bloody load-shedding made me lose everything


Looking forward to it later.


----------



## Abhiras

saheeen said:


> Kashmir joins Pakistan
> , it will become a part of pakistan with their choice what they have made already.



when did they made their choice??


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

most of the militants you are talking about are local Kashmiris....they will most likely stop fighting when indian army withdraw from their posts and end the sieges against the population; the collective punishment


----------



## amoverlord

mr. zolfiqar.....uske baad kya hoga??n kya hum kashmir me itne sare army ko khila pila ke khush nahi hai....n about local militants ...ek baat puchta hun ...aap ke yaha koi ake innocent logo ko marta hai(ex. ttp)..aaapki kya rai hai?unse baat karna chaenge???


----------



## Skies

indianrabbit said:


> I was expecting more worthwhile reply to my post then fanboy stuff.
> Any serious takers.



In 71 who had more strength? We had to sacrifice our lives for independence. So Pakistan/Kashmir needs too follow that way, otherwise apparently there is no other way to get Kashmir for Pakistan. And, obviously, after a certain time after beginning of war, Pakistan might get help of third country as we get from you. I don't know why but it seems to me Indian Army could not fight well against Pakistan Army.


----------



## amoverlord

brotherbangladesh said:


> In 71 who had more strength? We had to sacrifice our lives for independence. So Pakistan/Kashmir needs too follow that way, otherwise apparently there is no other way to get Kashmir for Pakistan. And, obviously, after a certain time after beginning of war, Pakistan might get help of third country as we get from you. I don't know why but it seems to me Indian Army could not fight well against Pakistan Army.







even if there is a uprising like BD...do u think there will be any solution possible in present scenario..........


----------



## Hulk

brotherbangladesh said:


> In 71 who had more strength? We had to sacrifice our lives for independence. So Pakistan/Kashmir needs too follow that way, otherwise apparently there is no other way to get Kashmir for Pakistan. And, obviously, after a certain time after beginning of war, Pakistan might get help of third country as we get from you. I don't know why but it seems to me *Indian Army could not fight well against Pakistan Army*.



Then go ahead and take it by force if you can, who stops Pakistan. However war is much more complicated then a kid can think about, hence lot of fanboys keep talking about Missiles and Nuclear bomb and think that is enough to win a war.

When 1999 Kargil happen, war was already on why did Pakistan did not went ahead and annexed Kashmir? Try finding the answer to this question.

Why did people of Kashmir not came out on streets and demanded for freedom at the same time, it would have been very effective and the world would have got the message.

If Pakistan has to get Kashmir from India by war, it has to get the following.
1) Enough money to fight the war. This is most important thing, daily expense of war is no joke, you need to think about expense occurred over a period of time you need to win the war.

2) Managing external pressure. Now it is more or less clear that world will not support this war, so Pakistan has to be capable to sustain world pressure. World pressure means, supply of spare parts stopped, oil supply can be blocked and the likes.

3) Defense forces and equipment to win. The missiles and nukes will be rarely used, minus the cruise missiles. You have to fight lot of war with Airforce and other conventional means, guess I do not think Pakistan has it right now. In fact balance is tilted in India's favor.

So what might happen at the end of any such war that there will still be no result and we need to go back to table. India will be further in advantageous position since it will play defensive (Attacking with intention of harming but not occupying), while Pakistan playing offensive will need much more firepower then India.

Last a Bangladeshi giving reference to 1971 and praying bad of India was the best thing in your post.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

amoverlord said:


> even if there is a uprising like BD...do u think there will be any solution possible in present scenario..........



if there is an uprising like BD, then there is an uprising like BD.....


i.e. similar end result.....


that would be my guess


----------



## amoverlord

lets ...imagine that there will be some huge anti india revolt...do uthink india will hand over kashmir to pakistan like apiece of cake.............................i know that we will never n i also know that that pak will also never let go of this issue n this conflict will never end............only talks can solve this............


----------



## Skies

indianrabbit said:


> lot of fanboys keep talking about Missiles and Nuclear bomb and think that is enough to win a war.



Ya, since both India and Pakistan both has nukes, so those do not work for win.



> Why did people of Kashmir not came out on streets and demanded for freedom at the same time, it would have been very effective and the world would have got the message.



Do you think that world dose not get that message yet? When ever they come out you guys shoot them!




> 1) Enough money to fight the war. This is most important thing, daily expense of war is no joke, you need to think about expense occurred over a period of time you need to win the war.



That's what I said. They need to be desperate, if Pakistan will think about economical damage then they could not win as I said that India will once leave Kashmir to avoid more economical and life damage in case of war. Why whole India will pay for Kashmiris who do not want to belong with them? Just for ego?



> 2) Managing external pressure. Now it is more or less clear that world will not support this war, so Pakistan has to be capable to sustain world pressure. World pressure means, supply of spare parts stopped, oil supply can be blocked and the likes.



Who knows, may be after starting the war would could support Pakistan.



> In fact balance is tilted in India's favor.



It's apparently. USA still not successful in Afghan. There are some other factors too e.g. skill or other kind of favors.



> Last a Bangladeshi giving reference to 1971 and praying bad of India was the best thing in your post.



Think that I just said on behalf them who are victim.

**Well I'm not gonna say anything else about this as I do not have well idea on it. I just said what I guess but if I'm right then time will say in case of any war if Pakistan will fight desperately.


----------



## amoverlord

brotherbangladesh said:


> Ya, since both India and Pakistan both has nukes, so those do not work for win.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that world dose not get that message yet? When ever they come out you guys shoot them!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *That's what I said. They need to be desperate, if Pakistan will think about economical damage then they could not win as I said that India will once leave Kashmir to avoid more economical and life damage in case of war. Why whole India will pay for Kashmiris who do not want to belong with them? Just for ego?
> *
> 
> 
> Who knows, may be after starting the war would could support Pakistan.
> 
> 
> 
> It's apparently. USA still not successful in Afghan. There are some other factors too e.g. skill or other kind of favors.
> 
> 
> 
> Think that I just said on behalf them who are victim.
> 
> **Well I'm not gonna say anything else about this as I do not have well idea on it. I just said what I guess but if I'm right then time will say in case of any war if Pakistan will fight desperately.







r u suicidal or somethng????is war childs play or somethng....is somebody in ur family in defence or u just want to be a net warrior????toi boka ne ki?????killing a man is more easier then saving him....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## NWO

DAWN.COM | Editorial | Resumption of talks

The two foreign secretaries, Salman Bashir from Pakistan and Nirupama Rao from India, finally met in New Delhi on Feb 25 and described their talks as useful. Rao said there had been good chemistry and transparency on both sides. 

They agreed to remain in touch, and Bashir invited his Indian counterpart to visit Islamabad. The talks covered all the issues outstanding between the two countries.

What was striking, though, was the level of scepticism and pessimism expressed in Pakistan about the utility of holding talks with India at this time. There were those who were sure that India would not be willing to discuss anything other than terrorism &#8212; more precisely, its insistence for the past many months that those Pakistani nationals who were allegedly involved in planning and executing the November 2008 Mumbai terrorist incident must be punished and &#8220;the networks of terrorism in Pakistan be dismantled&#8221;.

India has been particularly angered that Hafiz Saeed, head of the banned Jamaatud Dawa considered a cover group for the Lashkar-i-Taiba (LeT) that allegedly masterminded the Mumbai attack, remains a free man and recently made an incendiary statement against India. True enough, this was the main issue raised by Rao; but it was clear all along that once the talks took place, there was little that India could do to stop Pakistan from raising any other issue, including Kashmir.

Initially, the Pakistan Foreign Office did not help matters by insisting that India must agree to resume the &#8216;composite dialogue&#8217; that was broken off after the Mumbai attack. Some officials also called for an &#8216;integrated&#8217; dialogue. They missed the point: the resumption of talks was the real thing and all else was quibbling over words. The very fact that it was India that took the initiative for the resumption of talks signalled a rethink by New Delhi and a reversal of its own intransigent stance for more than a year.

There has, no doubt, been foreign pressure on India to resume dialogue with Pakistan; but it is more likely that the decision to hold talks was taken by New Delhi itself, on a re-evaluation of its interests.

The fact is that Islamist militant groups have become an even greater menace for Pakistan than for India; as Bashir said, Pakistan &#8220;has suffered many more Mumbais&#8221; than India. This realisation may well have influenced India to resume talks with Pakistan; India cannot go on looking at the issue of militancy through the prism of the past.

The ISI might have been supportive of the LeT and other jihadi groups in the past but today, religious extremists and terrorist outfits have become the main security threat to the Pakistani state, government and society. Since last year, Pakistan&#8217;s armed forces have been engaged in a war with militants in Swat, South Waziristan and elsewhere. It is clear, therefore, that Pakistan and India have a common enemy in these militants.

Of course, India is not alone in looking at issues through the prism of the past. Many in Pakistan harp on about the fact that the Afghan Mujahideen and Osama bin Laden were once fully supported by the US, during the Soviet military occupation of Afghanistan. They ask why the US now regards them as enemies.

The answer, obviously, is that circumstances change. In the 1980s, the Mujahideen and the US drew close to each other because of their common opposition to the Soviets in Afghanistan. Once the Soviets left, the common cause was gone.

While one can understand the outrage in India over the Mumbai incident, New Delhi&#8217;s reaction has been disproportionate and even misplaced. India itself conceded that no official agency in Pakistan had been involved in the Mumbai incident. While one of the terrorists, who was captured alive, is a Pakistani national and has confirmed that the LeT organised the attack, it was always clear that there had to be some Indian involvement as well.

Putting all the blame on the Pakistani government was irrational, since it cannot be held accountable for all the wrongs done by its nationals. To use an analogy, most of those involved in 9/11 were Saudi nationals but the US has never made this an issue against the Saudi government. India has also been mistaken in allowing the terrorists to derail the Indo-Pakistan peace talks, in effect giving to the terrorists a veto over the destinies of millions.

At the same time, Pakistani authorities need to be much more active in punishing Pakistani accomplices of the Mumbai incident. In this context Interior Minister Rehman Malik has been guilty of too much talk and too little action. Some sections of our media have also done a disservice by putting the interests of a handful of militants over the interests of the country. These terrorists deserve no defence or sympathy for their unlawful activities.

It is unfortunate that both in India and Pakistan, there are hate lobbies that continue to oppose any forward movement in Indo-Pakistan relations. They build on fears and concocted evidence to build up an atmosphere of deep distrust; more than 60 years have already been lost in the process. There have, no doubt, been fundamental problems such as Kashmir that have defied a solution. But fears in Pakistan about India blocking the rivers, which might lead to war, also appear highly exaggerated.

Our Indus Waters commissioner, Jamaat Ali Shah, and an ex-finance minister, Dr Mubashar Hasan, have said only recently that the shortage of waters in our rivers is due to climatic conditions and not because of any theft by India.

Finally, this question has to be posed to the sceptics: how exactly are the differences between the two sides to be resolved? One option is confrontation, but this would lead to nuclear war and destruction. Since that does not make sense, there is no other option but holding talks. They may be long and frustrating but eventually, the advantages of peace and cooperation will compel the two countries to come to terms with each other.


----------



## JimmyJ

Sorry I have not read the entire thread
I have a solution to offer....a real crazy one....

How about India and Pakistan become a Union with but two states in it and the third as Kashmir. Administration would continue to be the same but people would be free to move across the border and conduct trade but cannot own property. Foreign affairs and defense would come under a single entity. The armies would be integrated through a period of 15 years. Till full integration, the PA would take care of the state of Pakistan and IA the state of India. 

Can you all throw away the current possibilities and let your mind think freely without any constraints except for ideas causing harm to your neighbor and gain to oneself?

Caution: Idealism and perfectionism should be pursued only by people who want to be close to the Creator and want to throw away materialistic fantasies.


----------



## third eye

JimmyJ said:


> Sorry I have not read the entire thread
> I have a solution to offer....a real crazy one....
> 
> How about India and Pakistan become a Union with but two states in it and the third as Kashmir. Administration would continue to be the same but people would be free to move across the border and conduct trade but cannot own property. Foreign affairs and defense would come under a single entity. The armies would be integrated through a period of 15 years. Till full integration, the PA would take care of the state of Pakistan and IA the state of India.
> 
> Can you all throw away the current possibilities and let your mind think freely without any constraints except for ideas causing harm to your neighbor and gain to oneself?
> 
> Caution: Idealism and perfectionism should be pursued only by people who want to be close to the Creator and want to throw away materialistic fantasies.



Great out of the box thinking.

Err.. we are looking for solutions not more problems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Yusuf

After looking at the first post, there would be some Indians who would say resolution of Indo Pak prob would be Akhand Bharat. 

Anyways, there is not way either side is going to move an inch under any circumstances. At least not by negotiations.

Neither military have the capabilities to completely take over the entire land held by other. Only internet fan boys will tell you that their military will take over PakOK or Indian Kashmir. 

The only solution that can be quickly resolve the issue is stay put where you are and call in the international boundary. Beyond this no one is going to get anything either by negotiations or force. Even if we keep this issue alive for the next 50 years, it will remain where it is.

All those saying till when will India stay put. The answer is forever. We have the men, money, machinery and the resolve. The point to ask is till when can Pakistan afford the hostilities? I wouldnt question the men part, but money and machinery is questionable.

What Pakistan can do is accept Indias stand and take benefit from the enormous gain it can take home from Indias progress. Rest is up to Pakistan. We are pretty comfortable where we are. We dont even mind spending hundreds of crores just on Siachen.


----------



## Yusuf

After looking at the first post, there would be some Indians who would say resolution of Indo Pak prob would be Akhand Bharat. 

Anyways, there is not way either side is going to move an inch under any circumstances. At least not by negotiations.

Neither military have the capabilities to completely take over the entire land held by other. Only internet fan boys will tell you that their military will take over PakOK or Indian Kashmir. 

The only solution that can be quickly resolve the issue is stay put where you are and call in the international boundary. Beyond this no one is going to get anything either by negotiations or force. Even if we keep this issue alive for the next 50 years, it will remain where it is.

All those saying till when will India stay put. The answer is forever. We have the men, money, machinery and the resolve. The point to ask is till when can Pakistan afford the hostilities? I wouldnt question the men part, but money and machinery is questionable.

What Pakistan can do is accept Indias stand and take benefit from the enormous gain it can take home from Indias progress. Rest is up to Pakistan. We are pretty comfortable where we are. We dont even mind spending hundreds of crores just on Siachen.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhiras

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> if there is an uprising like BD, then there is an uprising like BD.....
> 
> 
> i.e. similar end result.....
> 
> 
> that would be my guess



India is not Pakistan....

If you wanna try you can try....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ouiouiouiouiouioui

maintain the status quo india has no problem till date and has not claimed vehemently.

the ball is on the pakistan's court and all pakistani leadership undertands that it is better that a will needs to be developed in pakistani leadership to pursue status quo and move ahead !!

there is no other solution other than above i stated *"maintain the status quo"*


----------



## ouiouiouiouiouioui

brotherbangladesh said:


> In 71 who had more strength? We had to sacrifice our lives for independence. So Pakistan/Kashmir needs too follow that way, otherwise apparently there is no other way to get Kashmir for Pakistan. And, obviously, after a certain time after beginning of war, Pakistan might get help of third country as we get from you. I don't know why but it seems to me Indian Army could not fight well against Pakistan Army.



i believe that countries who will not pick up the pace of growth in coming 10 years will automatique disintegrate and become a banana republik.....perhaps that has not happened in south asia..but i can see certain states who are left far behind and in a state of delima.....moving nowhere, 

world is divided into 4 categories

1. Devoloped States - USA, UK, Europe, Australia, Japan
2. Developing States - China, India, Brasil, Russia, Israel, South Korea, Taiwan
3. Rogue States that have no economic growth and no stability where wars are fought and economy are running by virtue of alimony being paid. these states are like dead horses to whom the hay is being fed" - Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Parts of African States
4. Potential States where Growth will Take place : Malayasia, Thailand, Egypt, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Argentina, South Africa

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## thebrownguy

brotherbangladesh said:


> In 71 who had more strength? We had to sacrifice our lives for independence. So Pakistan/Kashmir needs too follow that way, otherwise apparently there is no other way to get Kashmir for Pakistan. And, obviously, after a certain time after beginning of war, Pakistan might get help of third country as we get from you. I don't know why but it seems to me Indian Army could not fight well against Pakistan Army.



Well,you agree that we hepled you gain your independence in your post, but in the same post you are praying that India gets divided(with Kashmir broken).
Also would you also please enlighten us on your last point.


----------



## NWO

ouiouiouiouiouioui said:


> world is divided into 4 categories
> 
> 1. Devoloped States - USA, UK, Europe, Australia, Japan
> 2. Developing States - China, India, Brasil, Russia, Israel, South Korea, Taiwan
> 3. Rogue States that have *no economic growth* and no stability where wars are fought and economy are running by virtue of alimony being paid. these states are like dead horses to whom the hay is being fed" - Iran, *Pakistan*, Afghanistan, Parts of African States
> 4. Potential States where Growth will Take place : Malayasia, Thailand, Egypt, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Argentina, South Africa



How does Pakistan have no growth? Have you seen the economy the last decade? Yes, lately, it has been declining. But overall, it has greatly increased in the past decade. Musharraf even stopped borrowing from the IMF. Even with the War on Terror, Pakistan is still predicted to have 5&#37; growth by 2011. In this current crisis, Pakistan still has 3.5-4% growth.


----------



## Skies

thebrownguy said:


> Well,you agree that we hepled you gain your independence in your post, but in the same post you are praying that India gets divided(with Kashmir broken).
> Also would you also please enlighten us on your last point.



About Indian help in 71:

It&#8217;s true that Indian help catalyzed our independent process and saved many lives. But I do not want to derail this thread by saying why India helped BD in 71. Also India induced BD people for Independent in *some extant*, actually, to break Pakistan.

About supporting Kashmir and dividation of India:

Kashmiris have different ideology, religion, and may be race too from max Indians. If Kashmir will separate from India then it will be a re-arrangement of S-Asia instead of dividation of India.



brotherbangladesh said:


> I don't know why but it seems to me Indian Army could not fight well against Pakistan Army.



About ^:

It's only my intuition about the braveness and skill of IA. And I hope a lot of people will agree with me.


----------



## thebrownguy

brotherbangladesh said:


> About Indian help in 71:
> 
> Its true that Indian help catalyzed our independent process and saved many lives. But I do not want to derail this thread by saying why India helped BD in 71. Also India induced BD people for Independent in *some extant*, actually, to break Pakistan.
> 
> About supporting Kashmir and dividation of India:
> 
> Kashmiris have different ideology, religion, and may be race too from max Indians. If Kashmir will separate from India then it will be a re-arrangement of S-Asia instead of dividation of India.
> 
> 
> 
> About ^:
> 
> It's only my intuition about the braveness and skill of IA. And I hope a lot of people will agree with me.



Well my dear friend, please google "battle of Longewala" and get back at me! Our army has seen war. Faced it , braved it won it. Faught in Siachen, the worlds toughest battle field and emerged victorious, in Kargil in conditions very harsh, too harsh to survive forget fighting, faced enemy perched at heights, in bunkers, and drove them back. 
Has your army even seen action, that you are making such a rant. I don't want to go any further and say anything about your army, because i respect the men in uniform (armed forces), irrespective of their nationality.
PS - don't forget to google the battle of longewala

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## minhori

Gi&#7843;i pháp website &#273;&#7875; kinh doanh t&#7889;t h&#417;n

Website doanh nghi&#7879;p thông th&#432;&#7901;ng là 1 website có s&#7889; l&#432;&#7907;ng l&#7899;n thông tin &#273;&#432;&#7907;c ch&#7913;a trong c&#417; s&#7903; d&#7919; li&#7879;u. Khi s&#7903; h&#7919;u website &#273;&#7897;ng các doanh nghi&#7879;p, công ty có kh&#7843; n&#259;ng qu&#7843;n tr&#7883; thay &#273;&#7893;i thông tin, n&#7897;i dung website nh&#432; ý mu&#7889;n.
B&#7841;n ch&#432;a bi&#7871;t nên b&#7855;t &#273;&#7847;u t&#7915; &#273;âu &#273;&#7875; có th&#7875; xây d&#7921;ng m&#7897;t website? B&#7841;n có th&#7875; tham kh&#7843;o quy trình thi&#7871;t k&#7871; website c&#7911;a chúng tôi &#273;&#7875; có &#273;&#432;&#7907;c hình dung v&#7873; toàn b&#7897; các b&#432;&#7899;c trong quy trình thi&#7871;t k&#7871; và xây d&#7921;ng m&#7897;t website
Không ai có th&#7875; ph&#7911; nh&#7853;n m&#7897;t s&#7921; th&#7853;t r&#7857;ng Internet v&#7899;i các trang web th&#432;&#417;ng m&#7841;i &#273;i&#7879;n t&#7917; là cách th&#7913;c kinh doanh vô cùng hi&#7879;u qu&#7843; khi nó &#273;em l&#7841;i cho khách hàng c&#417; h&#7897;i &#273;&#7863;t hàng nhi&#7873;u lo&#7841;i s&#7843;n ph&#7849;m/d&#7883;ch v&#7909; khác nhau. R&#7845;t nhi&#7873;u công ty nh&#7887; &#273;ã thu l&#7907;i l&#7899;n t&#7915; các website c&#7911;a mình  m&#7897;t công c&#7909; ti&#7871;p th&#7883; h&#7919;u hi&#7879;u cho s&#7843;n ph&#7849;m/d&#7883;ch v&#7909; c&#7911;a h&#7885;. Tuy nhiên không ph&#7843;i m&#7885;i công ty &#273;&#7873;u có th&#7875; thành công v&#7899;i vi&#7879;c chào m&#7901;i m&#7885;i ng&#432;&#7901;i &#273;&#7863;t hàng s&#7843;n ph&#7849;m c&#7911;a h&#7885; tr&#7921;c ti&#7871;p qua Internet. N&#7871;u b&#7841;n &#273;ang ngh&#297; &#273;&#7871;n nh&#7919;ng chi&#7871;n l&#432;&#7907;c kinh doanh tr&#7921;c tuy&#7871;n, ho&#7863;c vi&#7879;c thu hút khách hàng qua m&#7841;ng, thì d&#432;&#7899;i &#273;ây là m&#7897;t vài y&#7871;u t&#7889; mà b&#7841;n c&#7847;n quan tâm và n&#7855;m v&#7919;ng


----------



## Skies

thebrownguy said:


> PS - don't forget to google the battle of longewala



Nice to see IA in bravery action. But I said about PA vs IA. I did not mention BA there. Tnx.


----------



## Abhiras

brotherbangladesh said:


> About Indian help in 71:
> 
> Its true that Indian help catalyzed our independent process and saved many lives. But I do not want to derail this thread by saying why India helped BD in 71. Also India induced BD people for Independent in *some extant*, actually, to break Pakistan.



India has sympathy for bangladeshi freedom fighters....therefore it opened it boaders ,,when operation searchlight was done by pakistani army.....the number of refugee in india became so high that causes worries to india
Then some pakistani aircrafted attacked indian airs..
India responding quickly destroyed the pakistani within fortnoght...[/QUOTE]




brotherbangladesh said:


> About supporting Kashmir and dividation of India:





brotherbangladesh said:


> Kashmiris have different ideology, religion, and may be race too from max Indians. If Kashmir will separate from India then it will be a re-arrangement of S-Asia instead of dividation of India.


most of the kashmiris supports india , do not fell in the false pakistani propagenda


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Abhiras said:


> most of the kashmiris supports india , do not fell in the false pakistani propagenda



Really? 

it sure doesnt seem that way, you been following the news lately?


----------



## Abhiras

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Really?
> 
> it sure doesnt seem that way, you been following the news lately?


Do you think few incidents are expressing the views of all people ???

Why there is about 60% voting for indian parliament in jammu & kashmir inspite boycott by separatist group


----------



## thebrownguy

Abhiras said:


> Do you think few incidents are expressing the views of all people ???
> 
> Why there is about 60% voting for indian parliament in jammu & kashmir inspite boycott by separatist group



The hard fact is, the valley does not support India, its true Abhiras, but i am talking just about the valley, not Jammu, not Leh and Ladakh. But contrary to the claim of Pakistanis, they do not want to be a part of Pakistan either.
The popular demand now is an independent Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

popular demand from Pakistan & Kashmiri is that they (the Kashmiris) choose their fate

we have a certain position, and regardless of everything else --we will not back down from it


----------



## jinxeD_girl

thebrownguy said:


> The hard fact is, the valley does not support India, its true Abhiras, but i am talking just about the valley, not Jammu, not Leh and Ladakh. But contrary to the claim of Pakistanis, they do not want to be a part of Pakistan either.
> The popular demand now is an independent Kashmir.



That is what I said in one of my previous posts in some other thread.


----------



## thebrownguy

jinxeD_girl said:


> That is what I said in one of my previous posts in some other thread.



Hey Jinxxie, in case say India agrees to give up the valley, will Pakistan ever give up the azad kashmir which is under Pakistani occupation, because the truth is they want an independent Kashmir. I want to know how is this "independent Kashmir" demand treated by the Pakistanis? Do they support it, or they feel betrayed, because i had read something like that in this same thread !!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abhiras

thebrownguy said:


> The hard fact is, the valley does not support India, its true Abhiras, but i am talking just about the valley, not Jammu, not Leh and Ladakh. But contrary to the claim of Pakistanis, they do not want to be a part of Pakistan either.
> The popular demand now is an independent Kashmir.



I know ,in valley no. of seperatist is far more then other region...but still most of them are indian sopporters...
see the 2008 J&K gerenral election result:
pro-indian parties (indian national congress,nc , BJP , CPI(m) etc.) won
more then 50 seats out of 87 in the jammu & kashmirs....


----------



## jinxeD_girl

thebrownguy said:


> Hey Jinxxie, in case say India agrees to give up the valley, will Pakistan ever give up the azad kashmir which is under Pakistani occupation, because the truth is they want an independent Kashmir. I want to know how is this "independent Kashmir" demand treated by the Pakistanis? Do they support it, or they feel betrayed, because i had read something like that in this same thread !!



If India agrees to give up valley, then Pakistan should give up Azad Kashmir too... and as I mentioned before I have lots of Kashmiri friends and the popular demand is for Independent Kashmir now.. and you are the first Indian (I think) to admit this.. Will Indian and Pakistani governments will let go of Kashmir.. well that is another story ...


----------



## thebrownguy

jinxeD_girl said:


> If India agrees to give up valley, then Pakistan should give up Azad Kashmir too... and as I mentioned before I have lots of Kashmiri friends and the popular demand is for Independent Kashmir now.. and you are the first Indian (I think) to admit this.. Will Indian and Pakistani governments will let go of Kashmir.. well that is another story ...



Its not that I am the first Indian to accept this. In fact, there was a lot of indian media coverage on this issue, during the separatist rallies before the last election. The govt does not say that the valley is very pro Indian, but it says they intend to change the people's minds. 
But honestly, do you feel, the Kashmiris' demand for "independent Nation" is even justified? They claim it on what basis?
The entire south asia, is a very diverse region, if each person had a separatist attitude, we would never have been the great nations we are today!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## desiman

jinxeD_girl said:


> If India agrees to give up valley, then Pakistan should give up Azad Kashmir too... and as I mentioned before I have lots of Kashmiri friends and the popular demand is for Independent Kashmir now.. and you are the first Indian (I think) to admit this.. Will Indian and Pakistani governments will let go of Kashmir.. well that is another story ...



See i understand the issue here is Kashmir and the happiness of the people there but one must understand that the Kashmir issue is much much more than that. Even if the people of India and Pakistan can come to a logical solution to this matter, the politicians will never let that happen. The Kashmir issue is like a golden duck on both sides and the best way to get the crowd going. No one will ever kill the Golden Duck as after that many of these politicians will not have an agenda to fight on. Any party that gives in regarding the Kashmir issue will probably never been seen again. With so much on stake, there are huge doubts on whether this issue can ever be solved. I really do not think politicians of both regions will ever want this Golden Duck to die. One must broaden his/her gaze when viewing the Kashmir issues, there is much more than what meets the eye.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## InExile

There is no solution to the Kashmir problem; that both sides will accept. At the moment, Pakistan is not strong enough to impose its will on India. India is happy with the status quo and will not try to change the situation.

Therefore, I forsee the status quo to last atleast our lifetimes.


----------



## Hyde

Tell me please............... is there any real solution of Kashmir


----------



## riju78

Kashmir conflict began when Britain pulled out
Kashmir conflict began when Britain pulled out - thestar.com



The battle over Kashmir dates back to the post-World War II era when Britain was negotiating the independence of India and the creation of the Islamic nation of Pakistan.

Britain sent London lawyer Cyril Radcliffe to the subcontinent to draw up borders separating India and Pakistan. After two centuries of British rule, Radcliffe, on his first visit to the region, was given 40 days to finish his job.

While Muslim-dominated states were supposed to become a part of Pakistan, Jammu and Kashmir had a Hindu ruler, Hari Singh. He opted to go with India.

An agreement was reached for residents to decide their ultimate future  Indian or Pakistani  in a statewide plebiscite. India has refused to allow that to happen, saying the original UN-brokered ceasefire demands Pakistan demilitarize its side of the contested border before a vote.

In 1972, after their third war, in which after India helped East Pakistan gain independence as Bangladesh, the Line of Control was established in Kashmir.

For close to 20 years, there was an uncomfortable peace in the valley.

In 1989, disenchanted by repeatedly rigged elections and purportedly inspired by the collapse of the Berlin Wall, Kashmiris began to revolt. Militants trained in Pakistan to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan were redirected to Kashmir and steered across the Line of Control to attack Indian targets.

It became routine for Kashmiri boys to slip into Pakistan-controlled Kashmir for weapons training before returning home to battle for an independent state of Kashmir.

Since 1989, an estimated 50,000 people have died in the bloody, costly conflict.

By 2002, then-U.S. president Bill Clinton dubbed Kashmir "the most dangerous place on Earth."

Many attempts have been made to settle the dispute over Kashmir.

Between 1947 and 2008, 46 proposals were made by Pakistan, India and others.

The U.S. would like the conflict settled so Pakistan can concentrate its efforts on its western border with Afghanistan, a former U.S. diplomat said.

"The U.S. role in the Kashmir conflict has to be as subliminal as possible," said Thomas Pickering, a former U.S. ambassador to New Delhi.

Appointing a special American mediator to work with India and Pakistan wouldn't work because India, in particular, "has special genes to resist 'made by the U.S.' solutions," he said.

Pickering said he could envision a solution where Kashmir is ultimately granted autonomy comparable to that given to New Caledonia, an "overseas territory" of France, 2,000 kilometres off the shore from Sydney, Australia.


----------



## Abhiras

Zaki said:


> Tell me please............... is there any real solution of Kashmir



LoC became international border....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## InExile

Zaki said:


> Tell me please............... is there any real solution of Kashmir




No there isn't. Accept it and move on.


----------



## yuvabharat

Zaki said:


> Tell me please............... is there any real solution of Kashmir


leave kashmir alone and solve ur own terrorist problems.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## prototype

Zaki said:


> Tell me please............... is there any real solution of Kashmir



the reality is nooo


----------



## Kinetic

Zaki said:


> Tell me please............... is there any real solution of Kashmir



The only solution in sight is LoC becoming international border and its the best I think because no one have to sacrifice anything. But it will be difficult for India than Pakistan. Because a democratic govt will rarely do that because of losing votes.


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

Kashmir for Pakistan Jammu for India


----------



## EjazR

First stop the violence and covert militant support, then we can sit across the table and talk about a solution.

Lets not forget that during Musharraf era, we where almost an announcement away from the Kashmir solution. And it was also during his era that militant groups were banned and suppressed.


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

^^^^ I love Musharraf era


----------



## BJlaowai

Gin ka Pakistan said:


> Kashmir for Pakistan Jammu for India



What about Ladakh?


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

BJlaowai said:


> What about Ladakh?



With Indian


----------



## BJlaowai

Zaki said:


> Tell me please............... is there any real solution of Kashmir



I don't think there is any possible solution except making LOC permanent border.
Pakistan doesn't have anything substantial to offer to India to compensate for any loss of territory. India holds all the cards. Pakistan tried to play the terror card, but it failed.
India is quite comfortable with the present situation. Unless Pakistan comes up with something new to offer to India, the status-quo will continue.


----------



## BJlaowai

Gin ka Pakistan said:


> Kashmir for Pakistan Jammu for India



What can Pakistan offer India to give up its claim on Kashmir presently under its control?


----------



## Gin ka Pakistan

BJlaowai said:


> What can Pakistan offer India to give up its claim on Kashmir presently under its control?


Friendship , partnership , Central Asia , Afghanistan and list goes on like UN , OIC


----------



## BJlaowai

Gin ka Pakistan said:


> Friendship , partnership , Central Asia , Afghanistan and list goes on like UN , OIC



Not good enough
Friendship: Its 2 way street. Pakistan can give up its claim on Kashmir for the sake of Indo-Pak friendship 

Partnership: For what?

Central Asia/Afghanistan: Clarify. You mean Pakistan gives India these countries in exchange for Kashmir? When did Pakistan own these countries? Why will India want them? 
If you meant land access to CAR region, then I feel its not worth it. Access to Afghanistan/CAR via Pakistan is not the best option for India, even if the Indo-Pak relationship is most friendly. For India best option is via Iran, since Iran borders CAR. Access to CAR via Pakistan has to go via Afghanistan, which will be a big bottleneck. Also, CAR is not a big market from India's POV. Its a sparsely populated region. The GDP of combined CAR is insignificant. Also, CAR is already a backyard of Russia. China borders most of the CAR countries too. 
Its only the Pakistanis who keep hyping about their Geo-strategic location for CAR. Once WoT is over and the American move out, even that will be gone.

UN, IOC : can you elaborate please??


----------



## PakSher

India Pakistan friendship, are you kidding. Until Indian mentality to dominate changes that will never happen. That will never happen, so there will never be India Pakistan friendship.


----------



## UnitedPak

Kinetic said:


> The only solution in sight is LoC becoming international border and its the best I think because *no one have to sacrifice anything*. But it will be difficult for India than Pakistan. Because a democratic govt will rarely do that because of losing votes.


This attitude is the main cause of the dispute. Complete disregard for Kashmiri wishes. A lot of us dont give a damn about Pakistan or India gaining land. We wish to do *whatever* the Kashmiris want.



EjazR said:


> First stop the violence and covert militant support, then we can sit across the table and talk about a solution.
> 
> Lets not forget that during Musharraf era, we where almost an announcement away from the Kashmir solution. And it was also during his era that militant groups were banned and suppressed.



Endlessly talking about solutions has gotten us nowhere.

But its good that you remember the Musharraf era as it tends to be the Pakistani side wanting and taking necessary steps towards a solution. Indian suggestions are usually to forget about everything, wait it out, admit there is no solution, all the while screaming that its a bilateral issue.

You are also suggesting to improve relations before a solution. You might have noticed that Indian officials use every opportunity to misalign Pakistan in the international community and try to protest nearly every business/military deal involving Pakistan. While you might deny any Baluchistan/Afghanistan links, its needless to say that Indian presence alone is considered hostile.
So does India have to do anything in your version of settling this dispute?


----------



## karan.1970

UnitedPak said:


> This attitude is the main cause of the dispute. Complete disregard for Kashmiri wishes. A lot of us dont give a damn about Pakistan or India gaining land. We wish to do *whatever* the Kashmiris want.
> 
> 
> 
> Endlessly talking about solutions has gotten us nowhere.
> 
> But its good that you remember the Musharraf era as it tends to be the Pakistani side wanting and taking necessary steps towards a solution. Indian suggestions are usually to forget about everything, wait it out, admit there is no solution, all the while screaming that its a bilateral issue.
> 
> You are also suggesting to improve relations before a solution. You might have noticed that Indian officials use every opportunity to misalign Pakistan in the international community and try to protest nearly every business/military deal involving Pakistan. While you might deny any Baluchistan/Afghanistan links, its needless to say that Indian presence alone is considered hostile.
> So does India have to do anything in your version of settling this dispute?



Yes.. 

1. Strongly deal with militancy, which it is doing
2. Keep the pressure on Pakistan by making the cost of backing militancy high. This can be done by increasing pressure in Afghanistan. Its a joke about Pakistan wanting what Kashmiris want. Pakistan, plain and simple needs a strategic gain against India and to keep India off balance.
3. Increase development many fold in Jammu and Kashmir. Increase the number of industries.. Basically deny the militants the socio-economic situation that allows them to recruit the Kashmiri youth as cannon fodder
4. Engage with Pakistan diplomatically (like in Musharraf's era) to evolve a solution that gives an out to every one engaged in the proxy way.


----------



## EjazR

UnitedPak said:


> Endlessly talking about solutions has gotten us nowhere.
> 
> But its good that you remember the Musharraf era as it tends to be the Pakistani side wanting and taking necessary steps towards a solution. Indian suggestions are usually to forget about everything, wait it out, admit there is no solution, all the while screaming that its a bilateral issue.
> 
> You are also suggesting to improve relations before a solution. You might have noticed that Indian officials use every opportunity to misalign Pakistan in the international community and try to protest nearly every business/military deal involving Pakistan. While you might deny any Baluchistan/Afghanistan links, its needless to say that Indian presence alone is considered hostile.
> So does India have to do anything in your version of settling this dispute?



We would not have reached so close to the Four-point solution to tha KSAhmir issue under Musharraf had it NOT been for reciprocal actions taking on the Indian side. Please do remember that even during that time, terrorists attacks were happening across many cities in India but still MMS was pushing the peace process along until ofcourse the Mumbai attacks. Cross border LoC visits and trade e.t.c. were all on the move. Even during the BJP era we had the bus trips and what not until Kargil. Even after that, the BJP govt. tried to find a solution on the Kashmir issue with various partition plans. So its wrong to say that GoI has not "tried" to resolve the Kashmir issue.


At the end of the day the wish of the Kashmiri people has to be taken into account. There is no doubt about that. But it can't be done where they are ignorant of facts or are intimidated by shadowy militant groups.

GoI should also reduce para military presence in population centers and leave it only to the J&K police. the Army act (AFSPA) should also modified and there should be zero tolerance for HR violations as GoI and J&K govt. are the ruling authority there after all.

You must understand that terrorism by its very nature terrorizes people and it is natural that they will over react especially with cases like the Mumbai attacks. Look at the reaction in Pakistan itself and the campaign now underway in the Tribal areas.

But in no way should India allow terrorists groups like LeT, Hizb and other assorted flavors under the United Jihad Council be allowed to set the agenda of the solution Kashmir solution. Nothing even remotely that can be claimed as a victory by them should be done by the GoI. And this is good for Pakistan herself, because any sort of "victory" against India that these groups claim will further spur and empower these groups within Pakistan itself further helping to de-stablise Pakistan.




I don't know the reality on the ground of couse but still I can understand that there may some involvement of India in Balochistan (although the PA/GoP has made the situation worse by its own actions as well) because there have been historical instances of support by India in the 1970s as well. 

But ideologically the TTP/AQ groups will just not work with India knowingly, I don't think that this is possible especially if you look at what local journalists like Saleem Safi e.t.c. have found about the origins of TTP and their background. They are not fighting for independence or separation but they claim to be fighting to "liberate Pakistan" itself and establish a proper "Islamic state"


----------



## anurag_singh

I am giving my solution which No one will like neither my indian brothers nor pakistani friends:-
Because Partition was not complete. So we should complete the partition now. According to mr. Jinnah "Hindu and Muslim can't live together". So Muslim majority area of Jammu and Kashmir ,i.e Kashmir valley should be given to pakistan but on one condition which is "complete the partition according to mr. jinnah theory which is stated above". i.e completely transfer of all hindu and sikh population of pakistan to India and completely transfer of all muslims of India to Pakistan.
Sorry Brothers If You don't like it.


----------



## shekhar

anurag_singh said:


> I am giving my solution which No one will like neither my indian brothers nor pakistani friends:-
> Because Partition was not complete. So we should complete the partition now. According to mr. Jinnah "Hindu and Muslim can't live together". So Muslim majority area of Jammu and Kashmir ,i.e Kashmir valley should be given to pakistan but on one condition which is "complete the partition according to mr. jinnah theory which is stated above". i.e completely transfer of all hindu and sikh population of pakistan to India and completely transfer of all muslims of India to Pakistan.
> Sorry Brothers If You don't like it.


they dont have the money to feed pak population there economy is reaching new depth every day how they will feed muslims from india who are more in numbers than pak population
i am surprised how they dream of becoming islamic power only thing they have managed so far is bomb they are not most highest islamic population country (indonasia)
they are not rich (saudi)
they dont have technology(malasia)
what they have is zaid hamid giving day dreaming to pak to become world Islamic leader 
they also lost humiliating wars and they want to be leader
BTW ur suggestion is BS why should muslims from india leave they are part of india
i have another solution "water solution"but i think india is not playing this card beacuse of IPI pipeline
i read it somewhere will provid the link also
we have water control once IPI pipeline is complete and if they dare to stop the petrolium supply to india from IRAN we can do the same for water to pakistan so water is like going to be insurance policy for indian petrolium supply thats the reason indian gov making so many small and big dams to control and divert water to punjab and other places


----------



## A.R.

anurag_singh said:


> I am giving my solution which No one will like neither my indian brothers nor pakistani friends:-
> Because Partition was not complete. So we should complete the partition now. According to mr. Jinnah "Hindu and Muslim can't live together". So Muslim majority area of Jammu and Kashmir ,i.e Kashmir valley should be given to pakistan but on one condition which is "complete the partition according to mr. jinnah theory which is stated above". i.e completely transfer of all hindu and sikh population of pakistan to India and completely transfer of all muslims of India to Pakistan.
> Sorry Brothers If You don't like it.



this is your very first post on this forum.... why do you think muslims of india are going to leave india... they too love india as much as you love india... what if you are turned out of india and sent to nepal which is has even more % of hindus(97%).... 
here in this forum as far as i know no indian muslim did ever supported pakistanies... 

so dear chill....


----------



## KS

Gin ka Pakistan said:


> Friendship , partnership , Central Asia , Afghanistan and list goes on like UN , OIC



Friendship --- if it is to come at the expense of Teriitorial integrity of India..sorry no thanks.
Partnership --- wat worthwile thing that India doesnt have can Pakistan give..?
Central Asia --- no thanks...as Chabahar is already going to be completed..Also Pakistani access to CAR is thro rugged mountains unlike Iran which is not so mountanious..I mean for Pipelines the route is not feasible.
Afghanistan --- already there....nothing for u to offer as it is a bilateral affair b/n Afg and India
UN ---- we have other routes
OIC --- u must be kidding rite...


----------



## Hyde

Abhiras said:


> LoC became international border....





InExile said:


> No there isn't. Accept it and move on.





yuvabharat said:


> leave kashmir alone and solve ur own terrorist problems.





prototype said:


> the reality is nooo





Kinetic said:


> The only solution in sight is LoC becoming international border and its the best I think because no one have to sacrifice anything. But it will be difficult for India than Pakistan. Because a democratic govt will rarely do that because of losing votes.





EjazR said:


> First stop the violence and covert militant support, then we can sit across the table and talk about a solution.
> 
> Lets not forget that during Musharraf era, we where almost an announcement away from the Kashmir solution. And it was also during his era that militant groups were banned and suppressed.





BJlaowai said:


> I don't think there is any possible solution except making LOC permanent border.
> Pakistan doesn't have anything substantial to offer to India to compensate for any loss of territory. India holds all the cards. Pakistan tried to play the terror card, but it failed.
> India is quite comfortable with the present situation. Unless Pakistan comes up with something new to offer to India, the status-quo will continue.



oh nai naa......... its only a win-win situation for India. There has to be a nuteral solution of this problem. Don't see the situation from India's perspective. Be Nuteral

The decision has to be Give n take


----------



## Prometheus

Zaki said:


> oh nai naa......... its only a win-win situation for India. There has to be a nuteral solution of this problem. Don't see the situation from India's perspective. Be Nuteral
> 
> The decision has to be Give n take




Solution cannot be neutral as whatever the agreement is reached, India is going to be loser..........it can be kashmir..........Saichen...........Sir chreek............or anything else.


Best for India is to maintain status co.


----------



## Hyde

Prometheus said:


> Solution cannot be neutral as whatever the agreement is reached, India is going to be loser..........it can be kashmir..........Saichen...........Sir chreek............or anything else.
> 
> 
> Best for India is to maintain status co.


in another words india will never solve this matter 

and keep us busy in Do more in aboloshing terrorist activities


----------



## Prometheus

Zaki said:


> in another words india will never solve this matter
> 
> and keep us busy in Do more in aboloshing terrorist activities




yup ..........you got it.............why should be?
sir chreek is under our control............if something happens we are gonna lose ground.

on saichen.............we are at heights..............solution will be coming down


----------



## KS

Zaki said:


> in another words india will never solve this matter
> 
> and keep us busy in Do more in aboloshing terrorist activities



if that benefits us...i dont c any reason y it should not be followed..?wat say Zaki bhai..?


----------



## ashisbutt

I posted the below in a new thread but got deleted for some lame reasons. Posting them here

Hi Folks,

I'm starting this thread (my first thread after the member intro ) with an intention to know a thing which is rattling in my head.

Quote:
1. Pakistan, as we all know, is not a big economy. Matter of fact, its not even among the fastest rising economies unlike China, India and few other Asian countries in this Asian Era. 

2. Pakistan, as we all know, is trying to help liberate Kashmir from India since Pakistan claims that it wants independent Kashmir.

3. Pakistan, as we know, spends a lot of money for the 2nd point.
But want I don't know is,

Quote:
1. Why Pakistan wants independent Kashmir.

2. Even if you have a justification/answer for the above question, is/was Pakistan ever in a position to help and liberate a second country (first country would mean the self ie., Pakistan itself)? 

3. Pakistan can do the 2nd point if it was US (like they did for Iraq, Afgan, and tried out in Vietnam) but is Pakistan same as the US?

4. If Pakistan ever wanted an independent Kashmir, why did it invade Kashmir in 1947 in the first place??
I really can understand if Pakistan wants Kashmir for itself and dose spend and engage for its land. But their official claim is not that or is it otherwise?

Quote:
1. Having put forward all the questions that I had in my mind, I'm not expecting any emotional replies.

2. My intention is not to create a flame thread so I kindly request you to help me in this regards.
Looking forward for a better understanding,

Thank you.


----------



## Hyde

Prometheus said:


> yup ..........you got it.............why should be?
> sir chreek is under our control............if something happens we are gonna lose ground.
> 
> on saichen.............we are at heights..............solution will be coming down





Karthic Sri said:


> if that benefits us...i dont c any reason y it should not be followed..?wat say Zaki bhai..?



get ready for war on 21st December 2012


----------



## anurag_singh

@ Shekhar @ A.R.
Bro I am not against muslims . I posted that only to see reactions from pakistanis, because many of them claim that they are "markas" of "ummat-e-muslimmah" and they are destined for "ghazwa-e-hind", but I got reactions from my Indian brothers which I already expected. Sorry for that message but that was not my intention.


----------



## KS

Zaki said:


> get ready for war on 21st December 2012



nd bro u can expect exactly the same result that befell that man.!!!


----------



## Hyde

Karthic Sri said:


> nd bro u can expect exactly the same result that befell that man.!!!



Shayr ke 1 din ki zindagi - Geedar ki so sala zindagi se behtar hai - Tipu Sultan 

*one day life of tiger is better than 100 years life of jackal* - Tipu Sultan


----------



## KS

Zaki said:


> Shayr ke 1 din ki zindagi - Geedar ki so sala zindagi se behtar hai - Tipu Sultan
> 
> *one day life of tiger is better than 100 years life of jackal* - Tipu Sultan



Good reply but practically doesnt answer my question in this contest..


----------



## Hyde

Karthic Sri said:


> Good reply but practically doesnt answer my question in this contest..



you made it clear already............... India will keep Pakistan busy in terrorism activities so that they cannot resolve Kashmir issue.

What else is there left to discuss now?

See me on border on 21st December 2012


----------



## KS

Zaki said:


> you made it clear already............... India will keep Pakistan busy in terrorism activities so that they cannot resolve Kashmir issue.
> 
> What else is there left to discuss now?
> 
> See me on border on 21st December 2012



agreed yaar but pls change "India will keep Pakistan busy in terrorism activities so that they cannot resolve Kashmir issue." to "Pakistan will keep India busy in terrorism activities so that they cannot resolve Kashmir issue"..
That reflects reality better.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hyde

Karthic Sri said:


> agreed yaar but pls change "India will keep Pakistan busy in terrorism activities so that they cannot resolve Kashmir issue." to "Pakistan will keep India busy in terrorism activities so that they cannot resolve Kashmir issue"..
> That reflects reality better.



but in another words you will be turning away from your own comments. I would stand on my words and respect your old opinion.

if you insist i can delete the entire post for you otherwise let it be like that

Thanks and this is my last post here...........


----------



## shekhar

Zaki said:


> Shayr ke 1 din ki zindagi - Geedar ki so sala zindagi se behtar hai - Tipu Sultan
> 
> *one day life of tiger is better than 100 years life of jackal* - Tipu Sultan



who is geedar here and who is sher
geedar can never take on sher face to face(pak can never take on india face to face) and if geedar tries to do so geedar has to risk his existence (pak tried to face india in 71 and united pakistan doesnt exist anymore) 
now tell me bro who is geedar and who is sher in india pak context

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hammy007

shekhar said:


> who is geedar here and who is sher
> geedar can never take on sher face to face(pak can never take on india face to face) and if geedar tries to do so geedar has to risk his existence (pak tried to face india in 71 and united pakistan doesnt exist anymore)
> now tell me bro who is geedar and who is sher in india pak context



geedar is one which looks for afghanistan when its not having the fcuk from the right place lol.


----------



## KS

Zaki said:


> but in another words you will be turning away from your own comments. I would stand on my words and respect your old opinion.
> 
> if you insist i can delete the entire post for you otherwise let it be like that
> 
> Thanks and this is my last post here...........



i m not contradicting any of my statements mate.
U can try keeping us busy by sending the mujaheddin...
nd We r perfectly happy with the *status quo of sending them to meet their makers*...

thanx.


----------



## Prometheus

Zaki said:


> get ready for war on 21st December 2012



zaki ji...........if war even stops after 15 days.........India will service........dont know about Pakistan.

You know you should hear to 'Najam sethi"


----------



## Prometheus

Zaki said:


> Shayr ke 1 din ki zindagi - Geedar ki so sala zindagi se behtar hai - Tipu Sultan
> 
> *one day life of tiger is better than 100 years life of jackal* - Tipu Sultan



zaki bhai kuch original toh bolo..............kissi Indian ki baat ko forward karte rehte ho


----------



## Hyde

Prometheus said:


> zaki bhai kuch original toh bolo..............kissi Indian ki baat ko forward karte rehte ho



As per your genius fellow - Tipu was a villain and disgrace to India  and those who support Sultan are insane 

Pleae read this thread
http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...d-bin-qasim-haji-adeel-anp-15.html#post822256

You may refer to his previous posts also in the same thread - First decide who was who - as per my knowledge he was a Muslim ruler on India whose father defeated a Hindu Raja and established his own empire - nothing else 

================

Get back to topic please


----------



## KS

Zaki said:


> As per your genius fellow - Tipu was a villain and disgrace to India  and those who support Sultan are insane
> 
> Pleae read this thread
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...d-bin-qasim-haji-adeel-anp-15.html#post822256
> 
> You may refer to his previous posts also in the same thread - First decide who was who - as per my knowledge he was a Muslim ruler on India whose father defeated a Hindu Raja and established his own empire - nothing else
> 
> ================
> 
> Get back to topic please




Good play of words isnt it.. by comparing Tipu with Bin Qasim..

The similarities b/n Tipu and Bin Qasim is that both are muslims and it ends there.
Bin Qasim was an Arab foreign invader invading the subcontinent.(unless u think urselves as Arabs).but Tipu was essentially an Indian and a hero at that (fighting British).
*Being a muslim doesnt mean he s not Indian.Please get out of that mentality of Indians and Muslims being mutually exclusive sets.*
nd Please dont compare Tipu and Qasim..there is a world of difference b/n them.


----------



## Hyde

Karthic Sri said:


> Good play of words isnt it.. by comparing Tipu with Bin Qasim..
> 
> The similarities b/n Tipu and Bin Qasim is that both are muslims and it ends there.
> Bin Qasim was an Arab foreign invader invading the subcontinent.(unless u think urselves as Arabs).but Tipu was essentially an Indian and a hero at that (fighting British).
> *Being a muslim doesnt mean he s not Indian.Please get out of that mentality of Indians and Muslims being mutually exclusive sets.*
> nd Please dont compare Tipu and Qasim..there is a world of difference b/n them.



I ain't saying anything Sir,

Your indian fellow saying he doesn't like Tipu and only insane will support him 

So are you insane??????  or you want to say he is insane 

Please decided amongsts yourself first  Thanks


----------



## Bang Galore

Zaki said:


> Pleae read this thread
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/milita...d-bin-qasim-haji-adeel-anp-15.html#post822256
> 
> You may refer to his previous posts also in the same thread - First decide who was who - *as per my knowledge he was a Muslim ruler on India whose father defeated a Hindu Raja and established his own empire - nothing else *



Getting tired of refuting you. Your knowledge is not accurate. Please don't go on making that silly statement without any proof.


----------



## KS

Zaki said:


> I ain't saying anything Sir,
> 
> Your indian fellow saying he doesn't like Tipu and only insane will support him
> 
> So are you insane??????  or you want to say he is insane
> 
> Please decided amongsts yourself first  Thanks




Again deflecting the point arent u...?

U made a comparison b/n Tipu and Bin Qasim and wen i refuted u went bak and started blaming him.
Even if he dislikes tipu(he may dislike him for a variety of reasons- being a muslim is not a necessary one) that doesnt make Tipu any less Indian..

So pls dont continue with this insane logic..if i may..


----------



## KSRaj

Zaki said:


> I ain't saying anything Sir,
> 
> Your indian fellow saying he doesn't like Tipu and only insane will support him
> 
> So are you insane??????  or you want to say he is insane
> 
> Please decided amongsts yourself first  Thanks



Thats a funny way to put it ... you expect a billion Indians to back a statement made by one!

So ... if any Pakistani has said something stupid / dumb / idiotic / insane, can we everytime ask YOU to defend it!?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mehwish92

ejaz007 said:


> Balchistan and Swat are not disputed territory and are not claimed by anyone. Stop derailing the thread. Balochistan joined Pakistan by free will in 1947 when their jirga voted on it.
> 
> India considers it self worlds best democracy would you be willing to give the same right to people of Kashmir, Punjab, Assam, Chatisgarh, Tamil Nadu, Bangal, Mizoram, Nagaland, Jharkand and Sikim.
> 
> Lets see how many wish to remain with you



Majority of these states (all except maybe a few like mizoram, parts of Kashmir) would most likely choose to remain within India.

There is no separatist movement in Sikkim. Sikkim joined India in thr 1970s via a referendum, in which 97&#37; of the citizens voted to join India. 

Just thought I'd clear this up because Ive come across many Pakistanis who bring up Sikkim issue for some odd reason.

Punjab also the separatist movement has died down, as it has in Tamil Nadu. There is no such movement in Bengal. Jharkhand is suffering from the Naxal movement.


----------



## RAVIAN

kehtay hain yaran a jahan kashmir hai jannat

jannat kisi kafir ko mili hai na mily ge


----------



## Silver-Scorpion

I think that the best solution for Kashmir is either scenario 4 or 7.

Here are the reasons:

There are a lot protests in Indian controlled Kashmir almost everyday over many issues and India spends a lot of money to maintain military in the region to keep order, whereas this is not an issue in Pakistani controlled Kashmir. This means that it would likely be true about the other Muslim majority region if it came under Pakistani administration.

It would seem that India has lost territory and resources. However resolving the issue of Kashmir would reduce the tensions between India and Pakistan and therefore both countries can come to a peace agreement. This would enable them to reduce their defense expenditures and reduce the size of army at the border of India and Pakistan and bring peace and stability to the region. If that happens India and Pakistan can both progress way faster than their current rate because the instability of the region is a hindrance in progress for both right now. So in the long run India would not have to spend a fortune maintaining its military in Kashmir and reducing its military budget would save India billions. It would be in the best interest of the Kashmiri people because they would not feel oppressed and their families that are split between the two regions of Kashmir will be united. Also improved relations between India and Pakistan would mean that overtime the borders would become meaningless just like in the case of France and Britain. They used to be rivals and enemies just like India and Pakistan but overtime they became Allies and now their citizens enjoy peace and can travel between the two countries without any difficulty. In conclusion this would be best for Kashmiri people and would also benefit India and Pakistan in the long run.


----------



## sab

RAVIAN said:


> kehtay hain yaran a jahan kashmir hai jannat
> 
> jannat kisi kafir ko mili hai na mily ge


Do you believe in Allah??? Then why are you contradicting him???
A leaf can not be moved without his wish. So brother, if Kasmir is in Indian control, it is his wish.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Silver-Scorpion

sab said:


> Do you believe in Allah??? Then why are you contradicting him???
> A leaf can not be moved without his wish. So brother, if Kasmir is in Indian control, it is his wish.



Well then by that same logic why don't you go and jump off a building if He wishes for you to live, u would live. My point is that our actions also play a role. We must work for what we want. So for the sake of Kashmiris both India and Pakistan must work together.


----------



## KS

Silver-Scorpion said:


> I think that the best solution for Kashmir is either scenario 4 or 7.
> 
> Here are the reasons:
> 
> There are a lot protests in Indian controlled Kashmir almost everyday over many issues and India spends a lot of money to maintain military in the region to keep order, whereas this is not an issue in Pakistani controlled Kashmir. This means that it would likely be true about the other Muslim majority region if it came under Pakistani administration.
> 
> It would seem that India has lost territory and resources. However resolving the issue of Kashmir would reduce the tensions between India and Pakistan and therefore both countries can come to a peace agreement. This would enable them to reduce their defense expenditures and reduce the size of army at the border of India and Pakistan and bring peace and stability to the region. If that happens India and Pakistan can both progress way faster than their current rate because the instability of the region is a hindrance in progress for both right now. So in the long run India would not have to spend a fortune maintaining its military in Kashmir and reducing its military budget would save India billions. It would be in the best interest of the Kashmiri people because they would not feel oppressed and their families that are split between the two regions of Kashmir will be united. Also improved relations between India and Pakistan would mean that overtime the borders would become meaningless just like in the case of France and Britain. They used to be rivals and enemies just like India and Pakistan but overtime they became Allies and now their citizens enjoy peace and can travel between the two countries without any difficulty. In conclusion this would be best for Kashmiri people and would also benefit India and Pakistan in the long run.



Both scenario 4 and 7 are not possible..I ll give the reasons.

*scenario 4*: Primary reason that an independent Kashmir is neither feasible nor advisable is that it will be sandwiched between three nuclear powers - India,Pak,China and given the strategic location of it *it will again become a centre of power play between India,Pakistan* and China and will be transformed into another Afghanistan.
And another thing is that there is *no provision for an independent Kashmir according to the UN resolutions.*

*Scenario 7:* *There is no provision for piece-by-piece settlement/accession of Kashmir.*
According to existing UN resolutions,If Kashmir tomorrow joins either India or Pakistan it should join as a single entity (Jammu,Kashmir Valley,P-O-K,Northern Areas,Ladakh,Area gifted to China all combined) and not as Valley going to Pak,Jammu and Ladakh going to India....That is not allowed.


So only feasible solution where both India,Pak happy - *Convert LOC into IB. *


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> Both scenario 4 and 7 are not possible..I ll give the reasons.
> 
> *scenario 4*: Primary reason that an independent Kashmir is neither feasible nor advisable is that it will be sandwiched between three nuclear powers - India,Pak,China and given the strategic location of it *it will again become a centre of power play between India,Pakistan* and China and will be transformed into another Afghanistan.
> And another thing is that there is *no provision for an independent Kashmir according to the UN resolutions.*
> 
> *Scenario 7:* *There is no provision for piece-by-piece settlement/accession of Kashmir.*
> According to existing UN resolutions,If Kashmir tomorrow joins either India or Pakistan it should join as a single entity (Jammu,Kashmir Valley,P-O-K,Northern Areas,Ladakh,Area gifted to China all combined) and not as Valley going to Pak,Jammu and Ladakh going to India....That is not allowed.
> 
> 
> So only feasible solution where both India,Pak happy - *Convert LOC into IB. *


Seriously, i am impressed by you people. When it suites you, _gaddha bhe **** ban jata hai._

Really, this entire thread is filled with the blatant refutations regarding the UN resolution in case of Kashmir by almost every indian member and here you are acceding to it just to make the LoC into an IB.

Well, guudluck!


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> Seriously, i am impressed by you people. When it suites you, _gaddha bhe **** ban jata hai._
> 
> Really, this entire thread is filled with the blatant refutations regarding the UN resolution in case of Kashmir by almost every indian member and here you are acceding to it just to make the LoC into an IB.
> 
> Well, guudluck!



well as a think tank without making fun of my post..can u give me a possible solution that satisfies both India and Pakistan..?

Dont say..Independence (not accepatable to India and not allowed as per UNSC resolutions).

Jus give me 1 solution in accordance with UNSC resolutions.


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> well as a think tank without making fun of my post..can u give me a possible solution that satisfies both India and Pakistan..?


Absurd posts are supposed to be made fun of. You'll learn this with the passage of time, here.



> Dont say..Independence (not accepatable to India and not allowed as per UNSC resolutions).


No, i wont.



> Jus give me 1 solution in accordance with UNSC resolutions.



i and many others have already given so many.

BTW, if for an instance you people would think sanely, the UN resolution itself is a very valid and logical solution to the Kashmir issue.


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> Absurd posts are supposed to be made fun of. You'll learn this with the passage of time, here.



Can u tel wat was absurd in my post..?..Atleast i dont post one liners ridiculing others..



xeric said:


> i and many others have already given so many.
> 
> BTW, if for an instance you people would think sanely, the UN resolution itself is a very valid and logical solution to the Kashmir issue.



If u guys had thought sanely abt the UN resolutions...u wouldn have gifted a large chunk of Kashmir to China.!!!
Sane thinking...my foot....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> Can u tel wat was absurd in my post..?..Atleast i dont post one liners ridiculing others..
> 
> 
> 
> If u guys had thought sanely abt the UN resolutions...u wouldn have gifted a large chunk of Kashmir to China.!!!
> Sane thinking...my foot....



Well people, the above quoted post is an empirical evidence of 'sane' thinking.

And on a second note, suggesting to convert LoC into IB and at the same time also advocating the UN Resolution on Kashmir - nothing can be more saner, right?

My sane friend you have been suggesting two opposite courses....

And as for 'gifting' something to China, well it is only the (lame) indians who consider our Northern Areas as part of Kashmir and unnecessarily take tension when we deal with our internal issues. i would suggest you to mind your 220 districts, coz we wont say a thing (or get tense) when they would get gifted into an independent state!


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Well people, the above quoted post is an empirical evidence of 'sane' thinking.
> 
> And on a second note, suggesting to convert LoC into IB and at the same time also advocating the UN Resolution on Kashmir - nothing can be more saner, right?
> 
> My sane friend you have been suggesting two opposite courses....
> 
> And as for 'gifting' something to China, well it is only the (lame) indians who consider our Northern Areas as part of Kashmir and unnecessarily take tension when we deal with our internal issues. i would suggest you to mind your 220 districts, coz we wont say a thing (or get tense) when they would get gifted into an independent state!



Isnt UN resolution regarding the complete princely state of Kashmir as it stood on 15th Aug 1947? Werent the Northern areas a part of it.?

About gifting into independent states, lets leave that aside as that will degenerate quickly into a tit-for-tat mud sling fest with the whole BLA, TTP stuff coming in.


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Isnt UN resolution regarding the complete princely state of Kashmir as it stood on 15th Aug 1947? Werent the Northern areas a part of it.?


i think we 'won' some Kashmir from you people or perhaps you are still in the state of denial?



> About gifting into independent states, lets leave that aside as that will degenerate quickly into a tit-for-tat mud sling fest with the whole BLA, TTP stuff coming in.



Well when some mirror is shown you start squealing. BTW, BLA and TTP are incompatible to 220 Districts, or so you want to believe?


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> i think we 'won' some Kashmir from you people or perhaps you are still in the state of denial?
> 
> 
> 
> Well when some mirror is shown you start squealing. BTW, BLA and TTP are incompatible to 220 Districts, or so you want to believe?



Yes in 1948, PA captured the area of Kashmir that is currently with Pakistan. That included the so called Azad Kashmir and the Northern areas of G&B. The UN resolution covers it all. Not just the valley of Kashmir

About we squealing; well, the shrillness of posts of most Pakistani members about UN resolutions suggest otherwise.

The Taliban situaltion is surely incomptible to the 220 districts. The 1st one is an organized global terrorism factory based out to NWFP regions of Pakistan and is a global headache(migraine)

The 2nd is a law and order problem which has assumed immense proportions due to neglect and political posturing of corrupt Indian politicians

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> Well people, the above quoted post is an empirical evidence of 'sane' thinking.
> 
> And on a second note, suggesting to convert LoC into IB and at the same time also advocating the UN Resolution on Kashmir - nothing can be more saner, right?



U din understand my post eh..?.thought so.

All im saying is u guys have lost the moral credibilty to ask for plebiscite wen u urself violated the UNSC resolutions by unilaterally gifting a part of the princely state of Kashmir to China.




xeric said:


> And as for 'gifting' something to China, well it is *only the (lame) indians who consider our Northern Areas as part of Kashmir* and unnecessarily take tension when we deal with our internal issues. i would suggest you to mind your 220 districts, coz we wont say a thing (or get tense) when they would get gifted into an independent state!



Oh wat can i say abt u brilliant one.
The whiole world including the UN believes that the Northern Areas are disputed and they are a part of the historic pricely state of Jammu and Kashmir.
If u think other wise i say "Grow Up". 



xeric said:


> i think we *'won'* some Kashmir from you people or perhaps you are still in the state of denial?



The correct word would be *"Illegally Occupied"*.
BTW if u think u won a part of Kashmir..then there is nothing wrong in us thinking we sucessfully defended a large portion of Kashmir.
So *by ur genius logic the Kashmir with India is India's internal problem* and so the purpose of this thread is zero.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> U din understand my post eh..?.thought so.
> 
> All im saying is u guys have lost the moral credibilty to ask for plebiscite wen u urself violated the UNSC resolutions by unilaterally gifting a part of the princely state of Kashmir to China.


So now you would shift goal posts..

You started with LoC into IB and now you are trying to become a champion of UN Resolution. Bravo!




> Oh wat can i say abt u brilliant one.
> The whiole world including the UN believes that the Northern Areas are disputed and they are a part of the historic pricely state of Jammu and Kashmir.
> If u think other wise i say "Grow Up".


i would love to see who all form part of this 'whoile' world that you say consider NA as part of Kashmitr today. Links would prove uselfull, provided they dont come from Bharat rakshat or some india drools.





> The correct word would be *"Illegally Occupied"*.
> BTW if u think u won a part of Kashmir..then there is nothing wrong in us thinking we sucessfully defended a large portion of Kashmir.
> So *by ur genius logic the Kashmir with India is India's internal problem* and so the purpose of this thread is zero.


Pot calling the kettle black?

It's like the US saying, hey we didnt occupy Iraq or Afghanistan, they just fell in our laps.

Hey kiddo, you need to do better than this.


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> So now you would shift goal posts..
> 
> You started with LoC into IB and now you are trying to become a champion of UN Resolution. Bravo!



I stand by my words.Moreover from this post I can understand u din read my first post fully.

I said converting LOC into IB is the only possible solution because the UN resolutions are invalid since Pakistan itself has violated them (read gifting of land to China)




xeric said:


> i would love to see who all form part of this 'whoile' world that you say consider NA as part of Kashmitr today. Links would prove uselfull, provided they dont come from Bharat rakshat or some india drools.



Instead asking me go ask ur govt why they consider NA as a part of Kashmir and hence a disputed area.It would do u a world of good. 

However let me give u 1 sample link:

Proof - Click Here



xeric said:


> Pot calling the kettle black?
> 
> It's like the US saying, hey we didnt occupy Iraq or Afghanistan, they just fell in our laps.



Y dont u answer my question of *"If u think u won a part of Kashmir..wats wrong in us thinking we sucessfully defended a large portion of our Kashmir and hence its an internal issue"* instead of posting some illogical words..




xeric said:


> Hey kiddo, you need to do better than this.


I dont need to prove anything to u oldie.


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> I stand by my words.Moreover from this post I can understand u din read my first post fully.
> 
> I said converting LOC into IB is the only possible solution because the UN resolutions are invalid since Pakistan itself has violated them (read gifting of land to China)


i dont blame you of your lack of interpretation. Infact you have shifted your posts so much that you yourself cant find its actual location. Here is what you said initially which started this entire debate:


Karthic Sri said:


> *Scenario 7:* *There is no provision for piece-by-piece settlement/accession of Kashmir.*
> According to existing UN resolutions,If Kashmir tomorrow joins either India or Pakistan it should join as a single entity (Jammu,Kashmir Valley,P-O-K,Northern Areas,Ladakh,Area gifted to China all combined) and not as Valley going to Pak,Jammu and Ladakh going to India....That is not allowed.
> 
> 
> So only feasible solution where both India,Pak happy - *Convert LOC into IB.*


This post contains no reference to volition of UN resolutions. But as you are infected with intuitions and dont digest facts you changed your sole stance, shifted your posts and lead on to the illogical, rhetorical and baseless (as you couldnt prove that the 'whiole' world consider NA as a part of Kashmir) argument that we contradicted the UN by resolving an issue between Pakistan and China (read 'gift).

If you would keep jumping from one argument to another as if you still go to kindergarten, seriously i cant help it.

Harness your intuitions and stop oscillating between one absurd argument to another illogical one.



> Instead asking me go ask ur govt why they consider NA as a part of Kashmir and hence a disputed area.It would do u a world of good.


Ok, why do you consider Mumbai as part of Maharashtra?

See, i am going 'absurd' by your absurd counter arguments.




> Y dont u answer my question of *"If u think u won a part of Kashmir..wats wrong in us thinking we sucessfully defended a large portion of our Kashmir and hence its an internal issue"* instead of posting some illogical words..


Illogical words requires and answer in illogical paras.

Dont worry, you wont understand that now, coz you still need to think straight.





> I dont need to prove anything to u oldie.


Guess what, you already did prove something to all of us


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> However let me give u 1 sample link:
> 
> Proof - Click Here





What is this, a joke?

No about us, no names, no agency, (_The Kashmir Study Group includes academics and foreign policy specialists with length professional experience with South Asian issues, and prominent U.S. legislators._)just a map showing whatever suit ones intent. What a load of proof. 

It looks to me like some fan boy on youtube beating it chest to Ghazwai Hind and Greening the indian map with a Crescent and Star!


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> i dont blame you of your lack of interpretation. Infact you have shifted your posts so much that you yourself cant find its actual location. Here is what you said initially which started this entire debate:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by Karthic Sri
> Scenario 7: There is no provision for piece-by-piece settlement/accession of Kashmir.
> *According to existing UN resolutions,*If Kashmir tomorrow joins either India or Pakistan it should join as a single entity (Jammu,Kashmir Valley,P-O-K,Northern Areas,Ladakh,Area gifted to China all combined) and not as Valley going to Pak,Jammu and Ladakh going to India....That is not allowed.
> So only feasible solution where both India,Pak happy - Convert LOC into IB.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This post contains no reference to volition of UN resolutions. But as you are infected with intuitions and dont digest facts you changed your sole stance, shifted your posts and lead on to the illogical, rhetorical and baseless (as you couldnt prove that the 'whiole' world consider NA as a part of Kashmir) argument that we contradicted the UN by resolving an issue between Pakistan and China (read 'gift).
Click to expand...


See the bolded part....I ve clearly mentioned according to UNSC resolutions if at all a plebiscite is consucted it should be conducted keeping the princely state of J&K as a whole not on a piecemeal basis.
So if u cant understand my argument the burden lies on u to read it twice or thrice to understand it rather than rambling.





xeric said:


> Ok, why do you consider Mumbai as part of Maharashtra?



how does this relate to NA which is an internationally recognised disputed area.
Ur analogy of Mumbai mayb correct if i bring in FATA or Balochistan not Northern Areas.




xeric said:


> See, i am going 'absurd' by your absurd counter arguments.



U didn go absurd just because of my arguments.U went absurd because u couldn logically counter my logically.



Heck even this thread starter(Bezerk) thinks that NA is a part of princely state of kashmir and given 7 solutions based on that.


----------



## Xeric

*Heck even this thread starter(Bezerk) thinks that NA is a part of princely state of kashmir and given 7 solutions based on that.*

Dude, it was not Bezerk who AGREED with it. he is just the thread opener. Moreover these 7 solutions were not coined by him, these already exist. If you would have seen i have also posted a few more (almost similar) solutions in the same thread.

i wonder if you cant understand the difference between agreeing to something and merely posting it over the internet, how can we even discuss something?

----


Here you go:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/348959-post368.html

These solutions also mentions the LoC into IB thingy, but does that mean i would accede to it?

Grow up!


----------



## American Eagle

The JKLF young men I have been corresponding with since 9/11 on the Internet have suggested to me, and I have advocated with my Members of the US Congress and both our two US Senators that the ANDORRAN MODEL might work. 

President Musharraf defacto seemed to advocate and prefer the Andorran Model, too, from what I read at the time.

The Andorran Model, which settled the 700+ year old dispute between France and Spain, would do the following for the THREE PARTS of Kashmir:

1. It would leave international relations and national security control respectively in the hands of Pakistan, India, and Chinia "as is" in terms of boundaries. A never before thought of but perhaps sound idea which could emerge might be a Mutual Defense Pact between Pakistan, India, and China against both "internal and external" terrorism which would help end the outsider violence coming out of the Stans and other related bordering nations where law and order as understood in a \"civilized sense" is lacking.

2. It would allow for election of a unified, single Parliament of Kashmir which could initially meet on a rotating basis in the current territorial capitals of PAK; IAK; and CAK (A= Administered in all cases).

3. Domestic laws, public education, commerce, housing, public health, etc. would be nationally unified via the Parliamentary laws to be enacted by the single Kashmiri Parliament.

4. I would throw in that freedom of religion, as well as freedom from religion, the right not to be coerced into any faith system one does not subscribe to, would be a good touchstone to a unified Kashmir future Constitution arranged in this loose Confederation style.

One of the major worries between [mainly] Pakistan and India has been water sources control/ownership to include present and proposed dams. The existing water treaty and agreements would be ruled on by the Parliament of Kashmir in terms of revenues from Pakistan and India, and China if appropriate, to fund the Parliament and internal operations of the government of Kashmir, housing, schools, etc, etc.

A rough cut idea but is most likely to win the support and agreement from Pakitan, India, and China, in my humble view.

Uniquely the JKLF have said via e-mails over recent years to me that this is the most likely to be accepted by the people inside Kashmir whom they and the JKLF regularly deal with, directly.

Thank you for allowing this outsider to offer an input which in fact originates from the JKLF folks I have gotten to know via e-mail over the past 9 years. Understand that I only listen to the JKLF because they and their primary leader in recent years have renounced violence.

George L. Singleton, Colonel, USAF, Retired
USA


----------



## mikkix

anurag_singh said:


> I am giving my solution which No one will like neither my indian brothers nor pakistani friends:-
> Because Partition was not complete. So we should complete the partition now. According to mr. Jinnah "Hindu and Muslim can't live together". So Muslim majority area of Jammu and Kashmir ,i.e Kashmir valley should be given to pakistan but on one condition which is "complete the partition according to mr. jinnah theory which is stated above". i.e completely transfer of all hindu and sikh population of pakistan to India and completely transfer of all muslims of India to Pakistan.
> Sorry Brothers If You don't like it.



Sardar patel and Nehru's family will tell you how they divide india,,,,,read jaswant singh book of MR. Jinnah...


----------



## American Eagle

If anything, I would as an outside obesver who served inside Pakistan (West, 1963-1965) and has been an interested observer ever since, especially since our new alliance in the war on terrorism since 911...I would recommend the extreme opposite...reunited both Pakistan and India into one nation, merge the military into a larger single outfit. Draw lots for the very top slots but allow for at least second in command to be from the loser in each lot drawing, etc, etc.

Right now India has more Muslims than all of Pakistan.

The original Constitution of Pakistan was not a "religious one" in the sense it has so become today. The changing in the 1950s of the Pakistan Constitution may have been a move in the wrong direction toward what has become a theocratic state, whereas a secular nation would still be a safer way to go in terms of protecting the rights of all Pakistanis, not just some Pakistanis.

Sincere religious beliefs are fine, confined to one's mosque and family without being forced on anyone else. 

Various sects of Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Zorastarian beliefs, etc. are all fine and all should be allowed inside Pakistan to practice their personal faith in peace without fear of attack or harm, which clearly is not currently the case.


----------



## Jade

American Eagle said:


> The JKLF young men I have been corresponding with since 9/11 on the Internet have suggested to me, and I have advocated with my Members of the US Congress and both our two US Senators that the ANDORRAN MODEL might work.
> 
> President Musharraf defacto seemed to advocate and prefer the Andorran Model, too, from what I read at the time.
> 
> The Andorran Model, which settled the 700+ year old dispute between France and Spain, would do the following for the THREE PARTS of Kashmir:
> 
> 1. It would leave international relations and national security control respectively in the hands of Pakistan, India, and Chinia "as is" in terms of boundaries. A never before thought of but perhaps sound idea which could emerge might be a Mutual Defense Pact between Pakistan, India, and China against both "internal and external" terrorism which would help end the outsider violence coming out of the Stans and other related bordering nations where law and order as understood in a \"civilized sense" is lacking.
> 
> 2. It would allow for election of a unified, single Parliament of Kashmir which could initially meet on a rotating basis in the current territorial capitals of PAK; IAK; and CAK (A= Administered in all cases).
> 
> 3. Domestic laws, public education, commerce, housing, public health, etc. would be nationally unified via the Parliamentary laws to be enacted by the single Kashmiri Parliament.
> 
> 4. I would throw in that freedom of religion, as well as freedom from religion, the right not to be coerced into any faith system one does not subscribe to, would be a good touchstone to a unified Kashmir future Constitution arranged in this loose Confederation style.
> 
> One of the major worries between [mainly] Pakistan and India has been water sources control/ownership to include present and proposed dams. The existing water treaty and agreements would be ruled on by the Parliament of Kashmir in terms of revenues from Pakistan and India, and China if appropriate, to fund the Parliament and internal operations of the government of Kashmir, housing, schools, etc, etc.
> 
> A rough cut idea but is most likely to win the support and agreement from Pakitan, India, and China, in my humble view.
> 
> Uniquely the JKLF have said via e-mails over recent years to me that this is the most likely to be accepted by the people inside Kashmir whom they and the JKLF regularly deal with, directly.
> 
> Thank you for allowing this outsider to offer an input which in fact originates from the JKLF folks I have gotten to know via e-mail over the past 9 years. Understand that I only listen to the JKLF because they and their primary leader in recent years have renounced violence.
> 
> George L. Singleton, Colonel, USAF, Retired
> USA




First, there is no such thing called Chinese Kashmir. China has nothing to do with Kashmir. China is illegally occupying Kashmir. Before proceeding to any solution China has to first vacate the part of Kashmir that it is occupying. I sincerely doubt whether China is ever going to vacate 

Second, I think, having international relations and national security controlled by the respective countries but having domestic laws, public education, commerce, housing, public health having controlled by the entity is too fuzzy a concept and may not work properly in subcontinent context. We believing in mixing everything. 

Third, Kashmir being a land locked entity; it would be hard for it to actually raise finance for its day to day operations. It has to rely very much on the India and Pakistan.

Fourth, I think, this arrangement instead of solving anything would invite more competition and more problems between India and Pakistan for influence on the unified entity 

Fifth, JKLF is not the only group that exists in Kashmir. There are pro India parties, separatists and militants. These groups may have a different Idea.

Sixth, there is a sharp polarization of opinion based on the region. A unified entity may not be possible and may lead to balkanization of Kashmir, and in turn leading to unintended consequences. 

Seventh, why should Kashmir trade water, after all it would require water for its own development. 

Lastly, what is there for India and Pakistan in such solution?


----------



## Jade

American Eagle said:


> If anything, I would as an outside obesver who served inside Pakistan (West, 1963-1965) and has been an interested observer ever since, especially since our new alliance in the war on terrorism since 911...I would recommend the extreme opposite...reunited both Pakistan and India into one nation, merge the military into a larger single outfit. Draw lots for the very top slots but allow for at least second in command to be from the loser in each lot drawing, etc, etc.
> 
> Right now India has more Muslims than all of Pakistan.
> 
> The original Constitution of Pakistan was not a "religious one" in the sense it has so become today. The changing in the 1950s of the Pakistan Constitution may have been a move in the wrong direction toward what has become a theocratic state, whereas a secular nation would still be a safer way to go in terms of protecting the rights of all Pakistanis, not just some Pakistanis.
> 
> Sincere religious beliefs are fine, confined to one's mosque and family without being forced on anyone else.
> 
> Various sects of Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Zorastarian beliefs, etc. are all fine and all should be allowed inside Pakistan to practice their personal faith in peace without fear of attack or harm, which clearly is not currently the case.



Mr. Singleton, this is much much more difficult than even solving Kashmir.


----------



## American Eagle

Perhaps it is much more difficult.

But if something along the lines of the Andorran solution for Kashmir is up front, formally agreed to, some of the other problems you allude to without specifics will start to diminish.

You have to start somewhere, why not the most visible excuse in the past to fight each other...fixing Kashmir?

I actually not only served in Pakistan (West) but for several years thereafter was an International Banking Officer in NYC dealing, among other places, with all the Indian subcontinent in a "banking" sense.

My reserve work ended up with me being defacto chief of computerized wargamming, worldwide, for HQ US Special Ops Command. I headed in the 1980s until about 1991 an all reservist team of wargammers for the USAF; Army; Navy; Marines; and the Coast Guard, both for Special Operations Command and a similar team for HQ US Atlantic Fleet under the CIC Admiral Kelso, USN, who is now retired.

Of course I didn't then or now ever "know it all" but I do understand many of the beneath the surface problems. It is always important to note that more Muslims exist in India today, as a democracy, than in Pakistan, which is a theocracy.


----------



## Jade

American Eagle said:


> Perhaps it is much more difficult.
> 
> But if something along the lines of the Andorran solution for Kashmir is up front, formally agreed to, some of the other problems you allude to without specifics will start to diminish.
> 
> You have to start somewhere, why not the most visible excuse in the past to fight each other...fixing Kashmir?
> 
> I actually not only served in Pakistan (West) but for several years thereafter was an International Banking Officer in NYC dealing, among other places, with all the Indian subcontinent in a "banking" sense.
> 
> My reserve work ended up with me being defactor chief of computerized wargamming, worldwide, for HQ US Special Ops Command.
> 
> Of course I didn't then nor now ever "know it all" but I do understand the beneath the surface problems, but do note, happily, that more Muslims exist in India today, as democracy, than in Pakistan, a theocracy.




But the question is how to fix Kashmir&#8230; I believe even Pakistan would not support Andorran type solution for Kashmir, because most waters that flow into Pakistan are from Kashmir. Having an independent entity means almost giving up waters that flow into Pakistan territory. That would be terrible for its economy. In a way, I feel, Pakistan would prefer status quo than an Andorran type solution


----------



## American Eagle

The Andorran Model, acceptable to the Kashmiris involved with the JKLF, are the subject of who wants what.

Your view is honest and open as to the rivers and waters. But, those remain status quo and would continue to exist as is under the existsing rivers and waters treaties. No changes there. People still have to go along to get along so to speak.

The concept of Pakistan, India, and China remaining in charge of national security and international affairs speaks to that...as does the in existance today Indus and related water/dam treaties. Those remain in force, as I wrote before.

I presume to know but do not know the hard facts, that today for example that Pakistan sells power generated from the Mangla Dam which built with World Bank with US financial support earns electricity sales revenue. IF an Andorran Model Kashmir central Parliament were created with a stand alone non-religious constitution for all three parts, the Mangla Dam would have to complete, if not yet completed, it's worldwide debt amortization. But if that amortization is already completed (likely the case) then the operation of Mangal Dam would continue but the revenue should then reflect income to the Kashmir Parliamentary system to help fund public (not religious) schools and any other non-sectarian infrastructure which meet daily needs of the ordinary grassroots Kashmiri.

I did not give this detail, power revenue sharing, net of overhead which has to be paid always, even if capital debt is paid off, you still have overhead cost of operating, maintaining, repairing, and generally running outfits like the Mangla Dam, in my prior articles on using the Andorran Model. I offer it now to get the subject of water and hydro power out in the open so it is not a shadow factor in negotiations over the future of all parts of Kashmir.

A British engineer who was a social friend of mine worked on the Mangla Dam project. A humerous example of in 1965 poor understanding of the "meaning" of language in business was when he asked his Kashmir office clerk to "post some documents to the file." The young, semi-literate office clear got a pot of office glue and "posted" as is glued the pages of the document onto the side of the metal filing cabinet!

To be fair, in Karachi, later, as my engineering friend got his property ready to be shipped back to UK when his job contract was up told a Texaco station employee to change the oil and to grease his Triumph TR-4. The Texaco station employee dutifully spread grease all over the outside of the Triumph, due to his limited understanding of English! This time we are not talking about a semi-literate Kashmiri but about a semi-literate native of Karach/Sind.

These two examples, up north and down south, in then West Pakistan demonstrated and may even today for all I know demonstrate the raw lack of language education in English, the most common language inside Pakistan...which emphasizes the great need for basic English language training in the few, you need more, free public schools for all people of all walks of life inside today's Pakistan. Parochial emphasis on Urdu, Pashtu, etc. does not help people improve their lot in the economic world, there or internationally, from the bottom of the economic ladder on up. 

In summary what I thinkchanges under an Andorran Model is to have a single Kashmiri Parliamenet which over many lifetimes would sort things out peacefully and quietly, not all the bravado back and forth which currently is limited to just Pakistan and India. China's grab of a piece of Kashmir in 1960 was "cheered on" by religious extremists even back then in Pakistan who then, and perhaps even now, would "goad" or "insult" India at every chance. This is and was all driven by differences over religion which is not what is needed today, and was harmful back then. Hatred and illiteracy driven in the wrong channels by religous thugs "in the name of religion" are a curse and help hold down, suppress, and keep in abject poverty and servitude the poorest among you.

Thanks for your opinion, which is important, as your concerns are important, but the wants and needs of all the Kashmiris themselves should come first...the water resources have long been the hidden worry-agenda and should not be such under the Andorran Model.

What everyone wants, including me as a outsider who cares about the future of the entire Indian subcontinent, is to end the excuse of threats of war over Kashmir. The average Kashmiri will have a unified vote but the three nations are still practically in charge of international relations and defense matters. Difference is everyone has to work together for the common good of the Kashmiris instead of focusing on religions and this country vs. that country. That is out of date thinking.

Remember, President Musharraf was working on an Andorran Model...the ISI in Pakistan was against it and him, and he is now deposed. Etc.

Cheers.


----------



## Jade

American Eagle said:


> The Andorran Model, acceptable to the Kashmiris involved with the JKLF, are the subject of who wants what.
> 
> Your view is honest and open as to the rivers and waters. But, those remain status quo and would continue to exist as is under the existsing rivers and waters treaties. No changes there. People still have to go along to get along so to speak.
> 
> The concept of Pakistan, India, and China remaning in charge of national security and international affairs speaks to that...as does the in existance today Indus and related water/dam treaties. Those remain in force, as I wrote before.
> 
> What changes is to have a single Kashmiri Parliamenet which over many lifetimes would sort things out peacefully and quietly, not all the bravado back and forth.
> 
> Thanks for your opinion, which is important, as your concerns are important, but the wants and needs of all the Kashmiris themselves should come first...the water resources have long been the hidden worry-agenda and should not be such under the Andorran Model.
> 
> What everyone wants, including me as a outsider who cares about the future of the entire Indian subcontinent, is to end the excuse of threats of war over Kashmir. The average Kashmiri will have a unified vote but the three nations are still practically in charge of international relations and defense matters. Difference is everyone has to work together for the common good of the Kashmiris instead of focusing on religions and this country vs. that country. That is out of date thinking.
> 
> Remember, President Musharraf was working on an Andorran Model...the ISI in Pakistan was against it and him, and he is now deposed. Etc.
> 
> Cheers.



Mr. Singleton,

Thanks for your opinion and concern. I have read some of the articles you wrote and I liked them. I agree with you that the Andorra model has a certain attraction, especially for those who advocate the independence option for Jammu and Kashmir. I agree with you that the wants and needs of all the Kashmiris should come first; however, the concern is who is a Kashmiris. Unlike Andorra, Kashmir is not a homogeneous region; it has Kashmir, Jammu, Ladakh, Aksai Chin and PAK. The question is how Andorra model is going to take care of aspirations of each of the regions; moreover there is another question of the aspiration of Kashmiri Pundits, who were forced to leave the Valley. Moreover, unlike Andorra, here the emotions on Kashmir run very high on both sides and accepting a solution that makes Kashmir (Muslim-majority state in a Hindu majority country) a quasi Independent state means reject the very foundation of India that is secularity and would have wide consequences in rest of India. 

However, I feel a tweaked Andorra model could be a solution. 

1)	Line actual control be converted to international border
2)	Full autonomy to J&K and Pakistan administered Kashmir but would be integral part of India and Pakistan respectively.
3)	Free movement of people and trade across both sides with out any documents 

Cheers


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> Here you go:
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/348959-post368.html
> 
> These solutions also mentions the LoC into IB thingy, but does that mean i would accede to it?



Arey yaar.....

This plebiscite crap only i was speaking abt...

How do u propose to conduct a plebiscite or wat moral rights does Pakistan have to demand a plebiscite after they themselves have violated the UNSC resolutions on two different occasions:-
1) Violating the resolutions by unilaterally gifting a part of the princely state of Kashmir to China (now dont get me started on wether NA are a disputed area or not...)

2) Violating the ceasefire by initiating Op.Gibralter in hope of Militarily securing wat u couldn secure before 18 years.

So the Plebiscite demand goes down the drain.

But since this prob between India and Pak cant go on for ever and since no country (India,Pak) will be satisfied with a loss of terrirtoy
the only possible solution according to current ground realities is 

*LOC into IB.*



xeric said:


> Grow up!



Thank u for ur concern...but care abt urself first.!!


----------



## ice_man

Karthic Sri said:


> Arey yaar.....
> 
> This plebiscite crap only i was speaking abt...
> 
> How do u propose to conduct a plebiscite or wat moral rights does Pakistan have to demand a plebiscite after they themselves have violated the UNSC resolutions on two different occasions:-
> 1) Violating the resolutions by unilaterally gifting a part of the princely state of Kashmir to China (now dont get me started on wether NA are a disputed area or not...)
> 
> 2) Violating the ceasefire by initiating Op.Gibralter in hope of Militarily securing wat u couldn secure before 18 years.
> 
> So the Plebiscite demand goes down the drain.
> 
> But since this prob between India and Pak cant go on for ever and since no country (India,Pak) will be satisfied with a loss of terrirtoy
> the only possible solution according to current ground realities is
> 
> *LOC into IB.*
> 
> 
> 
> Thank u for ur concern...but care abt urself first.!!



arey yaar don't get me started on junagadh & hyderabad dispute! which in many ways is similar to the dispute of kashmir by which the population was of a different faith from its ruler! and yet india quickly annexed it & held a plebiscite! 

& areey yaar let's not get started on indian invasion of siachen or east pakistan! 



so plebiciste deamnd is valid!


----------



## prodevelopment

ice_man said:


> arey yaar don't get me started on junagadh & hyderabad dispute! which in many ways is similar to the dispute of kashmir by which the population was of a different faith from its ruler! and yet india quickly annexed it & held a plebiscite!
> 
> & areey yaar let's not get started on indian invasion of siachen or east pakistan!
> 
> 
> 
> so plebiciste deamnd is valid!



Please do start about these issues. But in their relevant threads. This discussion is about kashmir. None of the disputes that you have mentioned have got anything to do with the UN resolutions.

Except Siachen of course. And as you know, the LoC ends where the glacier starts


----------



## American Eagle

In response to jade1982, thank you for your clear cut, well thoughout points and suggestions. This is your agenda to work out, I am only an outsider/kibitzer. But the press of Pakistan over the years since 9/11 along with some websites like KHYBERWATCH.COM have picked up the thread and literal article I wrote in a Nov. 2006 issue of the Peshawar FRONTIER POST and ran it as a lead article for over two years on their website.

It was the FRONTIER POST article by me which caused the initial contacts with me, on going, from the UK based JKLF folks, who shared their interest in the Andorran Model as one possible solution...which it turns out was at the top of the list of options which I think then President Musharraf pursued.

You, jade 1982, and others recognize this is a touchy topic but the more fully it can be outlined in the open for better public awareness and understanding the better of will be the domestic and national security of all three parties now involved in Kashmir, Pakistan, India, and China.

To single out one comment by jade1982: I agree with making the LOC the factual boundary between and among the three parts of Kashmir. But simultaneously you then have to have open borders, free trade, and free right of travel. But, this of course raises the horror of intrigue and religiously driven game playing to create havoc and upsets. Yes, I am aware of how complex it can be.

But a start is necessary. Both India and Pakistan's ISI or equivlaent to the ISI must be controlled and prevented from training, funding, and using terrorists in disguise to create religious mayhem.


----------



## Jade

American Eagle said:


> In response to jade1982, thank you for your clear cut, well thoughout points and suggestions. This is your agenda to work out, I am only an outsider/kibitzer. But the press of Pakistan over the years since 9/11 along with some websites like KHYBERWATCH.COM have picked up the thread and literal article I wrote in a Nov. 2006 issue of the Peshawar FRONTIER POST and ran it as a lead article for over two years on their website.
> 
> It was the FRONTIER POST article by me which caused the initial contacts with me, on going, from the UK based JKLF folks, who shared their interest in the Andorran Model as one possible solution...which it turns out was at the top of the list of options which I think then President Musharraf pursued.
> 
> You, jade 1982, and others recognize this is a touchy topic but the more fully it can be outlined in the open for better public awareness and understanding the better of will be the domestic and national security of all three parties now involved in Kashmir, Pakistan, India, and China.
> 
> To single out one comment by jade1982: I agree with making the LOC the factual boundary between and among the three parts of Kashmir. But simultaneously you then have to have open borders, free trade, and free right of travel. But, this of course raises the horror of intrigue and religiously driven game playing to create havoc and upsets. Yes, I am aware of how complex it can be.
> 
> But a start is necessary. Both India and Pakistan's ISI or equivlaent to the ISI must be controlled and prevented from training, funding, and using terrorists in disguise to create religious mayhem.



Thanks Mr. Singleton, I could not agree with you more


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> Arey yaar.....
> 
> This plebiscite crap only i was speaking abt...
> 
> How do u propose to conduct a plebiscite or wat moral rights does Pakistan have to demand a plebiscite after they themselves have violated the UNSC resolutions on two different occasions:-
> 1) Violating the resolutions by unilaterally gifting a part of the princely state of Kashmir to China (now dont get me started on wether NA are a disputed area or not...)
> 
> 2) Violating the ceasefire by initiating Op.Gibralter in hope of Militarily securing wat u couldn secure before 18 years.
> 
> So the Plebiscite demand goes down the drain.


Run in circles, i's guud for your health.



> But since this prob between India and Pak cant go on for ever and since no country (India,Pak) will be satisfied with a loss of terrirtoy
> the only possible solution according to current ground realities is
> 
> *LOC into IB.*



No, in this case (if no country will be satisfied with a loss of territory) the only prevalent solution is that you keep on committing .5 million army in Kashmir who get slaughtered just every day.



BTW, it's a UN demand that a plebiscite should be held, no way and no action what so ever can over rule its implementation, less the shameless, unethical and blatant refusal/denial of the Resolution by india itself, you are just wasting your time.


----------



## American Eagle

Operation Gibralter was the Pakistani war plan cooked up by General Musa and Foreign Minister Z. A. Bhutto, together with then President Ayub Khan.

Maybe you can slow down and read on the Internet the historic outline and summery and offer a more precise or concise opinion with the facts attributed to India and Pakistan as you see the facts.

As for the UN Resolution on Kashmir, there is also a UN Resolution creating Israel in 1947, together co-equally with creation of a Palestinian nation. The Arab countries at that time, plus brand new Pakistan, voted against that UN Resolution which would have empowered and created a co-equal Palestine.

Folks get a lot of history and facts/figures mixed up, I am sure, unintentionally.

One fact I stay focused on is that Pakistan is not an Arab country and in my view can do without crazy religious Wahabbi Arabs from Saudi Arabia who infest the madrassas of Pakitan today.


----------



## Xeric

American Eagle said:


> Operation Gibralter was the Pakistani war plan cooked up by General Musa and Foreign Minister Z. A. Bhutto, together with then President Ayub Khan.


Thanks for the revealing info!




> As for the UN Resolution on Kashmir, there is also a UN Resolution creating Israel in 1947, together co-equally with creation of a Palestinian nation. The Arab countries at that time, plus brand new Pakistan, voted against that UN Resolution which would have empowered and created a co-equal Palestine.


Right, so you agree it is always guud to accept UN Reolutions, they always bring peace.



> Folks get a lot of history and facts/figures mixed up, I am sure, unintentionally.
> 
> One fact I stay focused on is that Pakistan is not an Arab country and in my view can do without crazy religious Wahabbi Arabs from Saudi Arabia who infest the madrassas of Pakitan today.



America is also not a jewsih country, _in my view can do without crazy zionists from israel who infest the policy making America today._


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> BTW, it's a UN demand that a plebiscite should be held, no way and no action what so ever can over rule its implementation, less the shameless, unethical and blatant refusal/denial of the Resolution by india itself, you are just wasting your time.



First, let me enlighten you that any UNSC resolution passed through chapter VI are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability. Kashmir is one such resolution. No country or body on this earth can force India to enforce UNSC resolution on Kashmir. World realizes this and it is time that Pakistan also realize this. 

Second, this intransigence on UN resolution/plebiscite is not going to take Pakistan anywhere. Remember, India is 8 times bigger than Pakistan and growing at a rate of almost 9% every year. We are ready to wait for another 200 years, are you ready?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> Run in circles, i's guud for your health.



Bury ur head in sand....No problems for u.



xeric said:


> No, in this case (if no country will be satisfied with a loss of territory) the only prevalent solution is that you keep on committing .5 million army in Kashmir who get slaughtered just every day.



If it is required we r prepared/able to do that.We have the economy,will power and man power to do that. No problemo.



xeric said:


> BTW, it's a UN demand that a plebiscite should be held, no way and no action what so ever can over rule its implementation, less the shameless, unethical and blatant refusal/denial of the Resolution by india itself, you are just wasting your time.



Similarly its a UN demand that Pakistan get back the terrirtoy it unilaterally gifted to its friend,a UN demand to stop supporting cross-border terrorism,A UN demand not to violate ceasefire..

I dont see Pakistan following it...So there is no condition India should follow either.


----------



## KS

ice_man said:


> arey yaar don't get me started on junagadh & hyderabad dispute! which in many ways is similar to the dispute of kashmir by which the population was of a different faith from its ruler! and yet india quickly annexed it & held a plebiscite!



Dont get me started on Balochistan (annexed from the Khan of Kalat by Pakistan while it was rejected by the Khan) or FATA...Junagadh and Hyderabad are similar issues.
But Kashmir is a UN recognised dispute area while the top 4 are not.
So lets limit ourselves to Kashmir.




ice_man said:


> & areey yaar let's not get started on indian invasion of siachen or east pakistan!


Let me correct u..its not just an invasion ..
It s a sucessful reply given to Pakistan's unjustified provocation of sending international tourists for trekking to a disputed area.!!




ice_man said:


> so plebiciste deamnd is valid!


[/QUOTE]

Get back the territory gifted to China and stop cross border terrorism and then we ll think abt Plebiscite.


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> First, let me enlighten you that any UNSC resolution passed through chapter VI are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability. Kashmir is one such resolution. No country or body on this earth can force India to enforce UNSC resolution on Kashmir. World realizes this and it is time that Pakistan also realize this.


Lolz... what an enlightening piece of info.

Well i know what these resolutions mean, ofcourse it wont leading into an united miltary effort against india if it is not binding, but as we have already seen the indian support for the israeli action recently we arent surprised that india is very willing to join the list of those who blatantly disgrace civility and uprightness.

BTW, if india is so jumpy in not biding by the resolution, it shouldnt have agreed to it at the first place. This we call, licking ones own spit.

Moreover, you are just some internet champion who is of a different opinion, your govt has already agreed to the implementation of the resolution but isnt doing it because of the issues like troops withdrawal etc, and not because of what you have mentioned.

Anyhow, no worries, it is your soldiers that are killed every day there and dramas like those that happened in Mumbai take place if this Kashmir issue lingers on.



> Second, this intransigence on UN resolution/plebiscite is not going to take Pakistan anywhere.


That's what you like all of us to believe, but guess what, tt will take us atleast somewhere, which ofcourse is not digestible to an oppressor.


> Remember, India is 8 times bigger than Pakistan and growing at a rate of almost 9% every year.


Ooooo... i am shivering!



> We are ready to wait for another 200 years, are you ready?


^^ Well dont see us f;inching either.

And in case if you have forgotten of those soldiers who die in vain in Kashmir (that's the amount of respect that you have for them), allow me to remind you that it is india that is committing a 0.5 million army there, not us.

You seem weak at maths, boy.


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> Similarly its a UN demand that Pakistan get back the terrirtoy it unilaterally gifted to its friend,a UN demand to stop supporting cross-border terrorism,A UN demand not to violate ceasefire..



You need to prove all this, until then please carry on with the yap and keep on calling the kettle black.


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> And in case if you have forgotten of those soldiers who die in vain in Kashmir (that's the amount of respect that you have for them), allow me to remind you that it is india that is committing a 0.5 million army there, not us.



Sir they do not die in vain. They die to keep us safe. And to protect what is ours. From those that would snatch it in the name of religious fundamentalism. And we do respect our braves sir. When they lay down their lives for the country, their bodies come home dressed in full uniform, draped with the Indian tricolor. And full military honors. Not left unclaimed on a mountainside. Jai Hind.


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> allow me to remind you that it is india that is committing a 0.5 million army there, not us.



You sir are not committing forces because there is no part of your country hostilely coveted by mine. Were that not the case, I do believe the luxury of diverting boots towards the Taliban internally would be the lowest on your list of military priorities.


----------



## prodevelopment

A ramble from a think tank? Someone is getting fidgety 



xeric said:


> Well i know what these resolutions mean, ofcourse it wont leading into an united miltary effort against india if it is not binding, but as we have already seen the indian support for the israeli action recently we arent surprised that india is very willing to join the list of those who blatantly disgrace civility and uprightness.



Talks of civility and uprightness coming from those who train and support illegal gurilla fighters does not bode well my dear. The fact that you have to resort to India's military partnership with Israel to find something incriminating against us shows that India is on the right parth.



xeric said:


> BTW, if india is so jumpy in not biding by the resolution, it shouldnt have agreed to it at the first place. This we call, licking ones own spit.



The fact remains that Pakistan has completely disregarded the resolutions in gifting part of Kashmir to China and changing the demography of North-West J&K. And then you tried to take the rest of J&K by force in multiple wars. When that came to nothing, you are trying to run back to the UN resolutions?

Is that not called licking ones own spit?





xeric said:


> Anyhow, no worries, it is your soldiers that are killed every day there and dramas like those that happened in Mumbai take place if this Kashmir issue lingers on.
> .
> .
> .
> 
> And in case if you have forgotten of those soldiers who die in vain in Kashmir (that's the amount of respect that you have for them), allow me to remind you that it is india that is committing a 0.5 million army there, not us.
> 
> You seem weak at maths, boy.



Sirji, calling Mumbai like attacks a drama does not suit you. Jinke apne ghar sheeshe ke hote hain, wo doosro ke ghar par patthar nahi fainkte.

And the way you celebrate the death of our soldiers, the same way we celebrate the death of those trained assassins sent by you. In fact, your callousness is precisely the reason those brave soldiers are needed in J&K.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Sir they do not die in vain. They die to keep us safe. And to protect what is ours. From those that would snatch it in the name of religious fundamentalism. And we do respect our braves sir. When they lay down their lives for the country, their bodies come home dressed in full uniform, draped with the Indian tricolor. And full military honors. Not left unclaimed on a mountainside. Jai Hind.



Well for me the sure die in vain because there isnt any existential threat from Kashmiris to india, at maximum the only threat to someone that belongs to the indian union is to those soldiers that commit suicides, turn into rapists and experience a high degree of PTSD that too due to an enemy that they have create themselves - no occupation, rape, atrocity, no problems.

They lay down their live in vain because had this Kashmir abyss not created by india, hundreds of indian soldiers would have been saved and utilized to fight the maoists and re-gain those some 220 districts.

Believe me, it would be a profitable exchange of priorities for indian, if this happens.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Lolz... what an enlightening piece of info.
> 
> Well i know what these resolutions mean, ofcourse it wont leading into an united miltary effort against india if it is not binding, but as we have already seen the indian support for the israeli action recently we arent surprised that india is very willing to join the list of those who blatantly disgrace civility and uprightness.
> 
> 
> BTW, if india is so jumpy in not biding by the resolution, it shouldnt have agreed to it at the first place. This we call, licking ones own spit.
> 
> 
> Moreover, you are just some internet champion who is of a different opinion, your govt has already agreed to the implementation of the resolution but isnt doing it because of the issues like troops withdrawal etc, and not because of what you have mentioned.



Not commenting about the Israel issue at this time, but on Kashmir, no matter how you disguise it, the situation is simply of Pakistan sponsored terrorism in the valley to win territory through a proxy war. 

On agreeing to the implementation, the whole thing made sense at the time it was proposed. Pakistan did not cooperate in withdrawl of troops etc. Over next few years post 1948, the resolution lost its applicability and was *rejected by India starting 1954 or so*. Post 1965, when Pakistan attempted and failed to implement a sneaky military solution, the resolution lost whatever lilttle significance it had at that time. Right now, Kashmir issue and the above resolution is only an outdated artifact which only Pakistan is clutching at as a desperate ploy to divert attention from other explosive issues within the subcontinent that are totally contained within Pakistan. This we call burrying one's head in sand.







xeric said:


> Anyhow, no worries, it is your soldiers that are killed every day there and dramas like those that happened in Mumbai take place if this Kashmir issue lingers on.
> 
> 
> That's what you like all of us to believe, but guess what, tt will take us atleast somewhere, which ofcourse is not digestible to an oppressor.
> 
> Ooooo... i am shivering!
> 
> 
> ^^ Well dont see us f;inching either.
> 
> And in case if you have forgotten of those soldiers who die in vain in Kashmir (that's the amount of respect that you have for them), allow me to remind you that it is india that is committing a 0.5 million army there, not us.
> 
> You seem weak at maths, boy.



A nice underhanded attempt to use acts of terrorism (Mumbai) to add weight to the Kashmir arguement. Isnt by association, you are making the Kashmir war also an act of cross border terrorism against India. ??

But anyway, while highlighting costs of Kashmir issue to India, you do realize the manifold cost Pakistan is paying for supporting these acts of terrorism against India. In the words of your own govt, you are having a Mumbai like incident every week in Pakistan. Do you call those Dramas as well??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Well for me the sure die in vain because there isnt any existential threat from Kashmiris to india, at maximum the only threat to someone that belongs to the indian union is to those soldiers that commit suicides, turn into rapists and experience a high degree of PTSD that too due to an enemy that they have create themselves - no occupation, rape, atrocity, no problems.
> 
> *They lay down their live in vain because had this Kashmir abyss not created by india, hundreds of indian soldiers would have been saved and utilized to fight the maoists and re-gain those some 220 districts.*
> Believe me, it would be a profitable exchange of priorities for indian, if this happens.




Really the same arguement can be applied to a lot of other issues like Baluchistan, NWFP etc? But a country can not withdraw from a part of its territory simply because there is insurgency there. J&K is as much a part of India as the 220 districts you talk of. Niether is going anywhere.

Irrelevent, but just to clarify, the soldiers saved in Kashmir will have no impact on the fight with Maoists since Army is not playing a role there (yet)

Just like Pakistani irregulars (disguised as Kashmiri terrorists) getting killed in J&K does not impact Pakistan's ability to fight multiple indigenous terrorist organizations across its land.


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> Well for me the sure die in vain because there isnt any existential threat from Kashmiris to india, at maximum the only threat to someone that belongs to the indian union is to those soldiers that commit suicides, turn into rapists and experience a high degree of PTSD that too due to an enemy that they have create themselves - no occupation, rape, atrocity, no problems.
> 
> They lay down their live in vain because had this Kashmir abyss not created by india, hundreds of indian soldiers would have been saved and utilized to fight the maoists and re-gain those some 220 districts.
> 
> Believe me, it would be a profitable exchange of priorities for indian, if this happens.



Ofcourse 'you' would find their death to be in vain sir. We do see things differently. India is not at risk from Kashmiris, just as she is not at risk from Maharashtrians or Tamilians. Why would you think otherwise? The enemy comes from across our borders and he is not a figment of our imagination sir. The only stress our men in uniform face is the marked lack of opportunity off late in finally coming to terms with their uniformed ex-brothers who prefer to send civilians across to fight their fight. Coming to the Kasmir abyss kind sir, it was Pakistan who started hostilities. India's military position simply is to be around when the time comes to end it once and for all, or to prevent misadventure till the enemy gathers resources and the requisite courage for the final push. We are happy to wait and watch up until the point that happens. You see, our position is defensive. We protect what is ours. We do not covet what is yours, and so the onus of the first move lies on you. Coming to the Maoists, the army is going to be raising 7 crack units of our CRPF who would be trained and armed and commanded by the Rashtriya Rifles. It would also add to a credible force at the nation's disposal once the civil objectives are met, should the army ever need back-up, anywhere, anytime. You see sir, unlike some other nations, we believe our army is only for the enemy without. Not for killing our own people. Our armed forces in Kashmir meanwhile grow lonely and bored as they wait for your own to finish off your own.


----------



## Xeric

prodevelopment said:


> A ramble from a think tank? Someone is getting fidgety


Acting funny or what?



> Talks of civility and uprightness coming from those who train and support illegal gurilla fighters does not bode well my dear. The fact that you have to resort to India's military partnership with Israel to find something incriminating against us shows that India is on the right parth.


You need to prove those accusations or else keep shut.

Or may be you can post a few of those links stating ' Pakistani terrorists tried to cross the LoC and in turn india found a few rabbits or perhaps (ecevn better) a pegion!'




> The fact remains that Pakistan has completely disregarded the resolutions in gifting part of Kashmir to China and changing the demography of North-West J&K. And then you tried to take the rest of J&K by force in multiple wars. When that came to nothing, you are trying to run back to the UN resolutions?
> 
> Is that not called licking ones own spit?


That's your version of the story.

Just by 'believing' NAs as part of Kashmir wouldnt make them, almost all of you have been yapping about this but still no one has been able to prove it. So keep on dreaming and let us enjoy the lush greens of Pakistan's NAs.

We have done whatever we like to what that belonged to us. Let's see if you can do any guud to that something except killing and raping that dont even belongs to you.




> Sirji, calling Mumbai like attacks a drama does not suit you. Jinke apne ghar sheeshe ke hote hain, wo doosro ke ghar par patthar nahi fainkte.


Mumbai is a drama and it has been proved. Those whom you accused of roam freely today in Pakistan and would do so until you plan and execute another drama with a little bit more precision.

And as for the sheeshe thing, well your cold start BS and two front war had already sucked up shyt. Let's see what your land graber generals comes up with next.



> And the way you celebrate the death of our soldiers, the same way we celebrate the death of those trained assassins sent by you. In fact, your callousness is precisely the reason those brave soldiers are needed in J&K.



We dont celebrate death of any human, its just the byproduct of your sick mentality. Celebrate was used by you not me. Being a soldier myself, i just feel demoralized watching men in uniform dieing in vain without achieving anything but disgrace, a stigmatic life and increased levels of mental sickness!


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Really the same arguement can be applied to a lot of other issues like Baluchistan, NWFP etc? But a country can not withdraw from a part of its territory simply because there is insurgency there. J&K is as much a part of India as the 220 districts you talk of. Niether is going anywhere.
> 
> Irrelevent, but just to clarify, the soldiers saved in Kashmir will have no impact on the fight with Maoists since Army is not playing a role there (yet)
> 
> Just like Pakistani irregulars (disguised as Kashmiri terrorists) getting killed in J&K does not impact Pakistan's ability to fight multiple indigenous terrorist organizations across its land.



Ok, another genius who equate Kashmir with Balochistan and FATA-so the remaining lines doesnt even merit a read.


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Not commenting about the Israel issue at this time, but on Kashmir, no matter how you disguise it, the situation is simply of Pakistan sponsored terrorism in the valley to win territory through a proxy war.



Exactly the manner that you have adopted in Afghanistan against Pakistan, right?

BTW, please provide recent links that prove Pakistani involvement and supporting the freedom fighters there or else your yap is futile. 



> On agreeing to the implementation, the whole thing made sense at the time it was proposed. Pakistan did not cooperate in withdrawl of troops etc. Over next few years post 1948, the resolution lost its applicability and was *rejected by India starting 1954 or so*. Post 1965, when Pakistan attempted and failed to implement a sneaky military solution, the resolution lost whatever lilttle significance it had at that time. Right now, Kashmir issue and the above resolution is only an outdated artifact which only Pakistan is clutching at as a desperate ploy to divert attention from other explosive issues within the subcontinent that are totally contained within Pakistan. This we call burrying one's head in sand.


An excellent piece of what india want others to believe but has o grounds. india is keep more troops than Pakistan in Kashmir, if you dont mind. Withdrawal, my foot..





> A nice underhanded attempt to use acts of terrorism (Mumbai) to add weight to the Kashmir arguement. Isnt by association, you are making the Kashmir war also an act of cross border terrorism against India. ??
> 
> But anyway, while highlighting costs of Kashmir issue to India, you do realize the manifold cost Pakistan is paying for supporting these acts of terrorism against India. In the words of your own govt, you are having a Mumbai like incident every week in Pakistan. Do you call those Dramas as well??



Like i said, you need to prove the allegations. Pakistan is not supporting anything but morally the Kashmiri freedom movement.

Stop the rhetorics, it just make one look like a fool.

Provide credible links which claims any recent infiltration that was just not dreamingly foiled by the brave BSF, but got hold of a few Jiahdis and also provide soe proof that can suggest the Pakistani establishment is helping the freedom fighters in men and/or material, or else keep mum!


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Ok, another genius who equate Kashmir with Balochistan and FATA-so the remaining lines doesnt even merit a read.



Had you read the post, you would have realized that I did not equate the two.


----------



## prodevelopment

xeric said:


> Acting funny or what?
> 
> 
> You need to prove those accusations or else keep shut.
> 
> Or may be you can post a few of those links stating ' Pakistani terrorists tried to cross the LoC and in turn india found a few rabbits or perhaps (ecevn better) a pegion!'



Not trying to be funny. Just sad that's all.

For proof of those accusations of cross border terrorism, there is a mega-thread running over here:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmir-war/52736-pro-freedom-insurgents-vs-indian-army.html

Changing the name of the thread does not change its contents.



xeric said:


> That's your version of the story.
> 
> Just by 'believing' NAs as part of Kashmir wouldnt make them, almost all of you have been yapping about this but still no one has been able to prove it. So keep on dreaming and let us enjoy the lush greens of Pakistan's NAs.



See that's why I'm sad. I thought a think-tank advocating the UN resolutions would at least know where they would be applicable. Here's a map of 1947 Kashmir:










xeric said:


> We have done whatever we like to what that belonged to us. Let's see if you can do any guud to that something except killing and raping that dont even belongs to you.



Whatever attrocities take place in Kashmir due to hightened tension are deplorable. Using those to fulfill your own personal agenda is even more deplorable. 



xeric said:


> Mumbai is a drama and it has been proved. Those whom you accused of roam freely today in Pakistan and would do so until you plan and execute another drama with a little bit more precision.
> 
> 
> 
> And as for the sheeshe thing, well your cold start BS and two front war had already sucked up shyt. Let's see what your land graber generals comes up with next.
> 
> 
> 
> We dont celebrate death of any human, its just the byproduct of your sick mentality. Celebrate was used by you not me. Being a soldier myself, i just feel demoralized watching men in uniform dieing in vain without achieving anything but disgrace, a stigmatic life and increased levels of mental sickness!





You have mentioned that you are a soldier yourself. That's why I'm leaving this rant alone, out of respect. Please do not post such things unless you want a fitting reply.


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Had you read the post, you would have realized that I did not equate the two.



The first line says it all and i dont have time that i can waste on absurdness while reading illogical concepts from some weak raconteur.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Exactly the manner that you have adopted in Afghanistan against Pakistan, right?


If that is the case (I dont believe it though), then yes.. A good turn deserves another..



xeric said:


> BTW, please provide recent links that prove Pakistani involvement and supporting the freedom fighters there or else your yap is futile.


Forget the links. Go over the posts in this forum only for validating the support for the so called freedom struggle.



xeric said:


> An excellent piece of what india want others to believe but has o grounds. india is keep more troops than Pakistan in Kashmir, if you dont mind. Withdrawal, my foot..



The resolution did not ask for withdrawl of Indian troops. The deployment of existing forces in Jammu & Kashmir is post 1989. As I said, post 1965, this resolution is considered defunct by India





xeric said:


> Like i said, you need to prove the allegations. Pakistan is not supporting anything but morally the Kashmiri freedom movement.
> 
> Stop the rhetorics, it just make one look like a fool.
> 
> Provide credible links which claims any recent infiltration that was just not dreamingly foiled by the brave BSF, but got hold of a few Jiahdis and also provide soe proof that can suggest the Pakistani establishment is helping the freedom fighters in men and/or material, or else keep mum!



Its either me or the mods that will decide if I need to keep mum 

So if you are maintaining a stance that the support to the so called Kashmir freedom movement is only moral, then Ok, I will take your word for it. But that doesnt change my post. You linked the Mumbai incident to the insurgency in J&K, which by association makes both of them as acts of terrorism. Also Pakistan has a Mumbai like incident every week. I am sure you dont call that drama. So dont do that with Mumbai as well. Loss of innocent Life whether in Mumbai, Kashmir or Lahore is always regrettable.


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> Lolz... what an enlightening piece of info.
> 
> Well i know what these resolutions mean, ofcourse it wont leading into an united miltary effort against india if it is not binding, but as we have already seen the indian support for the israeli action recently we arent surprised that india is very willing to join the list of those who blatantly disgrace civility and uprightness. .



It is good that you understand UNSC resolution on Kashmir, so stop giving us your unwanted lectures on Kashmir and on plebiscite, Independence etc etc.. . Anyway&#8230;which is that military that has guts to take on India.




xeric said:


> BTW, if india is so jumpy in not biding by the resolution, it shouldnt have agreed to it at the first place. This we call, licking ones own spit. .



Ask your government why UNSC resolution cannot be implemented in Kashmir. I am sure they will give you a long list.




xeric said:


> Moreover, you are just some internet champion who is of a different opinion, your govt has already agreed to the implementation of the resolution but isnt doing it because of the issues like troops withdrawal etc, and not because of what you have mentioned. .



Neither do I care about your opinion. Anyway, when did GOI agreed on implementing UNSC resolution&#8230;.are you wet dreaming? 




xeric said:


> Anyhow, no worries, it is your soldiers that are killed every day there and dramas like those that happened in Mumbai take place if this Kashmir issue lingers on. .



Stop threatening us.. we had enough of that nonsense 




xeric said:


> That's what you like all of us to believe, but guess what, tt will take us atleast somewhere, which ofcourse is not digestible to an oppressor. .



I repeat this intransigence is not going to take you anywhere 



xeric said:


> Ooooo... i am shivering! .



It is good for you. You should shiver



xeric said:


> ^^ Well dont see us f;inching either. .



That&#8217;s what even India wants 



xeric said:


> You seem weak at maths, boy.



Huh&#8230;Huh


----------



## Xeric

prodevelopment said:


> Not trying to be funny. Just sad that's all.
> 
> For proof of those accusations of cross border terrorism, there is a mega-thread running over here:
> 
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmir-war/52736-pro-freedom-insurgents-vs-indian-army.html
> 
> Changing the name of the thread does not change its contents.



What?

'Foiled' attempts against ghost enemies, right?

Try harder.



> See that's why I'm sad. I thought a think-tank advocating the UN resolutions would at least know where they would be applicable. Here's a map of 1947 Kashmir:




i think you missed my post# 952-3 on this thread.




> Whatever attrocities take place in Kashmir due to hightened tension are deplorable. Using those to fulfill your own personal agenda is even more deplorable.


Deplorable? That's it.

The US said and i quote, " we went in iraq to find WMD and in the process we killed thousands of innocents lives, but we didnt find any and we are sorry' FTW. You even sound worst then the yanks when you say deplorable.

The dudes are committing atrocities against humanity they need to be ruthlessly insulted and brought to justice and surprisingly you lay them at rest by saying deplorable. That's what really is deplorable!!




> You have mentioned that you are a soldier yourself. That's why I'm leaving this rant alone, out of respect. Please do not post such things unless you want a fitting reply.



Oh my!

Why dont you give it a try? Or may you be you lack the 'morality' to support rapists and murderers.


----------



## harish

I am feeling left out and feeling no love here.


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> So if you are maintaining a stance that the support to the so called Kashmir freedom movement is only moral, then Ok, I will take your word for it. But that doesnt change my post. You linked the Mumbai incident to the insurgency in J&K, which by association makes both of them as acts of terrorism. Also Pakistan has a Mumbai like incident every week. I am sure you dont call that drama. So dont do that with Mumbai as well. Loss of innocent Life whether in Mumbai, Kashmir or Lahore is always regrettable.



Organizations like JuD take their inspirations from Kashmir or else thay dont have to do much with GoP or else you must have found them fighting besides mehsuds and likes.

i would like to quote President Musharraf on this while he was critisicied the A-f-Pak Strategy:
_
I am totally against the term AfPak. I do not support the word
itself for two reasons: First, the strategy puts Pakistan on the same level
as Afghanistan. We are not. Afghanistan has no government and the
country is completely destabilized. Pakistan is not.* Second, and this is
much more important, is that there is an Indian element in the whole
game. We have the Kashmir struggle, without which extremist elements
like Lashkar-e-Taiba would not exist.*_

So in short Mumbai and Kashmir are very much linked, it's the obvious only if you want to see a bit deep or else, it wont matter as Pakistan is just a 'terror factory', right?

Lastly, mumbai 'like' incidents dont happen in Pakistn everyday, just because human died and property was damaged doesnt mean they are alike, or else a train crash could also be equated with mumbai. Or may be you are in the habit of equating just anything intuition of-as you did in case of Kashmir = Balochistan


----------



## harish

Xeric coming from an ex service man, I just do not get you. Are you saying that because of Kashmir, Mumbai happened. Because of Kashmir, the LeT was born. So get out of Kashmir, and you will be safe. Your army can concentrate on killing your own. And be suitably and more fruitfully employed elsewhere. Do you see how absurd it sounds even to a lay person? Where else would we need the army so actively, were it not for you guys? So where else do you want our 0.5 million forces to be stationed? The Andamans? And do you see any country or soldier even consider backing away from such overtly hostile logic of arm twisting?Speaking of Mumbai like incidents not happening at your end my friend, your recent Lahore twin mosque attacks was very similar. So by the same logic,should we ask you now to butt out and hand Azad Kashmir and GB back to us? And allow your soldiers to be more fruitfully employed preventing Pakistanis from from causing bomb blasts in Pakistani cities all over, killing thousands of your own? Please do appreciate that Pakistan is riding the tiger it created. You are going to find it really difficult getting off. But you already know that by now, don't you?


----------



## prodevelopment

xeric said:


> What?
> 
> 'Foiled' attempts against ghost enemies, right?
> 
> Try harder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think you missed my post# 952-3 on this thread.



I know that you've been brainwashed by your 'mullahs' who fed you fairytales. But that stops being an excuse once you have an internet connection. Kindly go over to something called 'google' and search for 'map of J&K in 1947'. Lack of information stops becoming an excuse if you don't want to search for it.




xeric said:


> Oh my!
> 
> Why dont you give it a try?



Sure



xeric said:


> Anyhow, no worries, it is your soldiers that are killed every day there and dramas like those that happened in Mumbai take place if this Kashmir issue lingers on.
> 
> 
> 
> We dont celebrate death of any human, its just the byproduct of your sick mentality. Celebrate was used by you not me. Being a soldier myself, i just feel demoralized watching men in uniform dieing in vain without achieving anything but disgrace, a stigmatic life and increased levels of mental sickness!



You are a soldier right? How does it feel to kill your own? How does it feel that your government is being paid by the west to kill your own? You kill your own brothers and sisters everyday, yet cry false tears about OUR internal problems?? How dare you? You question OUR soldiers? How about YOUR hired hitmen? 


You know what. **** it. You were right. I can't do this. People like you can stoop down to such dirty levels, not me. 
I hope one day you will come to your senses. I will pray for you.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Xeric coming from an ex service man, I just do not get you.


First, i am not an ex.



> Are you saying that because of Kashmir, Mumbai happened. Because of Kashmir, the LeT was born.


Second, Yes, you got that. Yes that's what i am saying. Digest it.



> So get out of Kashmir


Third, one can get out of something if it is inside it.



> and you will be safe. Your army can concentrate on killing your own. And be suitably and more fruitfully employed elsewhere. Do you see how absurd it sounds even to a lay person? Where else would we need the army so actively, were it not for you guys? So where else do you want our 0.5 million forces to be stationed? The Andamans? And do you see any country, or any brave and proud soldier even consider backing away from such overtly hostile logic of arm twisting?



Last, the rest is an emotional rant. Take a sip of that cold water laying beside your table.


----------



## harish

I did take a sip. And modify my post further. Without emotion. Digest it.


----------



## rastor

Both India & Pak pay in blood for Kashmir.

That which has been won with blood & war will not be gifted or given away in "negotiations" or "talks". And it's a maxim that applies to both India & Pak.

Anybody who believes otherwise is spinning wheels in the sand.


----------



## Xeric

prodevelopment said:


> You are a soldier right? How does it feel to kill your own? How does it feel that your government is being paid by the west to kill your own? You kill your own brothers and sisters everyday, yet cry false tears about OUR internal problems?? How dare you? You question OUR soldiers? How about YOUR hired hitmen?



i will kill just anybody that would harm my country's integrity. It may be my own or someone having hindu genes, i dont care. Those who dont have respect for the motherland dont deserve to enjoy its lap. It is simple.

BTW, if you are mistaken, 'they' are not our own. Again that's something you people like us to believe. Any member who hits on his own house no longer belongs to the family. 2 +2 =4.

We tried to bring them back through deals, jirgas and agreemnets, they didnt listen, so they were rejected. How does it feel to kill maoists, dalties and indian muslims?

i question your those soldiers who blindly (rather wittingly) rape grannies and kill innocents on the orders of 21st century hitlers. Rapists and criminals deserve no charm! Can you question that?



> You know what. **** it. You were right. I can't do this. People like you can stoop down to such dirty levels, not me.
> I hope one day you will come to your senses. I will pray for you.



Guess what, you already did


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> You need to prove all this, until then please carry on with the yap and keep on calling the kettle black.



I needn prove the sun rises in the east since ur in a place where the sun doesnt shine.

The truth is there for all to see...


----------



## hillman32

*I support the following option :-
*

*The Chenab formula*

This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistan's borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.

*Though this option will leave the village of my ancestors across the Chenab in Indian Area ...........!!!!!!*


----------



## Xeric

*Please do appreciate that Pakistan is riding the tiger it created. You are going to find it really difficult getting off.*

We are slaughtering the sheep created by the West and RAWish mullahs.

---------- Post added at 04:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:55 PM ----------




Karthic Sri said:


> I needn prove the sun rises in the east since ur in a place where the sun doesnt shine.
> 
> The truth is there for all to see...



Ahem, sour grapes....??


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> We are slaughtering the sheep created by the West and RAWish mullahs.



Yes of course we believe you. You being a soldier and all. Meanwhile those you haven't yet slaughtered, are slaughtering your own, in mosques and hospitals and market places. You really do need to forget us for a bit and hurry up my friend. We will wait for you in the meantime, seeing as your hands are full. Both our soldiers and us.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Yes of course we believe you. You being a soldier and all. Meanwhile those you haven't yet slaughtered, are slaughtering your own, in mosques and hospitals and market places. You really do need to forget us for a bit and hurry up my friend. We will wait for you in the meantime, seeing as your hands are full. Both our soldiers and us.



Right, so you throw in FATA and taliban while we discuss Kashmir and you think you have a solution. Excellent!

BTW, we really dont need to forget you because for us, you are the priority ONE and would remain so unless your jingoistic generals stops the mental masturbation resulting in absurd claims like the Two Front War and limited nuclear escalation. And guess what, we can handle both the menaces-the terrorists and the indians and we did quite well and the world acknowledges it.

But what we have to see is if india could do the same - 220 districts on one side and Pakistan on the other - scary...?? Hell yeah!


----------



## Jade

harish said:


> I am feeling left out and feeling no love here.



Some times its is better to be irrational with people who are irrational


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> Ahem, sour grapes....??



hahaha...y should i feel sour grapes...

Im perfectly contented with wat i have....But it s ur country that wants more..



hillman32 said:


> *I support the following option :-
> *
> 
> *The Chenab formula*
> 
> This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistan's borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.
> 
> *Though this option will leave the village of my ancestors across the Chenab in Indian Area ...........!!!!!!*



no mate....u may support it because u gain territory here..
India doesnt not support/acknowledge any solution that entails loosing even an inch of Indian territory.
India has actually made a huge concession of willing to recognize NA and P-O-K as indisputed parts of Pakistan just like Punjab.Sindh. 
*We r happy with wat we have...and we r asking u also to be happy with wat u have.*
But if u not satisfied...then we r also ready for the game.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

no problem let the games continue...question is, who is suffering

it is the people of Kashmir


----------



## k_n

^^^^ Then why don't you stop forwarding your 'MORAL' support to Kashmiri seperatists and disband the United Jihad Council , arrest its head Syed Salahuddin and charge him with sustaining a law and order situation for 2 decades . Afterall you seem to be more concerned about Kashmiris .

Now dont reply me , asking Indian govt to let the Kashmiris excersice their Right To Determination .


----------



## desiman

xeric said:


> *Please do appreciate that Pakistan is riding the tiger it created. You are going to find it really difficult getting off.*
> 
> We are slaughtering the sheep created by the West and RAWish mullahs.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 04:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:55 PM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> Ahem, sour grapes....??



ya blame the RAW, nice and easy


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

k_n said:


> ^^^^ Then why don't you stop forwarding your 'MORAL' support to Kashmiri seperatists and disband the United Jihad Council , arrest its head Syed Salahuddin and charge him with sustaining a law and order situation for 2 decades . Afterall you seem to be more concerned about Kashmiris .
> 
> Now dont reply me , asking Indian govt to let the Kashmiris excersice their Right To Determination .



those are purely Kashmiri phenomenon....

and yes, I (we) are ''concerned'' about them (Kashmiris)


----------



## k_n

> and yes, I (we) are ''concerned'' about them (Kashmiris)



Sorry , you've again failed to explain the BOND that makes you feel Kashmiri grievances against GOI and IA as your ( Pakistan's ) own .

Yes , United Jihad Council is a completely Kashmri phenomenon and You ( Pakistan ) have a lot to worry about Them ( Kashmiris ) .
You cant expect Indians to talk in a neutral tone once you completely rubbish the fact that United Jihad Council cant sustain itself without PA support !


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

are you a spokesperson for indian government?


----------



## American Eagle

I am a thinking American who served in Pakistan at a time when US-Pakistan relations were at an all time high. I had very many good friends in Pakistan all of whom were welcome any time in our USMAAG Staff House; in the old Salateen Club which I ran as an additional duty (the Club for US Foreign Service officers and staff; enlisted and commissioned US military, and their families); and at our beach house I also ran as an additional duty at Samyiani (excuse my lousy spelling.)

Have tried hard to support/promote a peaceful Kashmir solution as an outsider and do have some powerful lifelong friends in Congress and in various Presidential administrations of both major political parties here in the US. Right after graduating university I served on the staff of the Majority Whip of the US Congress while waiting out my Nov. 1962 report date for USAF Officer Training School. Congressman Armistead Seldon, now deceased, was later US Ambassador to Australia and at one point under LBJ was Under Secretary of the Defense Dept. ((#2 in DoD). Good man, he was my Congressman when I was in college at the University of Alabama, a part of his Congressional District.

THE TIMES OF INDIA ran the same article I wrote on a Parliament for Kashmir back in 2006 or thereabouts, in addition to the Peshawar FRONTIER POST and the long running repeat of same article in KHYBER WATCH.COM.

Ordinary folks with a decent education and life experiences can communicate and do a little good from time to time. I try to do that.

I appreciate your straight forward question. I, too, am honestly frank. Nothing wrong with open frankness.


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> Right, so you throw in FATA and taliban while we discuss Kashmir and you think you have a solution. Excellent!



No different to you pulling in Mumbai and the Maoists in a Kashmir centric thread and discussion my friend. As a newcomer, its best to tread the trail blazed by a Think Tank.



> BTW, we really dont need to forget you because for us, you are the priority ONE and would remain so unless your jingoistic generals stops the mental masturbation resulting in absurd claims like the Two Front War and limited nuclear escalation. And guess what, we can handle both the menaces-the terrorists and the indians and we did quite well and the world acknowledges it.



You handled India? When? While you have been busy with your home grown vermin, we have consciously kept our hands to ourselves. So if you call the continuance of the status quo allowed to you by Indian largese as 'handling India,' then what else can I say? Yes, if we came at you opportunistically while your forces were divided and you still held us off, then I would concede that you handled us. Right now you seem to have your hands full handling rag tag guirellas who cannot even muster a matching pair of shoes to fight in. 

So to answer you sir , yes we as a nation are really scared. Scared at the impending prospect of handling you once you have the time. As we have handled you 5 times in the past 60 plus years.


----------



## KS

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> are you a spokesperson for indian government?



If ur a spokesman for Kashmiris then I am....


----------



## Xeric

*No different to you pulling in Mumbai and the Maoists in a Kashmir centric thread and discussion my friend. As a newcomer, its best to tread the trail blazed by a Think Tank.*

Hey newbie or whatever, Kashmir is not an isolated issue, it cant be. As i can see that you are a newcomer and probably lack the experience to discuss important issues, i dont blame you.

Mumbai like acts happen due to issues like Kashmir and that's a fact admitted by your own govt. Or else we would have seen the talibans and the TTP executing another Mumbai, but fortunately we dont because TTP and likes are not concerned with Kashmir (until now) and therefore they dont ogle india (except when the your surgical strike wet dream occurred). But on the other hand organizations like JuD and LeT get their motivation and reasons from the Kashmir issue. Kashmir help them recruit individuals because of the sole reason of the atrocities committed by your soldiers there.

So it's simple, but then you are just a new comer, arent you?


----------



## Xeric

*You handled India? When? While you have been busy with your home grown vermin, we have consciously kept our hands to ourselves. So if you call the continuance of the status quo allowed to you by Indian largese as 'handling India,' then what else can I say? Yes, if we came at you opportunistically while your forces were divided and you still held us off, then I would concede that you handled us. Right now you seem to have your hands full handling rag tag guirellas who cannot even muster a matching pair of shoes to fight in.

So to answer you sir , yes we as a nation are really scared. Scared at the impending prospect of handling you once you have the time. As we have handled you 5 times in the past 60 plus years. *

So the Akhund Bharat dies...?


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Organizations like JuD take their inspirations from Kashmir or else thay dont have to do much with GoP or else you must have found them fighting besides mehsuds and likes.
> 
> i would like to quote President Musharraf on this while he was critisicied the A-f-Pak Strategy:
> _
> I am totally against the term AfPak. I do not support the word
> itself for two reasons: First, the strategy puts Pakistan on the same level
> as Afghanistan. We are not. Afghanistan has no government and the
> country is completely destabilized. Pakistan is not.* Second, and this is
> much more important, is that there is an Indian element in the whole
> game. We have the Kashmir struggle, without which extremist elements
> like Lashkar-e-Taiba would not exist.*_
> 
> So in short Mumbai and Kashmir are very much linked, it's the obvious only if you want to see a bit deep or else, it wont matter as Pakistan is just a 'terror factory', right?



So if Mumbai and Kashmir are linked then both are blatant cases of terrorism. Firstly, Musharaf's words are not a final authority on the subject. But leaving that aside, the whole arguement of JuD and LeT existing only because of Kashmir is flawed since Kashmir is simply an excuse in the ongoing proxy war against India. 






xeric said:


> Lastly, mumbai 'like' incidents dont happen in Pakistn everyday, just because human died and property was damaged doesnt mean they are alike, or else a train crash could also be equated with mumbai. Or may be you are in the habit of equating just anything intuition of-as you did in case of Kashmir = Balochistan



Dude.. I am simply quoting your own Prime Minister

"Pakistan is itself facing Mumbai-like attacks almost every other day and when we cannot protect our own citizens, how can we guarantee that there wouldnt be any more terrorist hits in India"

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | No guarantee against repeat of Mumbai-like attacks, Gates told


And lastly, you do need to read more carefully.. I did not equate Kashmir with Balochistan in my earlier post (though they are not very different), but compared the fatalities suffered by the 2 armies in those areas..


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> So if Mumbai and Kashmir are linked then both are blatant cases of terrorism. Firstly, Musharaf's words are not a final authority on the subject. But leaving that aside, the whole arguement of JuD and LeT existing only because of Kashmir is flawed since Kashmir is simply an excuse in the ongoing proxy war against India.


Quit the occupation and the 'excuse' would die its own death.

You finger me and i punch your teeth out and then you blame me of hurting you, how not so intelligent.

Lastly, if you consider Kashmir is the reason behind the so called proxy war against india, why not leave the damn place? i play with fire and then burn myself up, and then i complain of injury, how not so logical.





> Dude.. I am simply quoting your own Prime Minister
> 
> "Pakistan is itself facing Mumbai-like attacks almost every other day and when we cannot protect our own citizens, how can we guarantee that there wouldnt be any more terrorist hits in India"
> 
> DAWN.COM | Pakistan | No guarantee against repeat of Mumbai-like attacks, Gates told
> 
> 
> And lastly, you do need to read more carefully.. I did not equate Kashmir with Balochistan in my earlier post (though they are not very different), but compared the fatalities suffered by the 2 armies in those areas..





You need a serious lesson on Metaphors!


----------



## EjazR

*@xeric*

Then why are the LeT and other militant groups killing more Kashmir muslims than security forces? Why have they killed pro-independence leaders of JKLF and other movements? Why do more than 80&#37;+ people on the Indian Kashmir side want the militants to stop the violence? And why are local Kashmiris in the police or otherwise leading the charge against them?

Give it a serious thought, LeT was not FORMED by the Kashmiris-at least not on the Indian side, it was formed by the ISI. The JKLF which was an indigenous secular movement has disavowed violence and is not involved in militant activities anymore.

These militant groups have a huge responsibility for not having achieved peace in Kashmir till now.


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> *@xeric*
> 
> Then why are the LeT and other militant groups killing more Kashmir muslims than security forces? Why have they killed pro-independence leaders of JKLF and other movements? Why do more than 80%+ people on the Indian Kashmir side want the militants to stop the violence? And why are local Kashmiris in the police or otherwise leading the charge against them?
> 
> Give it a serious thought, LeT was not FORMED by the Kashmiris-at least not on the Indian side, it was formed by the ISI. The JKLF which was an indigenous secular movement has disavowed violence and is not involved in militant activities anymore.
> 
> These militant groups have a huge responsibility for not having achieved peace in Kashmir till now.



It seems as if you have been reading lots of RAW chronicles lately.


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> Quit the occupation and the 'excuse' would die its own death.
> 
> You finger me and i punch your teeth out and then you blame me of hurting you, how not so intelligent.
> 
> Lastly, if you consider Kashmir is the reason behind the so called proxy war against india, why not leave the damn place? i play with fire and then burn myself up, and then i complain of injury, how not so logical.



You seem to have a point here Xeric. So India is not wanted in Kashmir and should move out to save itself further painful consequences. By that token my friend, Pakistan is not wanted in Balochistan. Pakistan is not wanted in Afghanistan. And Pakistan is most definitely not wanted in Waziristan, all along your NWFP, and FATA. And now you may add your Punjab to the list also apparently. So stop fingering and save yourself broken teeth. Give in to the TTP and BLA. Respect Afghan claims on territory you hold. Leave those damn places brother. Show us unintelligent and illogical Indians how its done. Move out.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## American Eagle

Kashmir boils down in a very poor region of the world, economically speaking, but a very rich area of the world in terms of the earliest history of mankind on this tired old globe...to water rights vs. learning to how live together and get along.

I myself am a sincere Christian, others are sincere Muslims, yet more are sincere Hindus, etc. Repeatedly we all at times forget the simple truth that we are one in the same God on high, all the children of Abraham.

Digressions to the Middle East are another digression from the issue of Kashmir, the three Kashmirs.

All worldwide problems of suffering peoples are bad and need help.

But the issue here needs to be focused on Kashmir, and those who wander off simply don't want to keep their eye on the ball they might be able to help roll in a constructive and problem solving way.

Indians, Pakistanis, and Chinese on this site need to be using their well educated brains and connections to help not hinder progress.

China and India have already become economic engines of the total world economy. Pakistan is sitting the dust of the past when getting past Kashmir constructively with workable plans such as the Andorran Model and the non violent, peaceful efforts of the current JKLF leadership are available every day to proactively cross the goal line for the benefit of everyone.

Too, I was told when I recently joined this site no cursewords and such. Let's drop that and stay constructively and positively focused. Worth ideas don't need rudeness...the logic of a good plan or plans will speak well for itself when deeply discussed and better understood.

Those posting geographical maps are very helpful on this topic. I for one say thanks for the maps.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> You seem to have a point here Xeric. So India is not wanted in Kashmir and should move out to save itself further painful consequences. By that token my friend, Pakistan is not wanted in Balochistan. Pakistan is not wanted in Afghanistan. And Pakistan is most definitely not wanted in Waziristan, all along your NWFP, and FATA. And now you may add your Punjab to the list also apparently. So stop fingering and save yourself broken teeth. Give in to the TTP and BLA. Respect Afghan claims on territory you hold. Leave those damn places brother. Show us unintelligent and illogical Indians how its done. Move out.



Post # 986, period.


----------



## harish

I will not compare myself to Karan. He's in a different league as a poster. But help me see where my reasoning built along the lines of your own intelligence and logic is flawed sir? You are fighting for what you believe is yours. Broken teeth do not deter you. You are fighting to win. So are we. Period.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> I will not compare myself to Karan. He's in a different league as a poster. But help me see where my reasoning built along the lines of your own intelligence and logic is flawed sir? You are fighting for what you believe is yours. Broken teeth do not deter you. You are fighting to win. So are we. Period.



Fighting for what's yours?! Strange!

Stealing something and then claiming it a legitimate right wont make it your own.

Muslims took Spain and the Christians took it back, that's what is called a right. They fought soldiers to make it their own, not civilians. Neither did they rape and destroy property nor did they oppress the population and aggressed. Though they were ancient times when the might was right, today logic, humanity, rationality and candorness prevails and an indian-occupied-kashmir doesnt fit in.


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> It seems as if you have been reading lots of RAW chronicles lately.



And then you guys wonder why opinion polls show why less than 2% of J&K wants to join Pakistan. Because anything that does not fall in your pre-conceived notion are "RAW chronicles".

Musharraf understood this reality and that was why he toned down the militant groups as they were harming Pakistani support. If this goes up again, the backlash against Pakistan will be greater.

Here is a post you should go through
*http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmir-war/45649-profiling-j-k-police.html#post658126*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> And then you guys wonder why opinion polls show why less than 2% of J&K wants to join Pakistan. Because anything that does not fall in your pre-conceived notion are "RAW chronicles".
> 
> Musharraf understood this reality and that was why he toned down the militant groups as they were harming Pakistani support. If this goes up again, the backlash against Pakistan will be greater.
> 
> Here is a post you should go through
> *http://www.defence.pk/forums/kashmir-war/45649-profiling-j-k-police.html#post658126*


We are talking in 2010. Alas, you lagged behind.


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> Fighting for what's yours?! Strange!
> 
> Stealing something and then claiming it a legitimate right wont make it your own.
> 
> Muslims took Spain and the Christians took it back, that's what is called a right. They fought soldiers to make it their own, not civilians. Neither did they rape and destroy property nor did they oppress the population and aggressed. Though they were ancient times when the might was right, today logic, humanity, rationality and candorness prevails and an indian-occupied-kashmir doesnt fit in.



Exactly Xeric. Stealing Azad Kashmir in 1947, by force, and then claiming it as your own and your legitimate right by reasons of religious majority alone, will not change the a truth of accesion, and make Kashmir yours. The rest of your post sir is emotional and rhetorical. Please have some of that cold water you offered me yesterday. The only atrocities inflicted on our Kashmiris, is by those you send across to do your dirty work, because you have lost the will for a full frontal face off, after what the IA has inflicted on you the last few times you tried sir. So please sit in your trenches and keep waiting, watching, and controlling your irregulars by sattelite phone. We are here to stay, broken teeth or not.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Exactly Xeric. Stealing Azad Kashmir in 1947, by force, and then claiming it as your own and your legitimate right by reasons of religious majority alone, will not change the a truth of accesion, and make Kashmir yours. The rest of your post sir is emotional and rhetorical. Please have some of that cold water you offered me yesterday. The only atrocities inflicted on our Kashmiris, is by those you send across to do your dirty work, because you have lost the will for a full frontal face off, after what the IA has inflicted on you the last few times you tried sir. So please sit in your trenches and keep waiting, watching, and controlling your irregulars by sattelite phone. We are here to stay, broken teeth or not.





Ok, it seems to me now as if i am talking to someone from kindergarten, so the debate ends from my side.

Lastword: Just go a little backward from 'Stealing Azad Kashmir in 1947' and you may find surprises 

Guud day.


----------



## harish

Ok sir, khuda hafiz. It was really nice talking to you.


----------



## Jade

@xeric ,

There is only one solution to Kashmir Problem. End you occupation of *** and return it back to India. We can always renegotiate Indus water treaty to Pakistans advantage


----------



## Xeric

Guys, we have just been issued a cyber threat!

Run, before he internet-punch you.


----------



## ice_man

American Eagle said:


> Kashmir boils down in a very poor region of the world, economically speaking, but a very rich area of the world in terms of the earliest history of mankind on this tired old globe...to water rights vs. learning to how live together and get along.
> 
> I myself am a sincere Christian, others are sincere Muslims, yet more are sincere Hindus, etc. Repeatedly we all at times forget the simple truth that we are one in the same God on high, all the children of Abraham.
> 
> Digressions to the Middle East are another digression from the issue of Kashmir, the three Kashmirs.
> 
> All worldwide problems of suffering peoples are bad and need help.
> 
> But the issue here needs to be focused on Kashmir, and those who wander off simply don't want to keep their eye on the ball they might be able to help roll in a constructive and problem solving way.
> 
> Indians, Pakistanis, and Chinese on this site need to be using their well educated brains and connections to help not hinder progress.
> 
> China and India have already become economic engines of the total world economy. *Pakistan is sitting the dust of the past *when getting past Kashmir constructively with workable plans such as the Andorran Model and the non violent, peaceful efforts of the current JKLF leadership are available every day to proactively cross the goal line for the benefit of everyone.
> 
> Too, I was told when I recently joined this site no cursewords and such. Let's drop that and stay constructively and positively focused. Worth ideas don't need rudeness...the logic of a good plan or plans will speak well for itself when deeply discussed and better understood.
> 
> Those posting geographical maps are very helpful on this topic. I for one say thanks for the maps.



great pakistan is sitting on the "dust" of the past! well then syria should also drop its claim to golan heights! the palestanians to a state of there own! 

China should drop its claim to taiwan! 

and the UK should apologize for the falkland campaign! 


& i would be asking this question to the germans if they hadn't been returned the *RHINELANDS!* after world war 2! 


Europe solved all its problem only because all land claimed was given to its rightful people! 

except cyprus which is the major friction point between turkey & greece! so you see my friend its easy for an AMERICAN to tell everyone to drop there weapons because AMERICAN's don't understand the people's problems! who are the rightful rulers of the land!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

harish said:


> You seem to have a point here Xeric. So India is not wanted in Kashmir and should move out to save itself further painful consequences. By that token my friend, Pakistan is not wanted in Balochistan. Pakistan is not wanted in Afghanistan. And Pakistan is most definitely not wanted in Waziristan, all along your NWFP, and FATA. And now you may add your Punjab to the list also apparently. So stop fingering and save yourself broken teeth. Give in to the TTP and BLA. Respect Afghan claims on territory you hold. Leave those damn places brother. Show us unintelligent and illogical Indians how its done. Move out.



Bad analogies - all of the territories mentioned in your post became part of Pakistan through one sort of representative process or another, under the rules of partition.

The accession of Princely States was subject to plebiscite under the rules of partition, a point endorsed by the UNSC in its resolutions on Kashmir, and accepted by both India and Pakistan. India carried out a plebiscite in Junagadh after invading it despite the accession of the State to Pakistan - that plebiscite has not yet been honored in J&K, which makes the accession incomplete, and which means the rights of the people of the State remain suspended and violated.

That is the basis on which 'India should move out', not necessarily literally, but in allowing the Kashmiris to determine their own destiny.

If we are going to drag in any territory that is inflicted by violence in a nation into this discussion, then India would have to break up into a dozen or so pieces.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> Guys, we have just been issued a cyber threat!
> 
> Run, before he internet-punch you.



I am dead serious. Even that is GOI official position.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

jade1982 said:


> @xeric ,
> 
> There is only one solution to Kashmir Problem. End you occupation of *** and return it back to India. We can always renegotiate Indus water treaty to Pakistans advantage



Absolutely, under the rules of partition (plebiscite to confirm accession) and the UNSC resolutions - that is come to an agreement on the demilitarization of the region and allow the UN or some other neutral body to hold a plebiscite that complies with the rules of partition and the UNSC resolutions of sel-determination for the Kashmiris.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

jade1982 said:


> @xeric ,
> 
> There is only one solution to Kashmir Problem. End you occupation of *** and return it back to India. We can always renegotiate Indus water treaty to Pakistans advantage



back to india??? joke of the day

learn the realities on the ground first


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

jade1982 said:


> I am dead serious. Even that is GOI official position.



Please raise the issue internationally to get support for it - you can't.

You know why? Because the international community has already addressed the issue under the UNSC resolutions, so if India takes the issue to the international community, of claiming all of J&K, the UNSC resolutions will come back into play. 

No country, especially the Western world so enamored with human rights and democracy, is going to argue against the principle of self-determination endorsed by existing UNSC resolutions and required under the rules of partition. That is why, barring military conquest (which is unlikely for either side), India cannot really make any concerted move to claim all of J&K.

In any case, Nehru very explicitly stated that India wanted to maintain the LoC = IB when he withdrew from the UNSC resolutions unilaterally, and MMS has of late said the same thing, 'a solution to Kashmir with no re-drawing of borders'.

India's claim to all of J&K is just on paper now, no one takes it seriously given the statements and actions of India since the fifties on the issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## prodevelopment

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> back to india??? joke of the day
> 
> learn the realities on the ground first



Reality on the ground is that even after your repeated attempts, 65% of J&K is still with India. And reality on the ground is that some of the part that was originally with Pakistan has been taken away by China. You want more ground realities?

What makes me laugh is that the so called sympathizers of Kashmiri sentiments refuse to hold plebiscites in ***. Sure, Indians are the oppressors. What's your excuse?


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

American Eagle said:


> China and India have already become economic engines of the total world economy. Pakistan is sitting the dust of the past when getting past Kashmir constructively with workable plans such as the Andorran Model and the non violent, peaceful efforts of the current JKLF leadership are available every day to proactively cross the goal line for the benefit of everyone.



You will find that it is Pakistan and Pakistanis that more than willing to explore dispute resolution models that do not convert the current LoC to the IB.

Becoming engines of the world economy does not mean those nations actions and policies are moral, correct and non-obstructionist. Indeed both China, in Tibet, and India, in Kashmir, have illustrated that both repressive Communism and a Secular Democracy can use force and violence to suppress millions and deny their rights ( in the case of J&K required under the rules of partition and the UNSC resolutions) for the sake of territorial expansion.


----------



## Jade

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Absolutely, under the rules of partition (plebiscite to confirm accession) and the UNSC resolutions - that is come to an agreement on the demilitarization of the region and allow the UN or some other neutral body to hold a plebiscite that complies with the rules of partition and the UNSC resolutions of sel-determination for the Kashmiris.



As far my I know there is no such thing as rules of partition. Regarding UNSC resolutions, there are certain pre conditions that are to be met. If Pakistan was so serious about the UNSC resolutions, then why did it ceded a part of disputed land to China?


----------



## Jade

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Please raise the issue internationally to get support for it - you can't.
> 
> You know why? Because the international community has already addressed the issue under the UNSC resolutions, so if India takes the issue to the international community, of claiming all of J&K, the UNSC resolutions will come back into play.
> 
> No country, especially the Western world so enamored with human rights and democracy, is going to argue against the principle of self-determination endorsed by existing UNSC resolutions and required under the rules of partition. That is why, barring military conquest (which is unlikely for either side), India cannot really make any concerted move to claim all of J&K.
> 
> In any case, Nehru very explicitly stated that India wanted to maintain the LoC = IB when he withdrew from the UNSC resolutions unilaterally, and MMS has of late said the same thing, 'a solution to Kashmir with no re-drawing of borders'.
> 
> India's claim to all of J&K is just on paper now, no one takes it seriously given the statements and actions of India since the fifties on the issue.




If what you claim is true, which I doubt, why no country, except maybe some OIC countries, is insisting on UNSC resolutions? Why is the international community asking Pakistan and India to solve the problems bilaterally? Why is the international community not trying to mediate?


----------



## Jade

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> back to india??? joke of the day
> 
> learn the realities on the ground first



Do you think the resolution passed by Indian Parliament on Jammu & Kashmir dated 22-Feb-1994 asking Pakistan to give back the occupied land is a joke? Then I cannot help.


----------



## Xeric

prodevelopment said:


> Reality on the ground is that even after your repeated attempts, 65% of J&K is still with India. And reality on the ground is that some of the part that was originally with Pakistan has been taken away by China. You want more ground realities?
> 
> What makes me laugh is that the so called sympathizers of Kashmiri sentiments refuse to hold plebiscites in ***. Sure, Indians are the oppressors. What's your excuse?



You missed one point here - it is india who seeks annexation of Kashmir by force against the will of the people. We did what was guud for the Kashmiri people and we dont see india doing the same.

If we keep aside the 'sponsored' polls we would know that india has no face in Kashmir and is merely carrying the stick on the basis of barbarity and nothing else.

You hold 65% of Kashmir and feel pride in it without knowing that this is blood-pride (as in blood diamonds). This is shameful!

You know what i find strange is that the largest democracy claimant not only feel justified and satisfied on occupation of a state by force but also shamelessly propagate the same. But guess what, it isnt something new, if you people can support countries like israel on incidents like raid on freedom flotilla, one can expect any level of bestiality from your likes.


----------



## American Eagle

Does anyone read what has already been posted here?

The Andorran Model makes the LOC the final boundaries within all parts of Kashmir.

Pakistan, India, and China retain foreign affairs and national security for their respective parts of Kashmir.

The difference is the Kashmiris are allowed to elect a unified, single Parliament which can meet on a rotating basis in each part of Kashmir until some day, maybe, a single capital could be agreed on, which might be generations down the road.

But it would be a start.

Several well intentioned writers on this topic keep digressing and missing the points. If you care about the people of all parts of Kashmir, and you are filled with national pride, all these factors are allowed for under the Andorran Model.

Maybe it is incomprehensiable to some that a resolution which ends secret terrorist training camps and such on all sides is sitting there to be used, a clean cut vehicle.

A single Constitution of all parts of Kashmir is a longer term goal, a non-religious Constitution guaranting rights and protections to all believers of all faiths as well as to those who may choose to believe nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> As far my I know there is no such thing as rules of partition. Regarding UNSC resolutions, there are certain pre conditions that are to be met. If Pakistan was so serious about the UNSC resolutions, then why did it ceded a part of disputed land to China?



Your argument of 'disputed land' is absolutely void. It has no basis what so ever. It is an indian creation so suite its ego and to make the Kashmir issue linger. By showing the only map of kashmir would make you claims justifiable. Had you claim been legitimate we should have seen some hue and cry from the international community over Azad Kashmir and especially the 'gifting; of territory to China, but in a face-palm to india we dont see that happening.

The international mapping agencies shows NA and whatever as part of Pakistan and has no issues. You tried the same tactics in Siachen (ignored the assessments of agencies like US geological survey which showed Siachen as a Pakistani territory and created a new myth basing of which you ingressed in Siachen) but it didnt work. This time also, you have miserably failed to lay an authoritative claim over our NA and the entire world, less you ofcourse does accede to it. You can keep on harping the flawed tune of NA and 'gifts' but no one's listening.


----

i would request the mods that if the indians cant prove the basis of their claim over our NAs, GB etc, they should not be allowed to unfold their self created and self sponsored wet dreams on this board.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

they won't









because they can't


----------



## Xeric

*Why is the international community asking Pakistan and India to solve the problems bilaterally?*

You seem to have the problem of understand the context. You would just pick anything and put it forth in a manner that suites you.Solving the problem bilaterally doesnt mean that one should forget the UN resolution, infact it implies that both the countries should honor the international decree over the issue. Moreover, we dont see this international community of yours insisting on throwing the UN resolution into the bin. No one has negated the UN resolution over Kashmir and even if you are referring to the news piece where 'reportedly' the US urged that both the countries should resolve the issue through dialogue then allow me to enlighten you that it was india who resented over the advice.

So in short, indian neither wants the plebiscite nor does it want a dialogue, thus the only thing left is use of unjustified force against civilians and that's what india is doing.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

American Eagle said:


> Maybe it is incomprehensiable to some that a resolution which ends secret terrorist training camps and such on all sides is sitting there to be used, a clean cut vehicle.



Fair points in the rest of your post, and ones that should be looked into in greater detail, but unless you are willing to call the US founding fathers and those who fought for US independence from the British 'terrorists' I would appreciate you not brand others fighting for freedom and an end to occupation with such a demeaning term.

You know well I am sure the atrocities committed by both sides in the US war for independence.


----------



## k_n

> The accession of Princely States was subject to plebiscite under the rules of partition, a point endorsed by the UNSC in its resolutions on Kashmir, and accepted by both India and Pakistan. India carried out a plebiscite in Junagadh after invading it despite the accession of the State to Pakistan - that plebiscite has not yet been honored in J&K, which makes the accession incomplete, and which means the rights of the people of the State remain suspended and violated.




Accession of Princely States was subject to plebiscite or the will of the Ruler ?

Why was the newly formed GOP with Qaid-e-Azam as the Governor General so adamant on sticking to the excercise of the 'free will' by the Nawab of Junagad and not the will of the citizens of the princely state in the decision of chosing either India or Pakistan .


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> Do you think the resolution passed by Indian Parliament on Jammu & Kashmir dated 22-Feb-1994 asking Pakistan to give back the occupied land is a joke? Then I cannot help.



Yes that's a joke. Probably the joke of the millennium. What is india? A permanent seat holder in the UN? Or a super-power or may be it is The emperor running this world whose words are to be accepted without a flinch?

Just because the 'india' parliament in an isolated and fallacious resolution said something wouldnt mean that it was right. By this definition Pakistan can pass a resolution reclaiming some part of india and that should be guud enough an excuse to send in the forces and rape and butcher the civilians there!

The india resolution stays inside india, no one outside accede to it and it is only guud enough to motivate interneters like you to troll a thread on PDF, nothing more.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> Yes that's a joke. Probably the joke of the millennium. What is india? A permanent seat holder in the UN? Or a super-power or may be it is The emperor running this world whose words are to be accepted without a flinch?
> 
> Just because the 'india' parliament in an isolated and fallacious resolution said something wouldnt mean that it was right. By this definition Pakistan can pass a resolution reclaiming some part of india and that should be guud enough an excuse to send in the forces and rape and butcher the civilians there!
> 
> The india resolution stays inside india, no one outside accede to it and it is only guud enough to motivate interneters like you to troll a thread on PDF, nothing more.



What is India? You dont know; ask your government or your army. They will give you a better picture.

You like it or not the resolution passed inside the Indian parliament is what the GOI is going to follow. If Indian parliament says that J&K is the integral part of India, GOI has no option but to follow the same line


----------



## prodevelopment

xeric said:


> You missed one point here - it is india who seeks annexation of Kashmir by force against the will of the people. We did what was guud for the Kashmiri people and we dont see india doing the same.



Actually, you are missing the point here. The person whom I quoted was dreaming about ground realities. I showed those to him.

Regarding the 'Good for Kashmiri people' rant, why don't you go ahead with the plebicite in P O K? I mean, India is the big bad wolf here. Pakistan is the saviour. Won't the polls put a tremendous amount of international pressure on India?



xeric said:


> If we keep aside *the 'sponsored' polls *we would know that india has no face in Kashmir and is merely carrying the stick on the basis of barbarity and nothing else.



Now we don't have any free and fair polls now do we. How do we go by judging the will of the people now? You certainly aren't the most fair judge. Neither am I. It's the best indication that we have at the moment.



xeric said:


> You hold 65&#37; of Kashmir and feel pride in it without knowing that this is blood-pride (as in blood diamonds). This is shameful!
> 
> You know what i find strange is that the largest democracy claimant not only feel justified and satisfied on occupation of a state by force but also shamelessly propagate the same. But guess what, it isnt something new, if you people can support countries like israel on incidents like raid on freedom flotilla, one can expect any level of bestiality from your likes.



Rant. Ignored.

If you want to debate. Come up with logic and facts. Keep your emotions for your girlfriend.


----------



## prodevelopment

xeric said:


> Your argument of 'disputed land' is absolutely void. It has no basis what so ever. It is an indian creation so suite its ego and to make the Kashmir issue linger. By showing the only map of kashmir would make you claims justifiable. Had you claim been legitimate we should have seen some hue and cry from the international community over Azad Kashmir and especially the 'gifting; of territory to China, but in a face-palm to india we dont see that happening.
> 
> The international mapping agencies shows NA and whatever as part of Pakistan and has no issues. You tried the same tactics in Siachen (ignored the assessments of agencies like US geological survey which showed Siachen as a Pakistani territory and created a new myth basing of which you ingressed in Siachen) but it didnt work. This time also, you have miserably failed to lay an authoritative claim over our NA and the entire world, less you ofcourse does accede to it. You can keep on harping the flawed tune of NA and 'gifts' but no one's listening.
> 
> 
> ----
> 
> i would request the mods that if the indians cant prove the basis of their claim over our NAs, GB etc, they should not be allowed to unfold their self created and self sponsored wet dreams on this board.



There was no international hue and cry about the gifting because the international community does not give a **** about kashmir in general.

And as far as I can see, we have come up with multiple proofs for our claim of NA being a part of the dispute. We have shown you maps from international agencies, twice. You haven't come up with any proofs except your rant.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Skeptic

American Eagle said:


> *Does anyone read what has already been posted here?*
> 
> The Andorran Model makes the LOC the final boundaries within all parts of Kashmir.
> 
> Pakistan, India, and China retain foreign affairs and national security for their respective parts of Kashmir.
> 
> The difference is the Kashmiris are allowed to elect a unified, single Parliament which can meet on a rotating basis in each part of Kashmir until some day, maybe, a single capital could be agreed on, which might be generations down the road.
> 
> But it would be a start.
> 
> Several well intentioned writers on this topic keep digressing and missing the points. If you care about the people of all parts of Kashmir, and you are filled with national pride, all these factors are allowed for under the Andorran Model.
> 
> Maybe it is incomprehensiable to some that a resolution which ends secret terrorist training camps and such on all sides is sitting there to be used, a clean cut vehicle.
> 
> A single Constitution of all parts of Kashmir is a longer term goal, a non-religious Constitution guaranting rights and protections to all believers of all faiths as well as to those who may choose to believe nothing.


*Does anyone read what has already been posted here?*
Well Sir, that exactly is the point. We have flogged the horse so many times, more often then not - The saner voices are either unheard or dampened. Generally people on forum such as these are looking to pick up an e-fight and score some points over the oppoent, unfortunately most of the polititions are not much different.

However loud their voices may be in support of Kashmiris, it is only nationalistic pride which is driving their minds. The fact is - No one wants the dispute to be resolved. India for the risk of igniting similar insurgencies in other parts / Losing territory and Pakistan for the fear of the armed fores becoming irrelevant.

I believe the point and solution raised by you can be tweaked to solve the Kashmir issue, but kindly notice the response from forum super-mod - clinching onto straws and raising objection to the term terrorist. My fellow countrymen also are not any better. 

I think the model suggested by you is very relevant to the resolution of Kashmir issue and should be taken up for serious discussions. I request a reply from senior Pakistani posters to register their response to this solution rather than nitpicking on the technicalities.


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> i would request the mods that if the indians cant prove the basis of their claim over our NAs, GB etc, they should not be allowed to unfold their self created and self sponsored wet dreams on this board.



Find the links on Indian claims over NA and GB

http://gbpost.wordpress.com/2009/06/25/world-bank-wb-refuses-to-finance-basha-dam-2/

http://beta.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article20325.ece

Kashmir conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://afpakwar.com/blog/archives/2664

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgit-Baltistan

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal...ashmir-dispute-gilgit-activist_100310830.html

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/international/article47049.ece


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> Find the link on Indian claims over NA and GB
> 
> Kashmir conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Wiki, yeah right!


----------



## Xeric

prodevelopment said:


> There was no international hue and cry about the gifting because the international community does not give a **** about kashmir in general.
> 
> And as far as I can see, we have come up with multiple proofs for our claim of NA being a part of the dispute. We have shown you maps from international agencies, twice. You haven't come up with any proofs except your rant.



We need not to prove anything. What we want to tell you is on the ground - NA being our part and some area which belonged to is with China.

And the mapS or map? That one which was posted twice - the only glorified map that all the indians are taught in their high schools and which was rubbished by me with the sole reason of incredible source! Voila!


----------



## Xeric

prodevelopment said:


> Actually, you are missing the point here. The person whom I quoted was dreaming about ground realities. I showed those to him.
> 
> Regarding the 'Good for Kashmiri people' rant, why don't you go ahead with the plebicite in P O K? I mean, India is the big bad wolf here. Pakistan is the saviour. Won't the polls put a tremendous amount of international pressure on India?
> 
> 
> 
> Now we don't have any free and fair polls now do we. How do we go by judging the will of the people now? You certainly aren't the most fair judge. Neither am I. It's the best indication that we have at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> Rant. Ignored.
> 
> If you want to debate. Come up with logic and facts. Keep your emotions for your girlfriend.




Readers know who is losing his cool 

Hitting below the belt is all what a weak and afraid human can do.


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> Find the links on Indian claims over NA and GB
> 
> World Bank (WB) refuses to finance Basha dam The Gilgit-Baltistan Post
> 
> The Hindu : Opinion / Op-Ed : Gilgit-Baltistan autonomy package wins few friends
> 
> Kashmir conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> India Lays Claim to Gilgit & Baltistan | America at War
> 
> Gilgit-Baltistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Pakistan is foreign aggressor in Kashmir dispute: Gilgit activist
> 
> The Hindu : News / International : Elections in Gilgit-Baltistan today



 



i bet you dont know what i am rofling at..!!


----------



## prodevelopment

xeric said:


> We need not to prove anything. *What we want to tell you is on the ground* - NA being our part and some area which belonged to is with China.



Ditto. On the ground buddy, on the ground.

65% of J&K is a part of India on the ground. What was initially with Pakistan was 'gifted away' to China. 

On the ground Siachen is with India.

All that matters is on the ground.





xeric said:


> And the mapS or map? That one which was posted twice - the only glorified map that all the indians are taught in their high schools and which was rubbished by me with the sole reason of incredible source! Voila!



Errrr.... why don't you show me YOUR map? And from a non-Pakistani source please if possible. I am yet to see YOUR proof.


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> i bet you dont know what i am rofling at..!!



Certainly, I don't know. It is hard to understand you


----------



## Xeric

*Errrr.... why don't you show me YOUR map? And from a non-Pakistani source please if possible. I am yet to see YOUR proof. *

Do the _kasht_ and google map of Pakistan - face palm!


----------



## prodevelopment

xeric said:


> *Errrr.... why don't you show me YOUR map? And from a non-Pakistani source please if possible. I am yet to see YOUR proof. *
> 
> Do the _kasht_ and google map of Pakistan - face palm!



Chalo that's one problem out of the way. You are familiar with google. 

Now, please type 'map of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947' and press search.


----------



## Jade

Link to the map. This map is used by the western world 


File:Map Kashmir Standoff 2003.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> Link to the map. This map is used by the western world
> 
> 
> File:Map Kashmir Standoff 2003.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


This is what it gives me, it nowhere says that NA *IS* PART of india, just absurd claims. And in an height of stupidity you yourself just again proved that NA is a separate entity, so is Azad Kashmir (both being administrated by Pakistan) and J&K is ONLY the shaded region in white color (with reference to the legend on the map on right top corner) - another face palm!






It also shows Askai Chin and Shaksam Valley and independent entity. Gosh, indian just lost what it had because of a genius!


----------



## Xeric

And phulease, can someone tell this kid that here on PDF we dont have much respect for sources like Wiki and likes...


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> And phulease, can someone tell this kid that here on PDF we dont have much respect for sources like Wiki and likes...



That's fine; live in your own dream world. But the reality is different. As per GOI, all of Kashmir including Northern Areas is integral part of India. Neither does India ready give up its claim.

When India is asking for a solution to Kashmir issue, means asking Pakistan to vacate *** and Northern Areas.


----------



## prodevelopment

xeric said:


> This is what it gives me, it nowhere says that NA *IS* PART of india, just absurd claims. And in an height of stupidity you yourself just again proved that NA is a separate entity, so is Azad Kashmir (both being administrated by Pakistan) and J&K is ONLY the shaded region in white color (with reference to the legend on the map on right top corner) - another face palm!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It also shows Askai Chin and Shaksam Valley and independent entity. Gosh, indian just lost what it had because of a genius!





Are you stupid or just acting that way? Did you look at the link? Did you bother to look at the top right of the image you've just posted? 
Seriously dude, you said you're in the PA? PA is losing it's respect in my eyes here.

Edit: Don't they teach how to read maps in the PA?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## hal-fgfa

xeric said:


> And phulease, can someone tell this kid that here on PDF we dont have much respect for sources like Wiki and likes...



but m find that pakistany members are great fan of source like *rupeenews* so whats the problem with wiki ????


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

keep claiming whatever you want, as the Pakistani flag waves with honour in occupied Sri Nagar and other districts

while the people reject ''indian-ism'' and demand freedom


yes keep lying to yourselves and distorting the truth. Despite our smaller size, we embrace our rifles and will die with our rifles --in order to defend our territory and stand up for our rights and the rights of Kashmir and Kashmiris.

yes keep lying to yourselves and using diversionary tactics to suppress the very issue that will continue to haunt you to your graves

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hal-fgfa

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> keep claiming whatever you want, as the* Pakistani flag waves with honour in occupied Sri Nagar* and other districts


----------



## prodevelopment

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> keep claiming whatever you want, as the Pakistani flag waves with honour in occupied Sri Nagar and other districts
> 
> while the people reject ''indian-ism'' and demand freedom
> 
> 
> yes keep lying to yourselves and distorting the truth. Despite our smaller size, we embrace our rifles and will die with our rifles --in order to defend our territory and stand up for our rights and the rights of Kashmir and Kashmiris.
> 
> yes keep lying to yourselves and using diversionary tactics to suppress the very issue that will continue to haunt you to your graves





We debate with facts. You debate with emotions. If you think we are lying, correct us with facts. These emotional rants do not suit 'Think Tanks'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> keep claiming whatever you want, as the Pakistani flag waves with honour in occupied Sri Nagar and other districts



Wet dream



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> while the people reject ''indian-ism'' and demand freedom



Indian-ism and freedom are synonymous



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes keep lying to yourselves and distorting the truth. Despite our smaller size, we embrace our rifles and will die with our rifles --in order to defend our territory and stand up for our rights and the rights of Kashmir and Kashmiris.



They same here: we embrace our rifles and will die with our rifles --in order to defend our territory and stand up for our rights and the rights of Kashmir and Kashmiris.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes keep lying to yourselves and using diversionary tactics to suppress the very issue that will continue to haunt you to your graves



There is nothing diversionary. Everything is straight forward: Kashmiris are Indians


----------



## Xeric

prodevelopment said:


> Are you stupid or just acting that way? Did you look at the link? Did you bother to look at the top right of the image you've just posted?
> Seriously dude, you said you're in the PA? PA is losing it's respect in my eyes here.
> 
> Edit: Don't they teach how to read maps in the PA?



Hey idiot listen to me, dont try to be a smart a$$. Like i said before you dont know a tosh. The map is what i have narrated earlier. The map shows the stand off position in 2003 and you STUPIDLY tried to use it to prove your claim that INDEPENDENT sources consider NA as *PART* of india, which indeed is not mentioned in that map nor does in anyway it proves so (by the legend or whatever).

Had you or the map maker wanted to prove your point (NA and stuff belongs to india) the following way of map making must have been adopted:



But like as said you fcuked up big time, you dont have face any more!

Enjoy.


----------



## Chinna Gounder

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> keep claiming whatever you want, as the Pakistani flag waves with honour in occupied Sri Nagar and other districts
> 
> while the people reject ''indian-ism'' and demand freedom



Dude we have three things that are necessary to win a war - Manpower,willpower and moneypower,,all in abundance.

So Kashmir stays in India...not going anywhere.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes keep lying to yourselves and distorting the truth. Despite our smaller size, *we embrace our rifles and will die with our rifles* --in order to defend our territory and stand up for our rights and the rights of Kashmir and Kashmiris.
> 
> yes keep lying to yourselves and using diversionary tactics to suppress the very issue that will continue to haunt you to your graves



Havent u heard of this famous quote by Gen.Patton..."The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bas**** die for his."..?

So I guess India is going along the right path.


----------



## Huda

hahahahaha
manpower and willpower hahahaha
kia apne jante ye cheeze kis country k pass zada hain

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

jade1982 said:


> Wet dream



BBC News | SOUTH ASIA | Pakistani flag protest in Kashmir



> Indian-ism and freedom are synonymous



Tell that to a Kashmiri. He'll sock you in the face. They want freedom, not indian-ism.




> They same here: we embrace our rifles and will die with our rifles --in order to defend our territory and stand up for our rights and the rights of Kashmir and Kashmiris.



you have raped them, you have humiliated them, you have killed them and suppressed their wishes




> There is nothing diversionary. Everything is straight forward: Kashmiris are Indians



Kashmiris to mark Black Day against Indian occupation

Pakistan News Service - PakTribune


----------



## Xeric

xeric said:


> Hey idiot listen to me, dont try to be a smart a$$. Like i said before you dont know a tosh. The map is what i have narrated earlier. The map shows the stand off position in 2003 and you STUPIDLY tried to use it to prove your claim that INDEPENDENT sources consider NA as *PART* of india, which indeed is not mentioned in that map nor does in anyway it proves so (by the legend or whatever).
> 
> Had you or the map maker wanted to prove your point (NA and stuff belongs to india) the following way of map making must have been adopted:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But like as said you fcuked up big time, you dont have face any more!
> 
> Enjoy.



See this is how logical people think alike (yes its me boasting), here there's a map which tried to prove your fantasy of NA being part of india (now who is stupid, let the readers decide):
The mountain war in Kashmir - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition






Though i mistakenly, in a hurry included askai chin in kashmir in my version of map.


----------



## karan.1970

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Please raise the issue internationally to get support for it - you can't.
> 
> You know why? Because the international community has already addressed the issue under the UNSC resolutions, so if India takes the issue to the international community, of claiming all of J&K, the UNSC resolutions will come back into play.
> 
> No country, especially the Western world so enamored with human rights and democracy, is going to argue against the principle of self-determination endorsed by existing UNSC resolutions and required under the rules of partition. That is why, barring military conquest (which is unlikely for either side), India cannot really make any concerted move to claim all of J&K.
> 
> *In any case, Nehru very explicitly stated that India wanted to maintain the LoC = IB when he withdrew from the UNSC resolutions unilaterally, and MMS has of late said the same thing, 'a solution to Kashmir with no re-drawing of borders'.*
> 
> India's claim to all of J&K is just on paper now, no one takes it seriously given the statements and actions of India since the fifties on the issue.



Maintaining IB = LOC is an offer that India made to settle the dispute. Not a release of claim. If that offer is accepted, then yes, thats what India will go with. If not, then the GOI position is as stated, that considers whole of Kashmir (1947) as a part of India and P-O-K and NA as land annexed by Pakistan.


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> See this is how logical people think alike (yes its me boasting), here there's a map which tried to prove your fantasy of NA being part of india (now who is stupid, let the readers decide):
> The mountain war in Kashmir - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Though i mistakenly, in a hurry included askai chin in kashmir in my version of map.



I have a serious question, do you really know how to read maps?


----------



## ejaz007

*Think tank outlines plan for peace in Kashmir *
Friday, June 04, 2010


HELD SRINAGAR: A top international think tank on Thursday released a report detailing the challenges it believes face any attempt by India and Pakistan to bring about peace in Kashmir.

The International Crisis Groups (ICG) report, Steps Towards Peace: Putting Kashmir First, comes amid heightened tensions in the region after the November 2008 Mumbai attacks by Kashmiri militants that killed 166 people.

Kashmir, which is divided between India and Pakistan but claimed in full by both, remains heavily militarised and laws that encourage human rights abuses by security forces remain, fuelling public resentment, says the report. India suspended talks with Pakistan after the Mumbai attacks, and the two sides have only recently revived the peace process.

Nevertheless, tensions between the two neighbours have eclipsed Kashmiri hopes for political liberalisation and economic opportunity, Samina Ahmed, the ICGs South Asia project director, says on the groups website. This atmosphere of hostility is undermining the progress that had been made in softening the borders that divide the Kashmiri people, Ahmed said.

Indias Armed Forces Special Powers Act, which gives its soldiers wide powers to shoot, arrest and search, is detested by Kashmiris and tensions have been heightened by the Indian armys alleged killing of three Muslims in April. India should repeal all such draconian laws, the Brussels-based ICG said, urging New Delhi to replace military-led counter-insurgency with accountable policing.

The group also advised New Delhi to revive Kashmirs economy, which has been devastated by violence and conflict. It is in New Delhis interest to be regarded as a sincere partner committed to improving Kashmiri lives, not as an occupying force, the ICG said. 

Think tank outlines plan for peace in Kashmir


----------



## Chinna Gounder

xeric said:


> See this is how logical people think alike (yes its me boasting), here there's a map which tried to prove your fantasy of NA being part of india (now who is stupid, let the readers decide):
> The mountain war in Kashmir - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Though i mistakenly, in a hurry included askai chin in kashmir in my version of map.



Dude even in ur version of map....NA and P-O-K are shown in same colour....?wat dooes that mean...

both are indisputable parts of Pakistan..?As some one said u serioulsy need to know how to read maps.


----------



## Nihat

This is all very silly and a 20 page cycle keeps repeating itself here. Nobody is willing to wake up to the ground realities of the 21st century and find a pragmatic solution.

Both India and Pak have thier heads burried deep in the sand. Some people in India think that a unified J&K will still be a part of India forever and people in Pak are still holding on to the possibility of a plebeside and mujahideen sparking an armed revolution.

The one and only solution is to mantain a largely demiliterized border with free movement, revoking the AFSPA , withdrawing the army and denying the terrorists any reason to fight.

Leaders of the countries can accept this as a solution now or maybe 25 years later. It won't bother India either way as it can comfortably bear a cold war with a booming economy and grwing diplomatic clout.

It won't bother the ordinary people of Pak either and they will continue on thier regular life and loose intrest in ceaseless confrontation and want more development.

the militant groups might become autonomous but thier ability to fight a war with a regular (trained in COIN) will be extremly limited.

The Only *REALISTIC* solution is LoC as de facto border and free movement with peaceful lives for the kashmiris.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harish

All this quibbling over maps and resolutions and technicalities cannot change what is on the ground. Kashmir is a region that has historically been fragmented with three countries holding parts of it. All three countries have strong armies. All three countries are nuclear armed. All three countries neighbour each other. All three countries have major cities and a large chunk of humanity within range of each other's nuclear missiles. That is the situation on the ground. Its called a stalemate. The Kashmiri people who still harbor dreams of a unified entity, either independent or unilaterally aligned, will just simply have to understand that. They have no other viable option. To put it bluntly, in the larger scheme of things, they simply are not important enough to risk the annhilation of nearly half of mankind. There is no scope of moving forward beyond the last moves made. A long time ago. There is no scope for moving laterally either, unless there is equal barter. Territory for territory. Like any corporate turf war with negotiation, concession, and trade, with clear understandings on territorial rights, exclusivity, and common competitive ground. These three countries are for all intents and purposes on top of the military food chain as far as the neighbourhood is considered. Territorially, they have no natural predators except for themselves. Now that we recognise the ground reality, let us talk about solutions. The obvious solution of course would be for all three nations to accept the status quo as legally binding moving forward for all time. Written in stone, erasable only by atomised blood. And a lot of it. 

There should of course be due counselling for the Kashmiri people, with a window period and the shared might and resources and logistics of the three nations coming together as one to help and protect and rehabilitate those who wish to relocate. No questions asked. A peaceful partition. Make your decision. Say your goodbyes. And do not look back after that. You may come back as guests, but legally, and through the due process of Visas and official channels, which can be worked out between the three countries in terms of modalities, security requirements, intel sharing, and cooperation at the level of the state and the people. Ditto with trade and the movement of business and goods. Water is another issue that can be debated and settled on between the countries. Between Pakistan and India mainly. With give and take mutually beneficial for both countries. Limited not only to water, but also to oil, gas, power, trade routes and transits, as well as humanitarian cooperation in rebuilding Afghanistan. Its not so difficult to comprehend or wrap your mind around. A very similar analogy exists right on our doorsteps with the Baloch people, who have ties of common 'peoplehood' but mutually exclusive national identities of three different countries who are not exactly the best of friends. Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran. If that can work, why not the same for Kashmiris, who are not even as homogeneous as a single people entity, with Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists all sharing a common geographical location which they have called home in peace for centuries. 

That is the Utopian solution. But while I am a die-hard optimist, I am also a pragmatist who recognises that this is probably not going to happen in my lifetime. So the other option for India today is to take the lead, and act unilaterally. Sometimes, one cannot wait forever for a solution, and one needs to be proactive and take a step after careful thought and weighing up of the pros and cons, and then standing by that decision as a single nation and people, regardless of which party or coalition or ideology is the incumbent ruler of the nation. We do not wait for Pakistan to dismatle its proxies and come to the table. We smile and hug and do business with China as usual, but do not have any illusions about their sights on bit by bit territorial erosion into our Ladakh regions either. We turn the world on its head and use the nuclear card to our advantage, by looking at it as an opportunity rather than a sword of Damocles hanging over our heads for perpetuity. We come forward on the world stage and make clear our stand moving forward as a country, on the Kashmir issue, and how we as India plan to treat it. No strings from the past attached. No scope of future strings either, from friends and allies or traditional foes alike. And here is where I see the point of a soldier like Xeric. Why put the burden of half a million forces to hold an area that is ours? Internal law and order can and should be handled by the police, with as many armed forces on the borders, as at any other international boundary of our country. No more, no less. 

We fence off once and for all the entire LOC. Any resistance to that should be treated as an overt act of war by a neighbouring country and interference in our internal issues as a sovereign nation. We build bunkers and air bases. We build infrastructure and our road and rail network to facilitate movement of manpower, goods, and machinery. And we declare unilaterally a imporatant rider to our stated 'No first Use' nuclear policy, stating very clearly to all responsible countries worldwide that any act of incursion by the armed forces of either China or Pakistan into the sovereign Indian soil of Jammu and Kashmir will invite a nuclear first strike by India. No negotiations. No hotlines. No chance of a grab and hold till ceasefire for eternity. No scope for any ambiguity as to the strength of our response. Period. Otherwise there is simply no sense in having these weapons if they are going to remain in their silos, their trigger in the hands of a nation which never plans to use it, even when it comes to our own soil and the lives of our own people. What is the sense of building conventional warfare capability superiority, when we are in a nuclear stalemate and have passed the threhold of credible deterrence a long time ago? Let us send the message across to the world. We do not want what belongs to others. But we will not tolerate others trying to take what is ours. These are the only two possible solutions I see to the Kashmir issue. Black and white. Try as other well meaning people might, there are never going to be shades of mutually peaceful grey here.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> I have a serious question, do you really know how to read maps?





Chinna Gounder said:


> Dude even in ur version of map....NA and P-O-K are shown in same colour....?wat dooes that mean...
> 
> both are indisputable parts of Pakistan..?As some one said u serioulsy need to know how to read maps.



Hey thick heads the issue is of not the color coding, but some lamers (like yourselves) trying to prove that NA and Azad Kashmir are inclusive in the phrase Jammu And Kashmir!

But the fact remains that no independent source, western mapping agencies and international map makers agree with you. They all have been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown *OUT* of J & K. So if someone want to prove the opposite he needs to quote a map that i posted in my* post # 1082*, but then it should be from a credible and independent source and not some BR shyt!

And *@ Gounde*r:
Kid you really need to get your map-reading straight. That map shows that though NA and AK are/were part of J & K (the red colored border) but now they are in Pakistani hands (the green color).

WTF! i never new i would be studying map reading from kids who cant even prove their claim i.e. NA is part of J & K by any mean!!

So both of you, the sooner you grow up the better it would be, one of you has already met his fate.


----------



## Xeric

Nihat said:


> This is all very silly and a 20 page cycle keeps repeating itself here. Nobody is willing to wake up to the ground realities of the 21st century and find a pragmatic solution.
> 
> Both India and Pak have thier heads burried deep in the sand. Some people in India think that a unified J&K will still be a part of India forever and people in Pak are still holding on to the possibility of a plebeside and mujahideen sparking an armed revolution.
> 
> The one and only solution is to mantain a largely demiliterized border with free movement, revoking the AFSPA , withdrawing the army and denying the terrorists any reason to fight.
> 
> Leaders of the countries can accept this as a solution now or maybe 25 years later. It won't bother India either way as it can comfortably bear a cold war with a booming economy and grwing diplomatic clout.
> 
> It won't bother the ordinary people of Pak either and they will continue on thier regular life and loose intrest in ceaseless confrontation and want more development.
> 
> the militant groups might become autonomous but thier ability to fight a war with a regular (trained in COIN) will be extremly limited.
> 
> The Only *REALISTIC* solution is LoC as de facto border and free movement with peaceful lives for the kashmiris.



i am glad that some of you can talk sense at times.

i agree with your post less the last line. Converting the LoC into IB is totally unacceptable to Pakistan as handing over complete Kashmir to Pakistan is unacceptable to india.

Having said that i would only accede to your proposals (mentioned in your 3rd para) if these are just taken as a step further towards the final solution of the issue. The proposal can be a temporary answer to Kashmir problem but then it cant be taken as a permanent solution as it wont lead to absolute peace. The reason being my point is that after converting the LoC into IB, there would still be some factions and areas left on the East of the LoC-converted-into-IB who would not be happy to join india and thus could become a reason behind another issue entailing militancy and freedom movements - so we would be back at square one again, which ofcourse no one wants.


----------



## EjazR

I am surprised at some Pakistani members claiming that NA is not part of the historical Jammu and Kashmir state. Just because Pakistan compromised territorial integrity of the state by bifurcating the shia majority part and giving away of Shaksam valley doesn't change the historical fact that the Jammu Kashmir state includes the Northern Areas as well as Pakistani Kashmir incluging the Shaksam valley.
It also includes Aksai Chin and the present day Indian state of Jammu& Kashmir.

This is clear from all documents like the Instrument of Accession, the UN resolutions, and most recently the EU report under Baroness Nicolson that highlighted the plight of people living in NA. It was for this reason that finally after 60+ years the people of Gilgit-Baltistan got a right to elect their leaders.

Ask any true Kashmiri whether NA is part of the historical Jammu Kashmir state or not and see what answer you get.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> All this quibbling over maps and resolutions and technicalities cannot change what is on the ground. Kashmir is a region that has historically been fragmented with three countries holding parts of it. All three countries have strong armies. All three countries are nuclear armed. All three countries neighbour each other. All three countries have major cities and a large chunk of humanity within range of each other's nuclear missiles. That is the situation on the ground. Its called a stalemate. The Kashmiri people who still harbor dreams of a unified entity, either independent or unilaterally aligned, will just simply have to understand that. They have no other viable option. To put it bluntly, in the larger scheme of things, they simply are not important enough to risk the annhilation of nearly half of mankind. There is no scope of moving forward beyond the last moves made. A long time ago. There is no scope for moving laterally either, unless there is equal barter. Territory for territory. Like any corporate turf war with negotiation, concession, and trade, with clear understandings on territorial rights, exclusivity, and common competitive ground. These three countries are for all intents and purposes on top of the military food chain as far as the neighbourhood is considered. Territorially, they have no natural predators except for themselves. Now that we recognise the ground reality, let us talk about solutions. The obvious solution of course would be for all three nations to accept the status quo as legally binding moving forward for all time. Written in stone, erasable only by atomised blood. And a lot of it.



Very well put forth, but then we have to see what are the major reasons behind this mortal combat? Is it the alleged Pakistani involvement (i say alleged because, post-Musharraf era india still need to prove this) or is the basic error that was made by india by occupying the state against the will of the people?



> There should of course be due counselling for the Kashmiri people, with a window period and the shared might and resources and logistics of the three nations coming together as one to help and protect and rehabilitate those who wish to relocate. No questions asked. A peaceful partition. Make your decision. Say your goodbyes. And do not look back after that. You may come back as guests, but legally, and through the due process of Visas and official channels, which can be worked out between the three countries in terms of modalities, security requirements, intel sharing, and cooperation at the level of the state and the people. Ditto with trade and the movement of business and goods. Water is another issue that can be debated and settled on between the countries. Between Pakistan and India mainly. With give and take mutually beneficial for both countries. Limited not only to water, but also to oil, gas, power, trade routes and transits, as well as humanitarian cooperation in rebuilding Afghanistan. Its not so difficult to comprehend or wrap your mind around. A very similar analogy exists right on our doorsteps with the Baloch people, who have ties of common 'peoplehood' but mutually exclusive national identities of three different countries who are not exactly the best of friends. Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran. If that can work, why not the same for Kashmiris, who are not even as homogeneous as a single people entity, with Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists all sharing a common geographical location which they have called home in peace for centuries.



Again agreed, but then who would decide this 'peaceful partition?' The LoC, the people of Kashmir or a War? What do you think is the most logical, peaceful (as you demanded) and righteous method?



> That is the Utopian solution. But while I am a die-hard optimist, I am also a pragmatist who recognises that this is probably not going to happen in my lifetime. So the other option for India today is to take the lead, and act unilaterally. Sometimes, one cannot wait forever for a solution, and one needs to be proactive and take a step after careful thought and weighing up of the pros and cons, and then standing by that decision as a single nation and people, regardless of which party or coalition or ideology is the incumbent ruler of the nation. We do not wait for Pakistan to dismatle its proxies and come to the table. We smile and hug and do business with China as usual, but do not have any illusions about their sights on bit by bit territorial erosion into our Ladakh regions either. We turn the world on its head and use the nuclear card to our advantage, by looking at it as an opportunity rather than a sword of Damocles hanging over our heads for perpetuity. We come forward on the world stage and make clear our stand moving forward as a country, on the Kashmir issue, and how we as India plan to treat it. No strings from the past attached. No scope of future strings either, from friends and allies or traditional foes alike. And here is where I see the point of a soldier like Xeric. Why put the burden of half a million forces to hold an area that is ours? Internal law and order can and should be handled by the police, with as many armed forces on the borders, as at any other international boundary of our country. No more, no less.



i agree with the taking the lead thing, but then we need to see what has been done with those who took leads in the past? Were their efforts acknowledged or were they rubbished off? Did india accede to the proposals (i only used india and excluded Pakistan because we havent seen inida taking leads over Kashmir issue, instead it has only aggravated the matter by acts like fencing the LoC and passing no-value-outside-india resolutions in its parliament, but on the other hand we have seen some OUT OF THE BOX OPTIONS from the Pakistani sides during Musharraf's era).



> We fence off once and for all the entire LOC. Any resistance to that should be treated as an overt act of war by a neighbouring country and interference in our internal issues as a sovereign nation. We build bunkers and air bases. We build infrastructure and our road and rail network to facilitate movement of manpower, goods, and machinery. And we declare unilaterally a imporatant rider to our stated 'No first Use' nuclear policy, stating very clearly to all responsible countries worldwide that any act of incursion by the armed forces of either China or Pakistan into the sovereign Indian soil of Jammu and Kashmir will invite a nuclear first strike by India. No negotiations. No hotlines. No chance of a grab and hold till ceasefire for eternity. No scope for any ambiguity as to the strength of our response. Period. Otherwise there is simply no sense in having these weapons if they are going to remain in their silos, their trigger in the hands of a nation which never plans to use it, even when it comes to our own soil and the lives of our own people. What is the sense of building conventional warfare capability superiority, when we are in a nuclear stalemate and have passed the threhold of credible deterrence a long time ago? Let us send the message across to the world. We do not want what belongs to others. But we will not tolerate others trying to take what is ours. These are the only two possible solutions I see to the Kashmir issue. Black and white. Try as other well meaning people might, there are never going to be shades of mutually peaceful grey here.



Now, here is where i see a problem. You fenced the damn thing as if it was yours - a gifted place from the God's side as is the case with the jews.

You dont allow any window of opportunity to discuss india other than the absolute conditions like Kashmir is india's _*atoot ang*_ and any aggression across the LoC would meet stiff resistance. Well, as i have pointed out at a number of times, you first need to prove that cross LoC infiltration is being carried (without posting links from the 90s) and then you may go trigger happy with your claims, but until then you need to understand that Kashmir is a DISPUTED territory with both the countries laying claims over it, for now it belongs to the Kashmiri people and nobody elses. Period. A stubborn satance over the issue (as india's) wouldnt yield anything.

Only if you people start thinking on these lines, can the Kashmir issue move forward, or else the 'stalemate' as you have pointed out (which for us is not a stalemate as it is india who is spending millions in Kashmir by maintaining a strong military presence there) can continue and we would only see more peoples being raped and killed and in turn more soldiers would die.

Lastly, it seems strange to me that how can india propose solutions if it doesnt consider Kashmir a disputed territory, instead it consider it a part of itself :wondering: 

So probably the discussion of options over Kashmir cant move forward till india is sticking to its stubborn stance over Kashmir, sorry.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> Having said that i would only accede to your proposals (mentioned in your 3rd para) if these are just taken as a step further towards the final solution of the issue. The proposal can be a temporary answer to Kashmir problem but then it cant be taken as a permanent solution as it wont lead to absolute peace. *The reason being my point is that after converting the LoC into IB, there would still be some factions and areas left on the East of the LoC-converted-into-IB who would not be happy to join india *and thus could become a reason behind another issue entailing militancy and freedom movements - so we would be back at square one again, which ofcourse no one wants.



And what would this "faction" want to join to in your opinion. If you say independance, I can understand that, but is GoP ready to allow Pakistani Kashmir and NA to become independant?

If you say Pakistan then I'm afraid you are not aware of the ground realities. As the many opinion polls and the recent survey showed. Overall, in Indian side 2% wanted to join to Pakistan while 21% overall opted for India.


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> And what would this "faction" want to join to in your opinion. If you say independance, I can understand that, but is GoP ready to allow Pakistani Kashmir and NA to become independant?


Actually Pakistan is not as _dheet_ as india.


> If you say Pakistan then I'm afraid you are not aware of the ground realities. As the many opinion polls and the recent survey showed. Overall, in Indian side 2% wanted to join to Pakistan while 21% overall opted for India.



Oh that polls, right.

The ones that have already been rubbished by me and many alike. Take some time out and dig those buried deep inside this thread and see hat we said about such polls.

BTW, if you people are so fond of polls and feel elated by posting them here, why dont you allow a direct plebiscite? Doodh ka doodh and stuff, right?


----------



## Xeric

And yes, if i remember correctly it was you and that toxic pus who so lavishly posted the polls. i think you have forgotten the replies given back then and just want to run in circles over and over again.


----------



## EjazR

^^Have you read the recent survey conducted by the Chatham house and their conclusion particularly with regard to the plebescite.

If you haven't then its no use discussing further. Please go through the report carefully. Note that it doesn't include the NA areas which could have been more negative towards Pakistan keeping in mind the local sentiment.
Chatham House - Publications - Reports and Papers - Kashmir: Paths to Peace

While you are at it, you can check out another poll done by an Irish professor at 
www.peacepolls.org

and check out the EU resolution of the Kashmir issue. You can google the report but the relevant part is this article here
EU Report Says Plebiscite Not In Kashmiris' Interest

One of the main reason being the plebiscite does not have independence as an option (which was removed on GoP insistence btw).


----------



## harish

xeric said:


> Having said that i would only accede to your proposals (mentioned in your 3rd para) if these are just taken as a step further towards the final solution of the issue. The proposal can be a temporary answer to Kashmir problem but then it cant be taken as a permanent solution as it wont lead to absolute peace. The reason being my point is that after converting the LoC into IB, there would still be some factions and areas left on the East of the LoC-converted-into-IB who would not be happy to join india and thus could become a reason behind another issue entailing militancy and freedom movements - so we would be back at square one again, which ofcourse no one wants.



Dear Xeric, how is that so different from what is on the ground today? What are the ramifications of a change of terminology (LOC to IB) of the de facto point of no return in terms of a full blown armed and even nuclear conflict between the two countries? Unless you (your fundamentalists, your weak off-on civilian governments, and most importantly your army and ISI) need a moral high ground and international credibility/sanction in keeping on stoking the flames of unrest in Kashmir and keep the attention of the people of Pakistan diverted from what really ails your country? You and I both know that such factions are present in J&K even today. I have already covered this part in my previous post which I hope you would read. First, both India and Pakistan I feel are agreed that independent Kashmir is not a viable solution. That is half the battle won brother! 

Once we are agreed on such a fundamental truth, we then need to accept the equally patent truth of the reality on the ground today, much as it may be unpalatable to both our countries. And that is that we have what we have, and the chance of getting a square kilometer more is next to impossible, without a full blown armed conflict, that would in all probability go nuclear by the side that finds itself going down. The chances for that have come and gone long ago. They were not seized for one reason or the other, and thats that. Let us move on, and look forward instead of back. There is no sense in going into the by whom of it cause it is not pertinent here. So once we are agreed on the above two where does that leave us? Removing ego and wet dreams out of the picture that would leave us with the only possible solution of converting LOC to IB once and for all and moving forward in our relations peacefully. 

Speaking about the disgruntled and less than satisfied factions on our side of the fence, again I have covered it in my previous post. They would first be counseled by neutral arbitrators/elders from the community. Failing which they would need to make a choice between staying in India or moving to Pakistan. Don't you see the beauty of this solution my friend? First India and Pakistan take one step back and many steps forward by deciding what is India and what is Pakistan. Then we both unitedly give the entire population of Jammu and Kashmir the right to vote on which country they would rather live in. The plebiscite we have been fighting over for decades now! In a way acceptable to all, for want of a better more workable alternative. Everything else would follow, and most importantly, in Peace. It would then simply be a matter of negotiation, and give and take, and working out the details. 

The donor country (of translocated populations at the time of this plebiscite and Partition II) would agree on a mutually agreeable fair price in terms of financial compensation to pay the translocated people for the land and immovable assets they would be leaving behind, to help them start a new life afresh in the recipient country of their choice. I use the word host country interchangeably with your India, cause I believe it could be equally possible that there would be certain factions within the part of Kashmir you hold (AK and GB/NA) who would prefer to come join India, and this arrangement would benefit them as well. The currency exchange valuation would be pre-decided mutually between India and Pakistan to ensure equality, in light of the big gulf which has off late developed between the Indian rupee vis a vis its Pakistani counterpart. This part could be arbitrated on by both our Reserve banks, much like the Euro. Please let me know what you think of this solution brothers.

Remember how the first Partition happened? It started with a polarization of two ideologies. Then a separate nation was carved out as a land mass. And then the migration of people one way or the other depending on which ideology they saw their future with. Partition II would be the same. The land masses are decided first. Then the people move. But the movement is peaceful. Protected by the armed forces and governments on either side. Safe transit. Rightful compensation. And ready and speedy rehabilitation so that one need not live as a refugee, but as a proud new citizen of the country of your choice. Lets learn our harsh lessons of 63 years ago brothers, and show the spirits of our ancestors that we did things better this time around. And righted the wrongs of days gone by. They will smile down on us, and their torn spirits would be free at last.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> Hey thick heads the issue is of not the color coding, but some lamers (like yourselves) trying to prove that NA and Azad Kashmir are inclusive in the phrase Jammu And Kashmir!
> 
> But the fact remains that no independent source, western mapping agencies and international map makers agree with you. They all have been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown *OUT* of J & K. So if someone want to prove the opposite he needs to quote a map that i posted in my* post # 1082*, but then it should be from a credible and independent source and not some BR shyt!
> 
> And *@ Gounde*r:
> Kid you really need to get your map-reading straight. That map shows that though NA and AK are/were part of J & K (the red colored border) but now they are in Pakistani hands (the green color).
> 
> WTF! i never new i would be studying map reading from kids who cant even prove their claim i.e. NA is part of J & K by any mean!!
> 
> So both of you, the sooner you grow up the better it would be, one of you has already met his fate.



The map I posted is from western media. Its pure BS that western media has been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown out of J & K. I repeat J&K comprise of Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh, Aksai Chin, Shaksam, Valley, NA and P-O-K; and India has claims on all the areas mentioned.

Anyway you need to improve your map reading skills. Look at the map you posted and read it otherwise


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> ^^Have you read the recent survey conducted by the Chatham house and their conclusion particularly with regard to the plebescite.
> 
> If you haven't then its no use discussing further. Please go through the report carefully. Note that it doesn't include the NA areas which could have been more negative towards Pakistan keeping in mind the local sentiment.
> Chatham House - Publications - Reports and Papers - Kashmir: Paths to Peace
> 
> While you are at it, you can check out another poll done by an Irish professor at
> www.peacepolls.org
> 
> and check out the EU resolution of the Kashmir issue. You can google the report but the relevant part is this article here
> EU Report Says Plebiscite Not In Kashmiris' Interest
> 
> One of the main reason being the plebiscite does not have independence as an option (which was removed on GoP insistence btw).


These are no different that those you have posted earlier and my concerns still stand as were posted by me in the following post:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/664098-post681.html

By changing the techniques of a poll facts can be distorted but the truth remains unanswered.

Publicizing BS like 'Pakistan Failed To Fulfil Its Obligations' (which indeed doesnt mention any credible proof to support its claim except the regular rhetorics of 'Pakistan needs to limit its cross LoC infiltration') tells us that the reports are just resonating the india tones.

The following excerpt from one of the reports, without providing any credible source says it all:
_Echoing India's position, the Nicholson report observes that Pakistan needs to take *more effective steps to curb cross-Line of Control infiltration of militants*. Moreover, the report supports the Indian position that *demilitarisation in J&K is not favourable unless there is genuine reduction in violence levels*._ 

Why dont for once and all anyone can come with a proof that Pakistan is supply the freedom fighters with weapons, ammo, money, training etc? You people harp about Pakistani statements like 'if Pakistan has a proof for indian involvement in Balochistan why dont it shows us all', but when they same formula is applicable to you, you start posting the self created news of 'foiled' infiltration attempts and even worse, post articles from the 'ancient times' where some support was available from organizations like LeT.

Until there's a hard proof, the india and western allegations over Pakistani involvement are void, which in turn put the credibility of such reports and poll in question - the ones who cant see the truth on ground how can they dig out the truth from people's heart?!


----------



## Xeric

jade1982 said:


> The map I posted is from western media. Its pure BS that western media has been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown out of J & K. I repeat J&K comprise of Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh, Aksai Chin, Shaksam, Valley, NA and P-O-K; and India has claims on all the areas mentioned.
> 
> Anyway you need to improve your map reading skills. Look at the map you posted and read it otherwise



Post reported!

Fed up of your stupidity, ignorance and absurd claims that too without proof.


----------



## harish

Even with an intelligent guy like Xeric, and a soldier to boot, who doubtless has seen his share of death and suffering amongst his own men, as ours must have too, I see this common self-defeating tendency to look behind and debate till our teeth fall out (from old age or violent trauma) about who did what and who should have done what and who said to do what. Nit pick on terminology, and technicalities, and historical chronologies, and definitions, and the like, when the solution is there, its obvious, and its the only one available. Arre bhai, this thread is about solutions, but I guess no one is interested. I wish your sindhis and our gujaratis would have been in charge of negotiations. You would have seen a solution and money rolling in both sides within a year. Businessmen and corporates have a way of cutting through bullshit and egos and precedents when there is profit to be had.


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> Post reported!
> 
> Fed up of your stupidity, ignorance and absurd claims that too without proof.



It doesnt behoove of think tank to use words such as thick heads, Kids, lamers while arguing. Arguments have to civilized


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Even with an intelligent guy like Xeric, and a soldier to boot, who doubtless has seen his share of death and suffering amongst his own men, as ours must have too, I see this common self-defeating tendency to look behind and debate till our teeth fall out (from old age or violent trauma) about who did what and who should have done what and who said to do what. Nit pick on terminology, and technicalities, and historical chronologies, and definitions, and the like, when the solution is there, its obvious, and its the only one available. Aree bhai, this thread is about solutions, but I guess no one is interested.



i appreciate you kind words , but unfortunately, though i was and had been talking solutions previously but then your _atoot ang _syndrome brought that to a grinding halt. Either agree that Kashmir is not india or else i cant talk solutions with someone having a stubborn stance over Kashmir, how can one?


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> These are no different that those you have posted earlier and my concerns still stand as were posted by me in the following post:
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/664098-post681.html
> 
> By changing the techniques of a poll facts can be distorted but the truth remains unanswered.
> 
> Publicizing BS like 'Pakistan Failed To Fulfil Its Obligations' (which indeed doesnt mention any credible proof to support its claim except the regular rhetorics of 'Pakistan needs to limit its cross LoC infiltration') tells us that the reports are just resonating the india tones.
> 
> The following excerpt from one of the reports, without providing any credible source says it all:
> _Echoing India's position, the Nicholson report observes that Pakistan needs to take *more effective steps to curb cross-Line of Control infiltration of militants*. Moreover, the report supports the Indian position that *demilitarisation in J&K is not favourable unless there is genuine reduction in violence levels*._
> 
> Why dont for once and all anyone can come with a proof that Pakistan is supply the freedom fighters with weapons, ammo, money, training etc? You people harp about Pakistani statements like 'if Pakistan has a proof for indian involvement in Balochistan why dont it shows us all', but when they same formula is applicable to you, you start posting the self created news of 'foiled' infiltration attempts and even worse, post articles from the 'ancient times' where some support was available from organizations like LeT.
> 
> Until there's a hard proof, the india and western allegations over Pakistani involvement are void, which in turn put the credibility of such reports and poll in question - the ones who cant see the truth on ground how can they dig out the truth from people's heart?!



Regarding your "concerns" I think you are mixing up the Chatham house poll which was completely different from the peacepoll.org one.
And have you GONE THROUGH the pdf file? Becuase if you did , it has break down of Jammu muslims and Ladakh muslims as well. And the results will be surprising. 

The polling questions itself do not highlight WoT or mumbai attacks. They are pretty straightforward questions and give you an overall mindset of the people.

If the Kashmir issue is so important to you. It would be well worth to go though both the surveys- the chatham house and the peacepolls.org one. 


And regarding the issue that Pakistan does not send any infiltrators across the borders--I agree that it went down during Musharraf era, but it has gone up since.
Arif Jamal mentioned that the same Kashmiri based militant groups said that right now has never been so good since 1999 (in terms of clandestine support from the establishment). He is a Pakistani based journalist.


----------



## Chinna Gounder

xeric said:


> Hey thick heads the issue is of not the color coding, but some lamers (like yourselves) trying to prove that NA and Azad Kashmir are inclusive in the phrase Jammu And Kashmir!
> 
> But the fact remains that no independent source, western mapping agencies and international map makers agree with you. They all have been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown *OUT* of J & K. So if someone want to prove the opposite he needs to quote a map that i posted in my* post # 1082*, but then it should be from a credible and independent source and not some BR shyt!
> 
> And *@ Gounde*r:
> Kid you really need to get your map-reading straight. That map shows that though NA and AK are/were part of J & K (the red colored border) but now they are in Pakistani hands (the green color).
> 
> WTF! i never new i would be studying map reading from kids who cant even prove their claim i.e. NA is part of J & K by any mean!!
> 
> So both of you, the sooner you grow up the better it would be, one of you has already met his fate.



Thick heads,lamers,kid.....think tank huh..?

Who said NA and P-O-K are parts of Jammu and Kashmir.(or Indian Administered Kashmir).?
Dont twist the words to suit ur needs.

Wat i said in my previous post is that NA and P=O=K are parts of the former princely state of Kashmir which was given by the accession document by Raja Harisingh to India.
*And as such along with J&K on the Indian side ,P-O-K and NA are also disputed areas administered by Pakistan.*

Now dont try to prove that NA is not a part of the historic princely state of Kashmir....I know better.


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> Regarding your "concerns" I think you are mixing up the Chatham house poll which was completely different from the peacepoll.org one.
> And have you GONE THROUGH the pdf file? Becuase if you did , it has break down of Jammu muslims and Ladakh muslims as well. And the results will be surprising.


Yes i did and i am not mixing up anything.

But then it doesnt change the basic question of 'By changing the techniques of a poll facts can be distorted but the truth remains unanswered.' Why, you'll know when you read further.



> The polling questions itself do not highlight WoT or mumbai attacks. They are pretty straightforward questions and give you an overall mindset of the people.


That's what i said. Omitting or adding a particular factor can alter the entire shap of the poll. There are certain things that cant be relagated, not even temporarily. Issues like Pakistan's fight against terrorism, terrorist attacks inside india, shaking economy, natural disasters etc etc might and would have a direct bearing over the question being asked.

Moreover, the particular group that is targeted for question would also matter. The ages, the gender, the educational level, employed or unemployed, standard of life etc etc all affects the poll. With a precise tweak in these constants results can be made to conform a particular answer.

Why would a hefty-earner who indeed is a Muslim but enjoys a guud life because of the indian imports like to say that he wants to join Pakistan? And on the other hand someone whose innocent son was killed by indian soldiers or the daughter was ravished would say that he would even think of joining inidia?

Similarly the youth would have a different opinion and the old-timers would have their own. How ever these indicators are mixed and made legitimate but still a certain factor would turn out to be the deciding one and that's what would matter (as in this case the GWoT and all the related shyt), and guess what, these pollers are guud at that (like by saying that 'these were pretty straightforward questions and give you an overall mindset of the people').

Having said that, i dont challenge the credibility of the organization conducting the polls as those on ground asking the questions must be doing a very guud job, but then the selection, profiling and segregation of individuals to be questioned and deciding the external factors to be included or excluded is what i am concerned about.

i know you can post here the details of people who were questioned and justify your point regarding the transparency, but then omitting/adding a certain age group, issue, factor, incident etc could turn the tides.



> And regarding the issue that Pakistan does not send any infiltrators across the borders--I agree that it went down during Musharraf era, but it has gone up since.
> Arif Jamal mentioned that the same Kashmiri based militant groups said that right now has never been so good since 1999 (in terms of clandestine support from the establishment). He is a Pakistani based journalist.




That's what i am saying, by shouting thief thief you impress no one, get hold of the thief with the booty right there and then we can talk over this.


----------



## Nihat

xeric said:


> i am glad that some of you can talk sense at times.
> 
> i agree with your post less the last line. Converting the LoC into IB is totally unacceptable to Pakistan as handing over complete Kashmir to Pakistan is unacceptable to india.
> 
> Having said that i would only accede to your proposals (mentioned in your 3rd para) if these are just taken as a step further towards the final solution of the issue. The proposal can be a temporary answer to Kashmir problem but then it cant be taken as a permanent solution as it wont lead to absolute peace. The reason being my point is that after converting the LoC into IB, there would still be some factions and areas left on the East of the LoC-converted-into-IB who would not be happy to join india and thus could become a reason behind another issue entailing militancy and freedom movements - so we would be back at square one again, which ofcourse no one wants.



Well, you have a good point there but declaring a de facto border would be a good start simply because it would isolate the problem. 

I always wished India would make Jammu a deperate state, Laddakh a Union Territory and Kashmir a seperate autonomous region.

Since Jammu and Laddakh have never shown even a semblense of Insurgency, I don't see any reason why it should be part of the dispute.

the problem area is a very small region called "Kashmir". As an autonomous region it is well capable of developing a self-sustaining economy (based on tourism) and the shreds of militancy will completly dissapear eventually when there will be no support or reason for it.


----------



## Xeric

Some fruitful thought....

Northern Areas, Pakistan - Definition

*Northern Areas, Pakistan - Definition*

Gilgit-Baltistan or the Northern Areas is the northernmost region of Pakistan. The entire area including Gilgit and Baltistan was known as the Gilgit Agency till October, 1947. This is a strategically very important region of the world, which is sandwiched between the high peaks of Hindukush and Karakorum on the north and those of western Himalaya on the south. It borders to the north with Afghanistan and China, to the south with India and Azad Kashmir and to the west with North-West Frontier, Pakistan.

*Unlike the area that Pakistan calls "Azad Kashmir," the Northern Areas are incorporated into Pakistan.* A small part of Northern Areas was ceded to China by Pakistan in 1963 with the proviso that the settlement was subject to the final solution of the Kashmir dispute. India does not recognize the Northern Areas as belonging to Pakistan and calls the region encompassing Azad Kashmir and the Northern Areas "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (***)"

*The region was under local rulers for many centuries. The rulers of Hunza were called Mirs, and those of Gilgit were called Raas. Some parts of the region were invaded by Maharajas of Kashmir and they forcefully governed the area for many years, which led to the common belief that it is a part of Kashmir. But the people of Gilgit-Baltistan regard themselves as being distinct from Kashmiris and many want to become the fifth province of Pakistan. And they oppose being included in Kashmir. Their opinion is that invasion of Mahrajas doesn't mean that this is a part of Kashmir, just like British invasion over the India in 19th century does not mean that India is a part of Britain.* _The region's lack of representation in the parliament of Pakistan has placed it outside the mainstream politics of the country, which has become a major cause of frustration to the inhabitants of Gilgit-Baltistan._

The Northern Areas comprise the two districts of Baltistan and the three districts of Gilgit (where the capital is located). Hunza, an independent principality for 950 years which only came under Pakistani rule in 1974, is also located in this region. The Northern Areas collectively comprise a territory of 27,991 mi² (72,496 km²).

Brushaski, an isolated language, is spoken in Hunza, Nagir, Yasin, some parts of Gilgit, and some villages of Punyal. Although Brushaski is most popular and polite language in the Area, it still is not used by a large portion of population. Shina with different accents or in different dialacts is the Language of over 40% of total population, spoken mainly in Gilgit, throughout Diamer, and most of the areas of Ghizr. Balti with a similar accent, is spoken by the entire population of Baltistan except some villages. There are also some other languages spoken in the area -- Wakhi is spoken in upper Hunza and some villages in Ghizr, and Khwar is spoken by some Khwar families in Ghizr. None of these languages are related to each other. Urdu is the Lingua franca of the Area. Urdu is understood by almost all men, and literate women.

According to Habib R. Sulemani the Northern Areas of Pakistan is commonly known as "Gilgit-Baltistan" and this term clearly indicates the districts of Gilgit, Ghizer, Diyamer, Skardu and Ganchay, while the term 'Northern Areas' confuses parts of the NWFP with Gilgit-Baltistan. Gilgit-Baltistan is geographically and politically more suitable than any other term.


----------



## harish

Can we get back to solutions please? Or are we going to go further and further back into history? Like when Chandragupta Maurya ruled everything all the way up to Afghanistan. So lets stop this on this thread at least. I took the pain of typing out a long post on 'Solutions'. Look forward to your response to that.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Can we get back to solutions please? Or are we going to go further and further back into history? Like when Chandragupta Maurya ruled everything all the way up to Afghanistan. So lets stop this on this thread at least. I took the pain of typing out a long post on 'Solutions'. Look forward to your response to that.



Stay put, i am right here.
BTW, did you change your position or not..? 

And the piece that i posted is very much linked with the topic as we have among us a few who are not quite clear of universal truths and live in a fool's paradise. They need to be shown a mirror before they claim something more stupid.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Dear Xeric, how is that so different from what is on the ground today? What are the ramifications of a change of terminology (LOC to IB) of the de facto point of no return in terms of a full blown armed and even nuclear conflict between the two countries? Unless you (your fundamentalists, your weak off-on civilian governments, and most importantly your army and ISI) need a moral high ground and international credibility/sanction in keeping on stoking the flames of unrest in Kashmir and keep the attention of the people of Pakistan diverted from what really ails your country? You and I both know that such factions are present in J&K even today. I have already covered this part in my previous post which I hope you would read. First, both India and Pakistan I feel are agreed that independent Kashmir is not a viable solution. That is half the battle won brother!


i agree, an independent would be a road towards another disaster. It was be just another place for both countries to play a new match similar in contents but smaller in scale to the one being played in Afghanistan.

But i didnt get the point of bringing in the our govt, the Army and then the bad-a$$ ISI..??

We already have india to justify our armed forces' huge existence and dont require another issue for the sake. Instead, this argument of yours made me wonder, is this reason that india has fingered every other neighbor of its (to divert the attention from the real problems of india - hint hint the figure 220)? See the list of territorial disputes here (Gosh! you people can take up a case and get into the guinness world record - the country having the maximum land disputes) 

List of territorial disputes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Once we are agreed on such a fundamental truth, we then need to accept the equally patent truth of the reality on the ground today, much as it may be unpalatable to both our countries. And that is that we have what we have, and the chance of getting a square kilometer more is next to impossible, without a full blown armed conflict, that would in all probability go nuclear by the side that finds itself going down. The chances for that have come and gone long ago. They were not seized for one reason or the other, and thats that. Let us move on, and look forward instead of back. There is no sense in going into the by whom of it cause it is not pertinent here. So once we are agreed on the above two where does that leave us? Removing ego and wet dreams out of the picture that would *leave us with the only possible solution of converting LOC to IB once and for all and moving forward in our relations *peacefully.


How?
_
Avian kham kha...??_

You know what, you are guud at sugar-coating you pill and shuffing it down our throat  But then you didnt put in your best this time, as the reason that you cite for the conversion of LoC into IB is a full scale war entailing use of nukes (HIC), but you forgot that going by the wishes of Kashmiri people is of utmost importance before we get this issue solved, without them, we would just buy cheap peace that would soon burst. Moreover, as i pointed out a very logical point that why the LoC cant be converted in IB (the factions and areas thingy), i dont see you pointing out any logical reason to why cant the plebiscite option be executed. Please refrain from bring in the rhetorics of 'plebiscite no more a viable option' just because india had lingered the issue for so long that one tends to forget the actual basis of its resolution. 

Kashmiris has the right to chose and we must let them choose, how would it feel if someone pushes a partition pill down your throat against your will?

You in your posts sounds like this over Kashmir:








> Speaking about the disgruntled and less than satisfied factions on our side of the fence, again I have covered it in my previous post. They would first be counseled by neutral arbitrators/elders from the community. Failing which they would need to make a choice between staying in India or moving to Pakistan. Don't you see the beauty of this solution my friend? First India and Pakistan take one step back and many steps forward by deciding what is India and what is Pakistan. Then we both unitedly give the entire population of Jammu and Kashmir the right to vote on which country they would rather live in. The plebiscite we have been fighting over for decades now! In a way acceptable to all, for want of a better more workable alternative. Everything else would follow, and most importantly, in Peace. It would then simply be a matter of negotiation, and give and take, and working out the details.
> 
> The donor country (of translocated populations at the time of this plebiscite and Partition II) would agree on a mutually agreeable fair price in terms of financial compensation to pay the translocated people for the land and immovable assets they would be leaving behind, to help them start a new life afresh in the recipient country of their choice. I use the word host country interchangeably with your India, cause I believe it could be equally possible that there would be certain factions within the part of Kashmir you hold (AK and GB/NA) who would prefer to come join India, and this arrangement would benefit them as well. The currency exchange valuation would be pre-decided mutually between India and Pakistan to ensure equality, in light of the big gulf which has off late developed between the Indian rupee vis a vis its Pakistani counterpart. This part could be arbitrated on by both our Reserve banks, much like the Euro. Please let me know what you think of this solution brothers.
> 
> Remember how the first Partition happened? It started with a polarization of two ideologies. Then a separate nation was carved out as a land mass. And then the migration of people one way or the other depending on which ideology they saw their future with. Partition II would be the same. The land masses are decided first. Then the people move. But the movement is peaceful. Protected by the armed forces and governments on either side. Safe transit. Rightful compensation. And ready and speedy rehabilitation so that one need not live as a refugee, but as a proud new citizen of the country of your choice. Lets learn our harsh lessons of 63 years ago brothers, and show the spirits of our ancestors that we did things better this time around. And righted the wrongs of days gone by. They will smile down on us, and their torn spirits would be free at last.



The rest is provisionary to your LoC into IB suggestion so it wont matter a reply.


----------



## harish

Dear Xeric, the 'wish of the Kashmir people' is not as important here as the wish of 1.5 billion people of both our countries, who are and have been suffering for over 6 decades. Suffering with a legacy foisted on us by the British as their parting gift before they left after 300 years of plunder, keeping the doors open for further milking of their favorite cash cow, till the reality of post-war depression set in, just as did the sun on their empire. 

After all please appreciate, that since both Pakistan and India agree that an independent Kashmir identity is not a possibility, then it stands to reason that the only two players involved here as independent standalone sovereign entities are India and Pakistan. And India and Pakistan both hold parts of what some would collectively term Kashmir, just as other would collectively loosely term adjoining parts of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan as Balochistan (or Baluchistan depending on the country in question). So since its the question that needs to be deliberated upon and decided between India and Pakistan, and what is at stake is the lives of 1.5 billion people of India and Pakistan, the decision needs to be collectively taken by all the citizens of both countries. Once that decision is taken and sealed, the Kashmiris are offered a vote (plebiscite) to decide which nation to be a part of. Hope that makes my point clear. 

I have told you a solution which is the only realistic one available to us today. Neither country will be willing to give up one square kilometer of land they hold today. Your solution is plebiscite which is also something I have covered. The choice of nationality will be in the hands of the Kashmiri people. So where is the problem in that? Isn't that what Pakistan has been crying itself hoarse about? We work together to help make the transition easy. If you stick to your stand and we stick to ours, then you can forget about a solution for the next thousand years.

You are wrong in saying that it is we who are losing out under the strain of maintaining a huge armed presence in Kashmir. The land is ours and we are occupying it and preventing entry to you. Simple. Just as you are on what is yours, as well as what you hold of ours. The results of this financial strain on India are no secret brother. A vibrant growing economy moving along at 7+% with the very real possibility of ramping up to over 10% soon, Maoists, dalits, poverty, dearth of toilets, and all. Compare that to your country? The message is clear.

You may continue to stay away from open conflict and train and arm and finance proxies to fight us. They will be an irritant at best for a country of our size and strength. And somewhere down the line you may force our hand in returning the favor. We will still hold Kashmir. And continue to do so. Where is the solution in that? What else can you do? You can either fight us for it with you regular forces, or you can try and turn the tide of international opinion against us. You know the results of both my friend. So come forward and try and find a solution together.


----------



## Xeric

harish said:


> Dear Xeric, the 'wish of the Kashmir people' is not as important here as the wish of 1.5 billion people of both our countries, who are and have been suffering for over 6 decades. Suffering with a legacy foisted on us by the British as their parting gift before they left after 300 years of plunder, keeping the doors open for further milking of their favorite cash cow, till the reality of post-war depression set in, just as did the sun on their empire.


i will jot down my points here;
One, you really need to read JFC Fuller's Conduct of War (an excellent book) so that you understand the phrase "Absolute War and Absolute Peace". But as probably you wont be reading it so here, let me try explaining you why i recommend this book to you; One cannot have absolute peace after a war if there's a chance the the side which was defeated was once again get up and avenge its defeat. As it happened after WW-1, the Treaty of Versaille subdued the Germans for some time but the humiliation, restrictions and the sanctions over Germany forced Hitler to play WW-2. In short, there is no fun in winning a war that would ultimately lead to another one, even after a 100 years. That's not what wars are meant for.

So, this brings me to my second point, solution of Kashmir without taking care of the 'wish of Kashmiri People' would be just another arrangement where we might gain peace temporarily but somewhere down there would come back to haunt us when he would have the power to do so. Moreover, apart from this theoretical (though proved) arrangement if india or Pakistan would not keep the 'wish of Kashmiri People' it would be a blunder that would make us repay in the times to come.

Three, what i see from your post is that indians have no regards whatsoever for the people of Kashmir. They just think of themselves and themselves alone, which indeed is dangerous!



> After all please appreciate, that since both Pakistan and India agree that an independent Kashmir identity is not a possibility, then it stands to reason that the only two players involved here as independent standalone sovereign entities are India and Pakistan. And India and Pakistan both hold parts of what some would collectively term Kashmir, just as other would collectively loosely term adjoining parts of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan as Balochistan (or Baluchistan depending on the country in question).


It seems as if you are in a habit of molding the words as it suits you. It surprises me how beautifully (sarcasm) you 'loosely' compared Kashmir and Balochistan. Just as an appetizer, Boluchistan and Pakistan are not separated by a LoC but an inter-provincial boundary. It is the real world and real politics and people dont use words as 'loosely' as we have seen you using them.

Please avoid using absurd and non-existent metaphors that dont fit in this debate. You people started with Balochistan and now have brought in Iran and Afghanistan. What on god's earth does Afghanistan and Iran has to do with Kashmir solutions, except that the resolution of Kashmir issue would not only be beneficial to them but the entire world?

So as you must have seen my impatience over and the inability to suffer fools especially who drag in Balochistan, i would suggest that you better refrain from doing this again. If you want to prove that Balochistan and Kashmir are compatible, please open up a new thread and we can kill each other there.



> So since its the question that needs to be deliberated upon and decided between India and Pakistan, and what is at stake is the lives of 1.5 billion people of India and Pakistan, the decision needs to be collectively taken by all the citizens of both countries.


Ok now coming towards the gray matter in your post.

As i have said earlier that you cannot take away the Kashmiri factor from india-Pakistan equation, you simply cant. You keep on saying that the lives of 1.5 billion people are at stake but you conveniently forget about the 0.5 million Kashmiris, which to me is similar to Hitler's attitude against the Jews!



> Once that decision is taken and sealed, the Kashmiris are offered a vote (plebiscite) to decide which nation to be a part of. Hope that makes my point clear.


No your point is not clear.

Whatever the decision has to be made is to be made with thorough consultations with the Kashmrirs and it would not be like; you take the decision first and then ask the effected party to accede to it, no. It's synonymous to dictatorship and india has a very guud track record in this regards, so please dont tarnish the image of the 'largest democracy' of this world.



> I have told you a solution which is the only realistic one available to us today. Neither country will be willing to give up one square kilometer of land they hold today. Your solution is plebiscite which is also something I have covered. The choice of nationality will be in the hands of the Kashmiri people. So where is the problem in that? Isn't that what Pakistan has been crying itself hoarse about? We work together to help make the transition easy. If you stick to your stand and we stick to ours, then you can forget about a solution for the next thousand years.


Sir, Kashmir not only require a 'realistic' solution but also a logical one, so your recommendation stands void.

As for the loss of territory, well if that be the will of Kashmiris (india and Pakistan to give up some parts), i think no one should and would have a problem, except that if the _atoot ang_ syndrome again comes to play things can get uglier. Dont try to be another israel, the world is already fed up of one! Respect humanity and human choice, phulease.



> You are wrong in saying that it is we who are losing out under the strain of maintaining a huge armed presence in Kashmir. The land is ours and we are occupying it and preventing entry to you. Simple. Just as you are on what is yours, as well as what you hold of ours. The results of this financial strain on India are no secret brother. A vibrant growing economy moving along at 7+% with the very real possibility of ramping up to over 10% soon, Maoists, dalits, poverty, dearth of toilets, and all. Compare that to your country? The message is clear.


EERrrrr...!!

Again the stubborn stance?! i think i have made it clear to you that our discussion cant move forward if you gonna stick to this stupid attitude.

Kashmir has to be solved with some give and take, so get used to it!

BTW, what you spend on your military in Kashmir could be spent for making something basically very useful . You get it dont you?



> You may continue to stay away from open conflict and train and arm and finance proxies to fight us. They will be an irritant at best for a country of our size and strength. And somewhere down the line you may force our hand in returning the favor. We will still hold Kashmir. And continue to do so. Where is the solution in that? What else can you do? You can either fight us for it with you regular forces, or you can try and turn the tide of international opinion against us. You know the results of both my friend. So come forward and try and find a solution together.



Very are already staying away not only from open conflict but also from this proxy stuff. Infact, today it is india that is used as a prefix to the P word, not us. Moreover, we have always tried to avoid conformation as we cant afford one (not that we dont have the capability, but i am talking of the economical and bloody results of war), but it has been india who have been provocative.

Escalation 2001-02, Cold Start, Surgical Strikes, fencing the LoC, backing out from dialogues and stubborn attitude is what india has always done, it was not Pakistan.

Now before i conclude, i would say something about your last words; we would fight you if we had to, you atleast shouldn't be having any doubt about this as you have already seen our capabilities. And as for the international opinion, well you couldn't change it either. Just by showing us some western statements where they have allegedly negated the plebiscite option you cant claim that you have turned the tides. The international community is blind but then it is not stupid. Had that been the case, by now Kashmir would have been yours.


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> That's what i am saying, by shouting thief thief you impress no one, get hold of the thief with the booty right there and then we can talk over this.



I'm not sure if you are aware, maybe you are not. But if possible do see if you can grab a voluminous set of Hum LeT kay Maee or We the Mother of LeT. 

Thats documentary statements of mothers who lost their sons in Kashmir and all of them from Pakistan. Mostly from rural and poor backgrounds. Hardly any from the middle class.

I'm basing this on a few magazine articles in a PAkistani based Urdu paper as well as a longer piece by Farhat Taj on the Internet. PM me if you want me to search the actual link.

If you had gone through the Chatham house poll. It should that there is hardly any support for militant violence in Indian Kashmir (highest in 6% in one district) while its close 50% on the Pakistani side. Clearly, the Indian Kashmiris are not appreciative of this but there is a mismatch on the Pakistani side.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> I'm not sure if you are aware, maybe you are not. But if possible do see if you can grab a voluminous set of Hum LeT kay Maee or We the Mother of LeT.
> 
> Thats documentary statements of mothers who lost their sons in Kashmir and all of them from Pakistan. Mostly from rural and poor backgrounds. Hardly any from the middle class.
> 
> I'm basing this on a few magazine articles in a PAkistani based Urdu paper as well as a longer piece by Farhat Taj on the Internet. PM me if you want me to search the actual link.


Lost in the 90s, right?

And Farhat Taj, who says that drones are welcomed by the FATAians as they consider them the holy bird Ababeel..??

Lolz..



> If you had gone through the Chatham house poll. It should that there is hardly any support for militant violence in Indian Kashmir (highest in 6% in one district) while its close 50% on the Pakistani side. Clearly, the Indian Kashmiris are not appreciative of this but there is a mismatch on the Pakistani side.


Support doesnt matter.

i support the freedom fighters of Kashmir, what matters is do i support them by providing weaponry?


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> Lost in the 90s, right?
> 
> And Farhat Taj, who says that drones are welcomed by the FATAians as they consider them the holy bird Ababeel..??
> 
> Lolz.
> 
> 
> Support doesnt matter.
> 
> i support the freedom fighters of Kashmir, what matters is do i support them by providing weaponry?



I believe you dismiss anything that doesn't fit in your preconceived notions. You're not even curious on reading up on that? If I remember correctly it was a 2009 article and quite current, although like I said it has gone down since 90s and 2000s. Maybe Musharraf/GoP realized that backlash it has caused among KAshmiris? Does the current GoP understand that, time will tell.

You want to support people, who have no support from Kashmiris themselves. And then you wonder why only 2&#37; want to join Pakistan.


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> I believe you dismiss anything that doesn't fit in your preconceived notions. You're not even curious on reading up on that? If I remember correctly it was a 2009 article and quite current, although like I said it has gone down since 90s and 2000s. Maybe Musharraf/GoP realized that backlash it has caused among KAshmiris? Does the current GoP understand that, time will tell.



These kind of articles require that they should be read with a pinch of salt and i usually avoid salty things.

Moreover, whether we realized something or not is none of your concern, you should be happy , thankful and appreciative of the fact that it stopped. _Aam khao, pair na gino.._

But what i feel here is that the graph taking a dive doesnt concern you people much, perhaps it needs to take an upward turn.



> You want to support people, who have no support from Kashmiris themselves. And then you wonder why only 2% want to join Pakistan.



That's what you think. The kind of regard that i have you people showing for the people of Kashmir has strengthened my belief that Kashmir should never fall into your hands or else you would make hitler/israel shy!


----------



## toxic_pus

A clarification.


xeric said:


> Some fruitful thought....
> 
> Northern Areas, Pakistan - Definition
> 
> *Northern Areas, Pakistan - Definition*
> 
> ......* Some parts of the region were invaded by Maharajas of Kashmir and they forcefully governed the area for many years, which led to the common belief that it is a part of Kashmir. But the people of Gilgit-Baltistan regard themselves as being distinct from Kashmiris and many want to become the fifth province of Pakistan. And they oppose being included in Kashmir. Their opinion is that invasion of Mahrajas doesn't mean that this is a part of Kashmir, just like British invasion over the India in 19th century does not mean that India is a part of Britain.*.....



Firstly, in 1857, following the Sepoy Mutiny, the British included the Kingdom of Kashmir under its suzerainty. Subsequently,_ The Imperial Gazetteer of India, 1908, Vol 15, pg 72 _published in detail, the physical boundaries of Kashmir and gave the co-ordinates as_ 'extending from 32°17' to 36°58'N and from 73°26' to 80°30'E'_. Those co-ordinates cover Gilgit, Hunza, Baltistan and also what is today know as Aksai Chin.



Similarly,_ The Imperial Gazetteer of India, 1908, Vol 19, opposite pg 218_, published the map of Kashmir and NWFP, clearly delimiting the boundaries between the two and of course, including Gilgit, Hunza and Baltistan as part of Kashmir.







The claim that these areas, i.e. Hunza, Gilgit and Baltistan which are collectively called Northern Areas, are part of the erstwhile kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir, arises from these official British documents and not from any _'common belief'_. Also the accusation of calling parts of NWFP as part of NA is just another hogwash

The Gazette and also the map can be accessed here.

Secondly, the agreement between Pakistan and China, regarding Saksam valley - which is in any case null and void - apparently contains a proviso that made the settlement _ subject to the final solution of the Kashmir dispute'_. This is by far the clearest indication that Pakistan does consider the NA as part of Kashmir, pending _'final solution'_.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> These kind of articles require that they should be read with a pinch of salt and i usually avoid salty things.
> 
> Moreover, whether we realized something or not is none of your concern, you should be happy , thankful and appreciative of the fact that it stopped. _Aam khao, pair na gino.._
> 
> But what i feel here is that the graph taking a dive doesnt concern you people much, perhaps it needs to take an upward turn.



Thankful for what? For not letting lose killers on the Kashmir populace? Is the propaganda of "Jihad in Kashmir" still being spread in Pakistan? Isn't the UJC still issuing statements from Muzaffarabad? At least think and tell me why the Indian army and paramilitary forces were NOT in Kashmir before 1989. 

The current military presence is a direct consequence of that. The Indian security forces can't be absolved from their crimes. But Kashmiris also know why the situation today is the way it is. 



xeric said:


> That's what you think. The kind of regard that i have you people showing for the people of Kashmir has strengthened my belief that Kashmir should never fall into your hands or else you would make hitler/israel shy!



What I want is a solution that will satisfy the widest possible section of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. These include people from Jammu and Ladakh and NA. They include Muslims, Hindus, Christians and Buddhists. The desires of a few cant be forced on the rest. And to achieve this there had to be end of violence on ALL sides. That means withdrawing of security forces from populated areas as well as end of any support to militant groups.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## toxic_pus

On another note, here is the Kashmir conundrum.







The solution envisaged by UN resolutions (i.e. either Pakistan or India) is unacceptable to Kashmiris.

The solution sought by the Kashmiris (i.e. independence) is unacceptable to both India and Pakistan.

The solution sought by India (i.e. LoC = IB) is unacceptable to Kashmiris and Pakistan.

The solution sought by Pakistan (i.e. joint sovereignty) is unacceptable to Kashmiris and India.

Lets not even pretend to know what the solution is.


----------



## RollingStones

toxic_pus said:


> On another note, here is the Kashmir conundrum.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The solution envisaged by UN resolutions (i.e. either Pakistan or India) is unacceptable to Kashmiris.
> 
> The solution sought by the Kashmiris (i.e. independence) is unacceptable to both India and Pakistan.
> 
> The solution sought by India (i.e. LoC = IB) is unacceptable to Kashmiris and Pakistan.
> 
> The solution sought by Pakistan (i.e. joint sovereignty) is unacceptable to Kashmiris and India.
> 
> Lets not even pretend to know what the solution is.



I dont think Kashmiri leaders really want freedom or anything. If the movement or urge was so powerful:
a. it would have found a voice in the international community
b. India would not be making huge investments such as building railway lines and educational institutions in Kashmir Valley 

There is more than meets the eye here. There must be backdoor diplomacy or something whereby Indian leaders know exactly what the future of their part of Kashmir is. No one makes multi billion dollar investments if they are not sure about the returns.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PakSher

EjazR said:


> You want to support people, who have no support from Kashmiris themselves. And then you wonder why only 2% want to join Pakistan.



I think you are referring to the 2% hindus that live in Jammu and Kashmir, it can happen, it is a typo. This has been discussed before and I am a Kashmiri and 2%multiply by 40 may be correct figure. 

Pakistan already captured 29% of it and we just need the rest. We will get there Inshallah. Your 2% lie is not going to work on this forum maybe works in Indian newspapers to misguide the Indian population.


----------



## toxic_pus

PakSher said:


> I think you are referring to the 2&#37; hindus that live in Jammu and Kashmir, it can happen, it is a typo. This has been discussed before and I am a Kashmiri and 2%multiply by 40 may be correct figure.
> 
> Pakistan already captured 29% of it and we just need the rest. We will get there Inshallah. Your 2% lie is not going to work on this forum maybe works in Indian newspapers to misguide the Indian population.



This is called cognitive dissonance. A self-serving version of &#8216;reality&#8217; has been drip fed to you by your State and you have convinced yourself that it _is_ the _truth._ So when you are faced with the _real_ &#8216;reality&#8217; that completely contradicts your _perceived_ &#8216;reality&#8217;, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, for you to rationalize the dichotomy between _what you perceive it should be_ and _what you see it really is_. Instinctively, you just reject the real &#8216;reality&#8217;, out of hand and cling on to your perception, because it is easier for you to rationalize your perception than the dichotomy. 

If it is any consolation, you are not the only one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> A clarification.
> 
> 
> Firstly, in 1857, following the Sepoy Mutiny, the British included the Kingdom of Kashmir under its suzerainty. Subsequently,_ The Imperial Gazetteer of India, 1908, Vol 15, pg 72 _published in detail, the physical boundaries of Kashmir and gave the co-ordinates as_ 'extending from 32°17' to 36°58'N and from 73°26' to 80°30'E'_. Those co-ordinates cover Gilgit, Hunza, Baltistan and also what is today know as Aksai Chin.
> 
> 
> 
> Similarly,_ The Imperial Gazetteer of India, 1908, Vol 19, opposite pg 218_, published the map of Kashmir and NWFP, clearly delimiting the boundaries between the two and of course, including Gilgit, Hunza and Baltistan as part of Kashmir.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The claim that these areas, i.e. Hunza, Gilgit and Baltistan which are collectively called Northern Areas, are part of the erstwhile kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir, arises from these official British documents and not from any _'common belief'_. Also the accusation of calling parts of NWFP as part of NA is just another hogwash
> 
> The Gazette and also the map can be accessed here.



By these coordinates even the cities of Pakistani Gujrat, Kharian and Gujranwala are included in Kashmir, dont be ridiculous!

Also i was talking of the Mahraja invasion in 1819, much earlier than your time line. Indeed it was not the british authority to include or exclude just anything from a piece of land. It may hold guud till the time the brits were in power (or else by that definition even today Pakistan should be part of india). Most importantly Kashmir is the only place in the history of this world that has been invaded, 'gifted' and occupied not once but many times. Here's a little insight:

* Up to 1325: Ruled by 155 Rajas independent and sovereign 1325 to 1585: Muslim Sultans independent and sovereign (1420 to 1470) "Golden period of Kashmir history" Periods of Occupation and Struggle for Freedom
* 1586 to 1752: Mughal Rule
* 1752 to 1819: Tyrannical Afghan Rule
* 1819 to 1846: Colonized by Sikhs
* 16 March 1846: British sold Kashmir to Dogras
* 1846 to 1947: Dogra Rule
* 15 August 1947: Partition of British India Indo-Pak war to gain control over the territory of Kashmir
* 22 Oct.1947 : Tribal-backed Invasion of Kashmir
* 24 Oct. 1947: Pakistan controls one third of Kashmir - Provisional Govt. of Azad Kashmir proclaimed
* 27 Oct. 1947: Indian military invasion in Kashmir- two thirds of Kashmir occupied by India
* Indo-Pak War: Cease-fire achieved 1 Jan, 1949. 

So why dont you go a bit further deep into history and tell us that Kashmir belongs to Afghans/Pathans who invaded in it 1752? Why choose a specific period of time, just because it suites? If we accede to your definition then half of the world today would belong to the brits and the remaining half (the areas in it) would claim each other as a part of theirs!


> Secondly, the agreement between Pakistan and China, regarding Saksam valley - which is in any case null and void - apparently contains a proviso that made the settlement _ subject to the final solution of the Kashmir dispute'_. This is by far the clearest indication that Pakistan does consider the NA as part of Kashmir, pending _'final solution'_.


You got that right.

But the agreement is not 'null and void' just because it awaits a final solution of Kashmir, indeed as the area 'was a no-man's undemarcated border land' and as these _'contiguous areas the defence of which is under the *actual control of Pakistan*, in a spirit of fairness, reasonableness, mutual understanding and mutual accommodation, and on the basis of the ten principles as enunciated in the Bandung conference'_ and for the _'development of good neighbourly and friendly relations, but also to help safeguard Asian and world peace'_ the agreement is subject to the final resolution of Kashmir issue as the 'Asian and world peace' and the regional tranquility is intermingled so deeply to Kashmir issue that it cant be seen in isolation. Indeed, if this 'modern' war on terror cant be seen in isolation and its success is subject to the final resolution of the Kashmir issue', how can we relegate an area whose (not only the) proximity warrants a solution to the 6 decade old issue?!

Or may be by your understanding if Pakistan today says that IPI gas pipeline is subject to the final resolution of Kashmir issue (as Kashmir is the main bone of contention between the two countries) the province of Balochistan should also become part of Kashmir?!


----------



## Xeric

EjazR said:


> Thankful for what? For not letting lose killers on the Kashmir populace? Is the propaganda of "Jihad in Kashmir" still being spread in Pakistan? Isn't the UJC still issuing statements from Muzaffarabad? At least think and tell me why the Indian army and paramilitary forces were NOT in Kashmir before 1989.
> 
> The current military presence is a direct consequence of that. The Indian security forces can't be absolved from their crimes. But Kashmiris also know why the situation today is the way it is.


Unfortunately it is the indian soldiers according to amnesty international's report which says that india committed war crimes that led to the death of 70,000 people and it was your Gen Bahia who was denied visa to Canada, not the militants.

You know what, that's a strange understanding - the freedom fighters attack the soldiers, and in turn the soldiers would extort, kill and rape the innocent populace.



> What I want is a solution that will satisfy the widest possible section of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. These include people from Jammu and Ladakh and NA. They include Muslims, Hindus, Christians and Buddhists. The desires of a few cant be forced on the rest. And to achieve this there had to be end of violence on ALL sides. That means withdrawing of security forces from populated areas as well as end of any support to militant groups.


Now we are talking, arent we?

That's what i want and the best thing to get this done is through a plebiscite, not by those 'controlled' polls. Also when you say 'end of militants', well FYKI (and as you has already acknowledged) it already did. One cannot rule out the possibility of some indigenous fighters who infact would always be there, come what may due to the sole reason of being oppressed.

Speaking frankly as per the UN demand, Pakistan has already pulled back its 'men and material' support (if any) from Kashmir since long, there are no tribals there now and no more are going in, so the only hindrance to the resolution of Kashmir issue is the presence of indian soldiers who commit crimes against humanity day and night and which is condemned the world over. Today, it is only india who has to fulfill its 'promise'.


----------



## Jade

RollingStones said:


> I dont think Kashmiri leaders really want freedom or anything. If the movement or urge was so powerful:
> a. it would have found a voice in the international community
> b. India would not be making huge investments such as building railway lines and educational institutions in Kashmir Valley
> 
> There is more than meets the eye here. There must be backdoor diplomacy or something whereby Indian leaders know exactly what the future of their part of Kashmir is. No one makes multi billion dollar investments if they are not sure about the returns.



Thats true. There are three segments in a Kashmir. One, which want to be in India: mostly main stream. Second, which want to be independent: ex JKLF, Hurriyat (Moderate) and the third segments could want to join Pakistan, Hurriyat (Gilani).

People recognize that the third segment has not much support even in valley forget the other parts of Kashmir. The segment such as JKLF and Hurriyat (Moderate) are convinced that Independence is not possible and they may settle for autonomy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

PakSher said:


> I think you are referring to the 2% hindus that live in Jammu and Kashmir, it can happen, it is a typo. This has been discussed before and I am a Kashmiri and 2%multiply by 40 may be correct figure.
> 
> Pakistan already captured 29% of it and we just need the rest. We will get there Inshallah. Your 2% lie is not going to work on this forum maybe works in Indian newspapers to misguide the Indian population.



The demographics of J&K(India): Muslims: 66 %;Hindus: 30%; Sikhs 2%; Buddhists 2%


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> By these coordinates even the cities of Pakistani Gujrat, Kharian and Gujranwala are included in Kashmir, dont be ridiculous!


Some posters here had speculated if you can read maps. Unfortunately, this comment is turning their speculation into fact. It appears you are not aware of how a region is marked on a map by identifying the co-ordinates of its extreme points. Also, if you had taken the trouble of reading the Gazette, you would have come across the physical description of Kashmir's boundaries as well.


> Also i was talking of the Mahraja invasion in 1819, much earlier than your time line. Indeed it was not the british authority to include or exclude just anything from a piece of land. *It may hold guud till the time the brits were in power* (or else by that definition even today Pakistan should be part of india). Most importantly Kashmir is the only place in the history of this world that has been invaded, 'gifted' and occupied not once but many times. Here's a little insight:
> 
> * Up to 1325: Ruled by 155 Rajas independent and sovereign 1325 to 1585: Muslim Sultans independent and sovereign (1420 to 1470) "Golden period of Kashmir history" Periods of Occupation and Struggle for Freedom
> * 1586 to 1752: Mughal Rule
> * 1752 to 1819: Tyrannical Afghan Rule
> * 1819 to 1846: Colonized by Sikhs
> * 16 March 1846: British sold Kashmir to Dogras
> * 1846 to 1947: Dogra Rule
> * 15 August 1947: Partition of British India Indo-Pak war to gain control over the territory of Kashmir
> * 22 Oct.1947 : Tribal-backed Invasion of Kashmir
> * 24 Oct. 1947: Pakistan controls one third of Kashmir - Provisional Govt. of Azad Kashmir proclaimed
> * 27 Oct. 1947: Indian military invasion in Kashmir- two thirds of Kashmir occupied by India
> * Indo-Pak War: Cease-fire achieved 1 Jan, 1949.
> 
> So why dont you go a bit further deep into history and tell us that Kashmir belongs to Afghans/Pathans who invaded in it 1752? Why choose a specific period of time, just because it suites? If we accede to your definition then half of the world today would belong to the brits and the remaining half (the areas in it) would claim each other as a part of theirs!


You have already answered your question. Refer to the line highlighted. The entire Kashmir was under Brit suzerainty since 1857. (If you don't know what suzerainty means, google.) When power was transferred to the Maharaja, circa 1947, it was transferred from the Brits and not from the Afghans or Pathans or Sikhs. So what held 'guud' to the Brits at the time of transfer of power became relevant, not what was 'guud' to the Afghans, Pathans or Sikhs during the stone age. Now since the Maharaja 'inherited' - for lack of better words - the entire Kashmir, hence on signing of Instrument of Accession, the entire Kashmir legally became India's property. Hence any reference to Kashmir includes the entire NA.

One more thing. Kashmir was never completely held by any one entity, other than the Dogras, post 1860. Also since Ladakh was a conquest, by your logic it shouldn't be part of Kashmir as well. 


> You got that right.


I know.



> But the agreement is not 'null and void' just because it awaits a final solution of Kashmir, indeed as the area 'was a no-man's undemarcated border land' and as these _'contiguous areas the defence of which is under the *actual control of Pakistan*, in a spirit of fairness, reasonableness, mutual understanding and mutual accommodation, and on the basis of the ten principles as enunciated in the Bandung conference'_ and for the _'development of good neighbourly and friendly relations, but also to help safeguard Asian and world peace'_ the agreement is subject to the final resolution of Kashmir issue as the 'Asian and world peace' and the regional tranquility is intermingled so deeply to Kashmir issue that it cant be seen in isolation. Indeed, if this 'modern' war on terror cant be seen in isolation and its success is subject to the final resolution of the Kashmir issue', how can we relegate an area whose (not only the) proximity warrants a solution to the 6 decade old issue?!


I am going to hazard a guess that you have never been within a mile of a legal document, let alone prepare one. Anyway, the Pak-Chin agreement regarding Saksam Valley, is null and void because it is an _ex parte_ agreement and not for all the gibberish you have typed.


> Or may be by your understanding if Pakistan today says that IPI gas pipeline is subject to the final resolution of Kashmir issue (as Kashmir is the main bone of contention between the two countries) the province of Balochistan should also become part of Kashmir?!


Except for putting a question mark on the competence of the Pakistani legal team, it won't mean anything like you have suggested. Historically Balochistan was never a part of Kashmir, in the same way as Gilgit, Baltistan, Hunza and Ladakh provinces are. It will have the same validity if Mexico enters into a contract with USA subject to 'final solution to Kashmir'.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Speaking frankly *as per the UN demand, Pakistan has already pulled back its 'men and material' support (if any) from Kashmir since long, there are no tribals there now* and no more are going in, so the only hindrance to the resolution of Kashmir issue is the presence of indian soldiers who commit crimes against humanity day and night and which is condemned the world over. Today, it is only india who has to fulfill its 'promise'.


So now you are going to invent facts?

As per UN resolutions, Pakistan is supposed to withdraw its entire military apparatus and the '_territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commission_'. 

And what constitutes 'territory evacuated'? In a letter dated 25th August, 1948, addressed to Nehru, Joseph Korbel the Chairman of the Commission clarified that, '_*evacuated territory refers to those territories in the State of Jammu and Kashmir which are at present under the effective control of the Pakistan High Command*._' This, by the way is another confirmation of how NA is part of the territory pending 'final solution'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> Some posters here had speculated if you can read maps. Unfortunately, this comment is turning their speculation into fact. It appears you are not aware of how a region is marked on a map by identifying the co-ordinates of its extreme points. Also, if you had taken the trouble of reading the Gazette, you would have come across the physical description of Kashmir's boundaries as well.



Lolz...why dont you do me a favor and mark all the 'extreme' points and let us know what exactly constitutes of Kashmir?

i am waiting, let's see who is better at map-reading a soldier or ranter.



> You have already answered your question. Refer to the line highlighted. The entire Kashmir was under Brit suzerainty since 1857. (If you don't know what suzerainty means, google.) When power was transferred to the Maharaja, circa 1947, it was transferred from the Brits and not from the Afghans or Pathans or Sikhs. So what held 'guud' to the Brits at the time of transfer of power became relevant, not what was 'guud' to the Afghans, Pathans or Sikhs during the stone age. Now since the Maharaja 'inherited' - for lack of better words - the entire Kashmir, hence on signing of Instrument of Accession, the entire Kashmir legally became India's property. Hence any reference to Kashmir includes the entire NA.



You know what, you posts puts me in a delima - should i laugh or should i bang my head at your stupidity.

Just because the great maharaja was given the 'entire' Kashmir so we ALL should take that point as the reference and forget what went before that. Voila!

Why dont you tell us all from which point of time in the history should we start accepting our history?

Lolz..the brits gave maharja something and therefore one should only consider this point worthy enough to make future decisions as if nothing else in the history merits any significance less the brits.

And BTW, i used the Pathans/Afghans for just a random reference, nothing specific. The same example can hold GUUD Mugals and Rajas.



> One more thing. Kashmir was never completely held by any one entity, other than the Dogras, post 1860. Also since Ladakh was a conquest, by your logic it shouldn't be part of Kashmir as well.



And it is therefore that your intellect tells us that anything past/before this era is insignificant and useful.

You are so blinded by false superiority and perceived notions, ever heard of that _kowain ka mandaq_? i doubt you had, or else by now you must have figured out a way to come out of that god forsaken hole!




> I am going to hazard a guess that you have never been within a mile of a legal document, let alone prepare one. Anyway, the Pak-Chin agreement regarding Saksam Valley, is null and void because it is an _ex parte_ agreement and not for all the gibberish you have typed.


i am soldier and not a LDA, so may be you can help me out on this one!

The decision was ex parte because the area was ours and ours alone, we consulted those who had a stake in the 'Saksam' valley and obviously not those who were merely irritants and nothing more!



> Except for putting a question mark on the competence of the Pakistani legal team, it won't mean anything like you have suggested. Historically Balochistan was never a part of Kashmir, in the same way as Gilgit, Baltistan, Hunza and Ladakh provinces are. *It will have the same validity if Mexico enters into a contract with USA subject to 'final solution to Kashmir'*.



Well that's what you sounded like, dont blame me, question your intellect.


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> So now you are going to invent facts?
> 
> As per UN resolutions, Pakistan is supposed to withdraw its entire military apparatus and the '_territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commission_'.
> 
> And what constitutes 'territory evacuated'? In a letter dated 25th August, 1948, addressed to Nehru, Joseph Korbel the Chairman of the Commission clarified that, '_*evacuated territory refers to those territories in the State of Jammu and Kashmir which are at present under the effective control of the Pakistan High Command*._' This, by the way is another confirmation of how NA is part of the territory pending 'final solution'.


As i have already observed that you are in the bad habit of cherry-picking sentences, dates and events to your on suitability, this time again you did the same thing. You just copy pasted what suited your agenda from the letter to justify your misplaced beliefs. Allow me to show you the entire picture:

[A clarification given in writing by the Commission on 3rd September 1948, that the evacuated territory refers to those territories in the State of Jammu and Kashmir which are at present under the effective control of Pakistan High Command, *it being understood that the population of these territories will have freedom to legitimate political activities.*

I*n view of above , the authority to govern these territories is basically vested in the government of Pakistan.* This governance has to be regulated and guaranteed through the constitution of Pakistan, in a manner that it satisfies the parameters set up by the international standards of human rights, accepted and recognized by the United Nations.

*Being under the effective control of Pakistan high command, the territories fall under clause 2 (d) of Art. 1 of Constitution of Pakistan which states that the territories of Pakistan shall comprise;

(d) Such States and territories as are or may be included in Pakistan either by accession or otherwise.*

This clause is comprehendible by two independent connotations to be categorized as:

(i) such States and territories which are otherwise included in Pakistan; and

(ii) such States and territories which acceded to Pakistan.

_ The territories of the State of Jammu and Kashmir i.e. Gilgit, Baltistan and Azad Kashmir fall in the first category of clause (d) of Article 1(2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan as these are otherwise included in Pakistan. _*It derives its legitimacy from the the UNCIP resolutions and clarifications given by it in writing and orally, the ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan.* It has received the judicial assent as reported in PLJ 1999 AJK-1, PLD 2006 AJK-1; PLD 2006 Lah-465 and PLJ 1991 AJK-60.]


Moreover, if you didnt know *The government of Pakistan is empowered to regulate these territories (the territories resulting) out of the war of liberation of the people of the State under UNCIP resolutions. *

And guess what, (with reference to the *highlighted* part - which you deliberately missed, in this post) the Gilgit-Baltistan Self Governance Order 2009 is another step towards this realization, so as i have said earlier at number of places it is only india that is required to shut their forces in Kashmir as all other requirements has been met by Pakistan. To further clarify this and the "evacuation of territories by Pakistani troops," we need to understand the following:

_the AJK Constitution of 1974 gives Islamabad significant legal authority in the affairs of AJK but only through the Kashmir Council. The AJK Constitution also restricts the AJK Assembly and the Kashmir Council from making any laws regarding the following areas, which fall under the purview of the Federal Government of Pakistan:

· The responsibilities of the Government of Pakistan under the UNCIP Resolutions;

*· The defense and security of AJK;*

· The issue of any bills, notes or other paper currency; and

· The external affairs of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, including foreign trade and foreign aid._


We know now who have been 'inventing facts' around here!


----------



## toxic_pus

I dont see any real refutation of points raised by me. Only a feeble attempt to sound intelligent. Anyway.


xeric said:


> Lolz...why dont you do me a favor and mark all the 'extreme' points and let us know what exactly constitutes of Kashmir?
> 
> i am waiting, let's see who is better at map-reading a soldier or ranter.


Soldier boy, I did post a map from Imperial Gazetteer of India. May be you can do the hard work of reading it up before shooting your mouth.


> You know what, you posts puts me in a delima - should i laugh or should i bang my head at your stupidity.
> 
> Just because the great maharaja was given the 'entire' Kashmir so we ALL should take that point as the reference and forget what went before that. Voila!


You can do both if that makes you feel superior but soldier boy, law is a bit more complicated than you would like to accept. When power was transferred it was transferred on _as is_ basis. And it was on this basis Pakistan was carved out of India and not, for example, on the basis of Buddhist empire of pre Mughal era. 


> Why dont you tell us all from which point of time in the history should we start accepting our history?


Depends upon what history you wish to accept. For example, if its Pakistani history you are talking about then its 14th August, 1947. 


> And it is therefore that your intellect tells us that anything past/before this era is insignificant and useful.


As far as law is concerned, what matters is what is codified at the time of application of that law. True, this codification depends on past and present. But once codified, nothing else matters. Had it not been the case, all completed sale or transfer of properties, for example, could be challenged simply on the basis of past possession. Past possession does matter though, but only in case current ownership cant be identified with reasonable certainty.


> The decision was ex parte because the area was ours and ours alone, we consulted those who had a stake in the 'Saksam' valley and obviously not those who were merely irritants and nothing more!


And it continues to be _ex parte_, in spite of that empty bravado.


> Well that's what you sounded like, dont blame me, question your intellect.


Since thats what I sounded like in your mind, may be I should question your intellect instead.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> As i have already observed that you are in the bad habit of cherry-picking sentences, dates and events to your on suitability, this time again you did the same thing. You just copy pasted what suited your agenda from the letter to justify your misplaced beliefs. Allow me to show you the entire picture:
> 
> [A clarification given in writing by the Commission on 3rd September 1948, that the evacuated territory refers to those territories in the State of Jammu and Kashmir which are at present under the effective control of Pakistan High Command, *it being understood that the population of these territories will have freedom to legitimate political activities.*
> 
> I*n view of above , the authority to govern these territories is basically vested in the government of Pakistan.* This governance has to be regulated and guaranteed through the constitution of Pakistan, in a manner that it satisfies the parameters set up by the international standards of human rights, accepted and recognized by the United Nations.
> 
> *Being under the effective control of Pakistan high command, the territories fall under clause 2 (d) of Art. 1 of Constitution of Pakistan which states that the territories of Pakistan shall comprise;
> 
> (d) Such States and territories as are or may be included in Pakistan either by accession or otherwise.*
> 
> This clause is comprehendible by two independent connotations to be categorized as:
> 
> (i) such States and territories which are otherwise included in Pakistan; and
> 
> (ii) such States and territories which acceded to Pakistan.
> 
> _ The territories of the State of Jammu and Kashmir i.e. Gilgit, Baltistan and Azad Kashmir fall in the first category of clause (d) of Article 1(2) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan as these are otherwise included in Pakistan. _*It derives its legitimacy from the the UNCIP resolutions and clarifications given by it in writing and orally, the ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan.* It has received the judicial assent as reported in PLJ 1999 AJK-1, PLD 2006 AJK-1; PLD 2006 Lah-465 and PLJ 1991 AJK-60.]
> 
> 
> Moreover, if you didnt know *The government of Pakistan is empowered to regulate these territories (the territories resulting) out of the war of liberation of the people of the State under UNCIP resolutions. *
> 
> And guess what, (with reference to the *highlighted* part - which you deliberately missed, in this post) the Gilgit-Baltistan Self Governance Order 2009 is another step towards this realization, so as i have said earlier at number of places it is only india that is required to shut their forces in Kashmir as all other requirements has been met by Pakistan. To further clarify this and the "evacuation of territories by Pakistani troops," we need to understand the following:
> 
> _the AJK Constitution of 1974 gives Islamabad significant legal authority in the affairs of AJK but only through the Kashmir Council. The AJK Constitution also restricts the AJK Assembly and the Kashmir Council from making any laws regarding the following areas, which fall under the purview of the Federal Government of Pakistan:
> 
> · The responsibilities of the Government of Pakistan under the UNCIP Resolutions;
> 
> *· The defense and security of AJK;*
> 
> · The issue of any bills, notes or other paper currency; and
> 
> · The external affairs of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, including foreign trade and foreign aid._
> 
> 
> We know now who have been 'inventing facts' around here!



Your claim, or part of it:


xeric said:


> ...*as per the UN demand, Pakistan has already pulled back its 'men and material' support (if any) from Kashmir since long, there are no tribals there now and no more are going in*...


If we forget for the time being that my response was precisely to prove that Pakistan hasnt already pulled back its men and material support, you yourself have successfully managed to prove your own claim wrong. Read your post again. Now you are arguing that Pakistan is entitled to stay in GB and AJK, if not for anything at least for the _defense and security of AJK_. If what you say is true, then it stands to reason that Pakistan hasnt already pulled back its men and material support, which as you have claimed was as per the UN demand.

Ergo you have proved your earlier claim to be wrong. 

Also your source unambiguously acknowledges that _the territories of the State of Jammu and Kashmir_ includes Gilgit-Baltistan region a.k.a. NA, along with AJK. May be you should now give your NA-is-not-a-part-of-Kashmir canard a rest and save yourself some more embarrassment.

It is however another matter that, all that gibberish, that is passed off as a legal argument in prove that UNCIP legitimises Pakistan's role in Kashmir, is just bunkum. More of it in an appropriate thread. 

One clarification though. I have quoted a letter dated *25th August, 1948*, not any letter dated 3rd Sept, 1948. Maybe you should pay attention to what you are responding to before accusing someone of cherry picking.


----------



## RollingStones

toxic_pus said:


> Your claim, or part of it:
> 
> If we forget for the time being that my response was precisely to prove that Pakistan hasnt already pulled back its men and material support, you yourself have successfully managed to prove your own claim wrong. Read your post again. Now you are arguing that Pakistan is entitled to stay in GB and AJK, if not for anything at least for the _defense and security of AJK_. If what you say is true, then it stands to reason that Pakistan hasnt already pulled back its men and material support, which as you have claimed was as per the UN demand.
> 
> Ergo you have proved your earlier claim to be wrong.
> 
> Also your source unambiguously acknowledges that _the territories of the State of Jammu and Kashmir_ includes Gilgit-Baltistan region a.k.a. NA, along with AJK. May be you should now give your NA-is-not-a-part-of-Kashmir canard a rest and save yourself some more embarrassment.
> 
> It is however another matter that, all that gibberish, that is passed off as a legal argument in prove that UNCIP legitimises Pakistan's role in Kashmir, is just bunkum. More of it in an appropriate thread.
> 
> One clarification though. I have quoted a letter dated *25th August, 1948*, not any letter dated 3rd Sept, 1948. Maybe you should pay attention to what you are responding to before accusing someone of cherry picking.



If I were Pakistan, I wouldnt rely on forcing India's hands by quoting UN resolutions. This would mean that countries like the US, Israel, Russia and others would be on notice to honor some of the UN resolutions passed against them that would embarrass them. Why do you think there arent many takers in the UN for Pakistan's proposal to hold India accountable to UN resolutions? It would set a precedent that 60 year old resolutions can be held to be active now and by extension 10 or 20 year old resolutions against countries such as Israel would become active again. No member country will support that. That is why UN resolutions are dead. If you dont act upon a UN resolution within 1 or 2 year of passing it, I can bet 100% that you wont find any support from UN member countries to force the implementation later.


----------



## toxic_pus

RollingStones said:


> Why do you think there arent many takers in the UN for Pakistan's proposal to hold India accountable to UN resolutions?


Could it be because all these resolutions, both regarding Kashmir and Palestine, are Chapter VI resolutions which implies that these are merely recommendatory in legal sense and not enforceable like Chapter VII resolutions?

Regarding being a Pakistani, well, most of them are convinced that UN resolutions put India in a bad place. Unfortunately, today, if UN resolution is to be enforced _en toto_, then it is Pakistan which will have to make the biggest effort. Imagine dismantling the entire military set up spread all over the part of Kashmir that they currently hold, pack their bags and leave. On the other hand India just needs to reduce its force level.


----------



## Old School

To be practical , Kashmir will not dictate Pakistani foreign policy in the long term. It has rather become a liability for the greater interest of Pakistan as a whole. It is only a matter of time that the GoP will fully distance itself from the Kashmir issue. This is already happening. Kashmiris will have to sort out them selves what they want for the future such as devolution ( within the Indian Union) but the redrawing of the international border is out of question. Only a fool or naive will believe that Kashmir will redraw the international border once again. The sooner both Pakistan and India move forward leaving the Kashmir issue behind the better.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

^^ TP, you are just beating about the bush now as you have nothing much to say.

You'll not find bone where it doesnt exists.

i will rest my case on this; Pakistan has no stake whatsoever when it comes to the freedom fighter in (india occupied) Kashmir except that we do support their cause and also support them morally, as is the situation at present. Moreover, when it comes to defence of Pakistani areas, well NA and AK are to be held by REGULAR force of the Pakistan military as is the situation at present.

You may now jump like whoever and even hang upside down.


----------



## Jade

Here are my reasons why UN resolutions are not relevant 

First, before any UN resolution to happen, all the parts of Kashmir under the control of India (43%), Pakistan (37%), and China (20%) have to be brought together. But the official positions of all the governments make it impossible to bring all the parts together: India's official position is that Kashmir is an integral part of India. Pakistan's official position is that Kashmir is a disputed territory and China's official position is that Aksai Chin is a part of Tibet; Moreover, Pakistan has unilaterally ceded a part of Kashmir to China ignoring the disputed nature of territory and in the process making it more complicated 

Second, the resolution was passed by UN Security Council under chapter VI of UN charter. Any resolution passed under chapter VI are considered non binding and have no mandatory enforceability.

Third, the execution of the UN resolution might create more serious difficulties than were foreseen at the time the parties agreed to. National identities are much stronger in both India and Pakistan than compared to National identities in 1947. Moreover, India and Pakistan have invested lot of blood and money in the last 60 years. The question of Kashmir has become the question of national identities and prestige.

Fourth, Kashmir is not a homogeneous region; it has Kashmir, Jammu, Ladakh, Aksai Chin and PAK. The question is how UN resolution is going to take care of aspirations of each of the regions; moreover there is another question of the aspiration of Kashmiri Pundits. 

Last, India is a secular country and hugely diverse. Accepting UN resolutions on Kashmir (Muslim-majority state) mean reject the very foundation of India that is secularity. Moreover this could be a Pandora Box (other demands for states on ethnicity, religion and caste could arise)


----------



## Old School

jade1982 said:


> Moreover this could be a Pandora Box (other demands for states on ethnicity, religion and caste could arise)



Maharashtra or Tamil Nadu might follow suit demanding referendum on independence as far chain reaction goes , for instance. We also have such history and current issue around the Pakistani Republic. Entertaining any separatist movement is a very dangerous game which often haunts the entertainer as history shows. We need to focus on the stability of the whole region by keeping the territorial status quo.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## RollingStones

Old School said:


> Maharashtra or Tamil Nadu might follow suit demanding referendum on independence as far chain reaction goes , for instance. We also have such history and current issue around the Pakistani Republic. Entertaining any separatist movement is a very dangerous game which often haunts the entertainer as history shows. We need to focus on the stability of the whole region by keeping the territorial status quo.



South Asia is a mystery. India and Pakistan need to sit down and define if their future will be shaped by historical factors such as religion or future factors such as economy and control of resources. If Pakistan decides that economy is what is important, then Kashmir is irrelevant, and the focus should be on improving the administration in both countries to draw up treaties that strongly encourage economic platforms such as FTA, MFN etc. and a relatively free movement of goods and people across territories. A good indicator is India's FTA/Visa regime with Sri Lanka and Nepal. Pakistan needs to get an FTA done with India.


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> If I were Pakistan, I wouldnt rely on forcing India's hands by quoting UN resolutions. This would mean that countries like the US, Israel, Russia and others would be on notice to honor some of the UN resolutions passed against them that would embarrass them. Why do you think there arent many takers in the UN for Pakistan's proposal to hold India accountable to UN resolutions? It would set a precedent that 60 year old resolutions can be held to be active now and by extension 10 or 20 year old resolutions against countries such as Israel would become active again. No member country will support that. That is why UN resolutions are dead. If you dont act upon a UN resolution within 1 or 2 year of passing it, I can bet 100% that you wont find any support from UN member countries to force the implementation later.


So you correct a wrong, by doing two more wrongs.

Seriously, i am not surprised, you are from the US.


toxic_pus said:


> Could it be because all these resolutions, both regarding Kashmir and Palestine, are Chapter VI resolutions which implies that these are merely recommendatory in legal sense and not enforceable like Chapter VII resolutions?
> 
> Regarding being a Pakistani, well, most of them are convinced that UN resolutions put India in a bad place. Unfortunately, today, if UN resolution is to be enforced _en toto_, then it is Pakistan which will have to make the biggest effort. Imagine dismantling the entire military set up spread all over the part of Kashmir that they currently hold, pack their bags and leave. On the other hand India just needs to reduce its force level.



You need to prove your yaps. Again you are just propagating your misplaced beliefs basing on which so run in circles.

Pakistani forces are and would remain present anywhere deemed necessary and this includes areas of GB (our fifth province) and AK whose defence is sanction by the UNCIP to which i have provided ample proof. Which you term 'gibberish' probably because you dont have anything to counter it and also that your toxicity has rendered your eyesight weak.

Your problem was the freedom fighters being supported by Pakistan, well you need to bring up something to support your claim or else it goes down that toxic drain or yours. Contemporary proofs with solid kills would be appreciated, please.


----------



## RollingStones

Omar1984 said:


> India cant keep on sending hundreds of thousands of its troop to Kashmir, how long will India keep on doing this?
> 
> The world is realizing now what is going on in Kashmir. I'm glad Obama is talking about it, the 61 year old dispute must come to an end for both India and Pakistan to move on.
> 
> If there was no Kashmir problem, there would not be any India-Pakistan tensions rising. The center of India-Pakistan problem is Kashmir.



That's what living in a false bubble would mean. Neither the US nor President Obama is remotely interested in a Kashmir solution, only to the extent that Pakistan would move its troops to their Western border. When the US Defense Secretary and the President repeatedly state that India is no threat to Pakistan means that:

a. The Kashmir issue is dead in the US' eyes. There is no single benefit that the US gets by even beginning to solve this issue. The US is not even interested in solving the Chechnya issue, which is far more volatile than Kashmir ever was. In fact the US currently is NOT interested in solving the Middle Eastern crisis either. When Obama appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, we all understood how low on the policy scale, the State Department came for Obama. He did not want Hillary anywhere near him and so he politically exiled her. 
b. India has satisfied the US enough in its handling of Pakistan, that the US thinks that Pakistan is being uselessly India centric.
c. The US thinks that enough time has passed since the Bombay attacks that whatever justices need to be done has been done. 
d. The US thinks that people of loosely sovereign areas are better off in India than in Pakistan, where they are taken advantage of and turned into undesirables. 

If you want to bring the US into the discussion, you should at least be honest about what the US wants. My honest opinion is that Kashmir is a dead issue for the western world and unless you threaten to nuke India or nuke India, it is never going to become alive.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> So you correct a wrong, by doing two more wrongs.
> 
> Seriously, i am not surprised, you are from the US.
> 
> 
> You need to prove your yaps. Again you are just propagating your misplaced beliefs basing on which so run in circles.
> 
> Pakistani forces are and would remain present anywhere deemed necessary and this includes areas of GB (our fifth province) and AK whose defence is sanction by the UNCIP to which i have provided ample proof. Which you term 'gibberish' probably because you dont have anything to counter it and also that your toxicity has rendered your eyesight weak.
> 
> Your problem was the freedom fighters being supported by Pakistan, well you need to bring up something to support your claim or else it goes down that toxic drain or yours. Contemporary proofs with solid kills would be appreciated, please.



Then, you are completely ignorant of how world politics works. I would urge Pakistan to float lets say, a HR violation in Kashmir resolution in the UN, and see how many votes it gets. You can talk all you want and moralize all you want. If you dont take the rest of the world with you, you'll be stuck when all others would have moved on.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> That's what living in a false bubble would mean. Neither the US nor President Obama is remotely interested in a Kashmir solution, only to the extent that Pakistan would move its troops to their Western border. When the US Defense Secretary and the President repeatedly state that India is no threat to Pakistan means that:



What ever does SecDef or POTUS say, wouldnt matter. We have already at many occasions clarified that for us the priority one threat is on our East. i think you probably have forgotten the news piece where the US suggested us to move troops from our Eastern border towards the western front but was out-rightly rejected by Pakistan, and not a single man was moved there.



> a. The Kashmir issue is dead in the US' eyes. There is no single benefit that the US gets by even beginning to solve this issue.


It wont matter, we already know how helpful the US has been to us in our critical times. Thanks, but no thanks. But then may be you need to worry about Kashmir issue as two nuclear armed nations sit eye ball to eye ball over it.



> The US is not even interested in solving the Chechnya issue, which is far more volatile than Kashmir ever was. In fact the US currently is NOT interested in solving the Middle Eastern crisis either. When Obama appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, we all understood how low on the policy scale, the State Department came for Obama. He did not want Hillary anywhere near him and so he politically exiled her.


Yeah, we already know that, dont we? We know you have been held by balls in iraq and afghanistan so you are unable to think straight presently, none of your fault, that's quite natural.



> b. India has satisfied the US enough in its handling of Pakistan, that the US thinks that Pakistan is being uselessly India centric.


Shyt like cold start and two front war have been flying from our East and you tell us it is useless? You people have forgotten the cold war, didnt you?



> c. The US thinks that enough time has passed since the Bombay attacks that whatever justices need to be done has been done.


Well, the justice that already had been done is at par with the amount of proof available/provided, and we dont have any worries over that.


> d. The US thinks that people of loosely sovereign areas are better off in India than in Pakistan, where they are taken advantage of and turned into undesirables.






> If you want to bring the US into the discussion, you should at least be honest about what the US wants. My honest opinion is that Kashmir is a dead issue for the western world and unless you threaten to nuke India or nuke India, it is never going to become alive.


Who cares?

BTW, its you people who want us to go inside NWA, so whose at the receiving end?


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Then, you are completely ignorant of how world politics works. I would urge Pakistan to float lets say, a HR violation in Kashmir resolution in the UN, and see how many votes it gets. You can talk all you want and moralize all you want. If you dont take the rest of the world with you, you'll be stuck when all others would have moved on.



Well it was not us who denied visa to a war criminal and another indian national....


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> Well it was not us who denied visa to a war criminal and another indian national....



Yeah, but its we who also signed a large scale nuclear power treaty with India. In the scale of things, would you rely on actions such as large scale, multi billion dollar treaties suggest or small stuff such as visa denials, which is largely done to show some American rights organizations that the State department still cares for these issues and get them off their backs?


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Yeah, but its we who also signed a large scale nuclear power treaty with India. In the scale of things, would you rely on actions such as large scale, multi billion dollar treaties suggest or small stuff such as visa denials, which is largely done to show some American rights organizations that the State department still cares for these issues and get them off their backs?



First, it the visa was not denied by the US, by Canada.

Ok, so now have the gotten the guts to show your true face by saying that whatever you do is just superficial and just a hogwash. Well, not surprised, international politics work that way, but then i am worried about the american people who claim their basis from freedom, justice and truth! Poor people! 

BTW, arent we people talking Kashmir here?


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> What ever does SecDef or POTUS say, wouldnt matter. We have already at many occasions clarified that for us the priority one threat is on our East. i think you probably have forgotten the news piece where the US suggested us to move troops from our Eastern border towards the western front but was out-rightly rejected by Pakistan, and not a single man was moved there.
> 
> 
> It wont matter, we already know how helpful the US has been to us in our critical times. Thanks, but no thanks. But then may be you need to worry about Kashmir issue as two nuclear armed nations sit eye ball to eye ball over it.
> 
> 
> Yeah, we already know that, dont we? We know you have been held by balls in iraq and afghanistan so you are unable to think straight presently, none of your fault, that's quite natural.
> 
> 
> Shyt like cold start and two front war have been flying from our East and you tell us it is useless? You people have forgotten the cold war, didnt you?
> 
> 
> Well, the justice that already had been done is at par with the amount of proof available/provided, and we dont have any worries over that.
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares?
> 
> BTW, its you people who want us to go inside NWA, so whose at the receiving end?



If you dont care, the leave the US out of Kashmir discussions. Pn Pakistani wars, you cannot accept money from us and then send your own soldiers to fight and die and then claim we are at the receiving end. Either you dont work for us or work for us. You cannot work for us and then complaint about us not being good. If you had refused all our moneys and refused to work, then we can see your locus standi, and we may have even admired your courage. To complain now is rather weak.


----------



## Xeric

Off topic post, ignored.


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> First, it the visa was not denied by the US, by Canada.
> 
> Ok, so now have the gotten the guts to show your true face by saying that whatever you do is just superficial and just a . Well, not surprised, international politics work that way, but then i am worried about the american people who claim their basis from freedom, justice and truth! Poor people!
> 
> BTW, arent we people talking Kashmir here?



Not superficial, but done in ways that overall balances relationship between countries and protects US interests. I mean you wouldnt want us to cut trade with India because Canada refused entry to some bozo, would you? Its like plea bargain - we could ultimately prove you wrong at considerable expense but if you admit upfront you are wrong, we'll reduce your punishment and everyone can move on. You wouldnt call this a superficial exercise, would you? Nothing is absolute in this world. Everything has to be bargained for. No one has unlimited resources.


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> *Pakistani forces are and would remain present anywhere deemed necessary and this includes areas of GB (our fifth province) and AK whose defence is sanction by the UNCIP* to which i have provided ample proof. Which you term 'gibberish' probably because you dont have anything to counter it and also that your toxicity has rendered your eyesight weak.


Can you cite me the resolution or any explanatory letter, where it is mentioned that PA is allowed to 'remain present anywhere deemed necessary' including 'areas of GB and AK'.

Meanwhile, can you please explain how does the freedom of population of the evacuated territories to pursue '_legitimate political activities_' translates into vesting in the GoP, '_the authority to govern these territories_', when GoP itself, is required by UNSC resolution of 13th Aug, 1948 to completely remove '_the tribesmen and Pakistan nationals_' and withdraw all its military from Kashmir. 

Also do explain how PA was supposed to take care of AJK's defense once Pakistan had withdrawn all its nationals and military.


----------



## genmirajborgza786

xeric said:


> Well it was not us who denied visa to a war criminal and another indian national....





xeric said:


> First, it the visa was not denied by the US, by Canada.
> 
> Ok, so now have the gotten the guts to show your true face by saying that whatever you do is just superficial and just a hogwash. Well, not surprised, international politics work that way, but then i am worried about the american people who claim their basis from freedom, justice and truth! Poor people!
> 
> BTW, arent we people talking Kashmir here?





dont try to stretch your nose where it wont fit. We have already appologized to india we have moved on 



> Friday, May 28, 2010 11:33 AM
> 
> Tories apologize to India over visa feud
> Campbell Clark
> 
> The Harper government has issued a groveling apology to India in a spat that began when Canadian visa officers barred several members of the country&#8217;s security agencies from coming here.
> 
> New Delhi had summoned Canada&#8217;s high commissioner to lodge a protest over the rejection of Indians who had worked for its army or intelligence services in the contested Kashmir region &#8211; which the Canadian visa officers termed notoriously violent.
> 
> Immigration Minister Jason Kenney issued a statement Friday saying Canada works closely on security matters with India.
> 
> &#8220;The Government of Canada therefore deeply regrets the recent incident in which letters drafted by public service officials during routine visa refusals to Indian nationals cast false aspersions on the legitimacy of work carried out by Indian defence and security institutions, which operate under the framework of democratic processes and the rule of law,&#8221; Mr. Kenney said in the statement.
> 
> &#8220;This language, or the inaccurate impression it has created, in no way reflects the policy or position of the Government of Canada.&#8221;
> 
> Mr. Kenney said non-political civil servants review visa requests, but the incident showed they have too much latitude. He said the government&#8217;s whole policy on judging whether people should be admitted to Canada is now being reviewed.
> 
> Mr. Kenney&#8217;s own office is already being accused in the Federal Court of Canada of manipulating the same sections of the immigration law to bar controversial British MP George Galloway from entering Canada. He was judged a member of a terror group for leading a &#8220;Viva Palestina&#8221; aid convoy to Hamas-controlled Gaza. Mr. Kenney&#8217;s office denies claims it interfered politically to keep Mr. Galloway out.
> 
> Tories apologize to India over visa feud - The Globe and Mail.
> 
> Visa rejection: Canada reviewing situation
> 
> The Hindu : News / National : Visa rejection: Canada reviewing situation
> 
> Visa row ends: Canada regrets, India says chapter closed
> 
> Visa row ends: Canada regrets, India says chapter closed-Visa Power-Travel-Services-News By Industry-News-The Economic Times
> 
> India, Canada put visa spat behind them
> India, Canada put visa spat behind them



_we are not interested in pakistan administered northern areas & azad kashmir ' nor indian administered jammu & kashmir._


----------



## Xeric

NA and AK are part of Pakistan just like any other province/city and it can send whatever it likes there. None of your business. It is india who needs to prove its illegal occupation or Kashmir and illegitimate claim over NA and AK, not us, so there is nothing that requires a proof, you pathetic attempt to show us Pakistan on the receiving end is hereby ignored.

--------
Anywaz, apart from the above statement there's something i like to share for those who are habitually sickened by delusive contentment:

_*Historically The Gilgit and Northern Areas have never been part of Jammu and Kashmir.*

*In 1935, the British demanded J&K lease to them for 60 years Gilgit town plus most of the Gilgit Agency and the hill-states Hunza, Nagar, Yasin and Ishkuman. The leased region was then treated as part of British India, administered by a Political Agent at Gilgit responsible to Delhi, first through the Resident in J& K and later a British Agent in Peshawar. J& K State no longer kept troops in Gilgit and a force, the Gilgit Scouts, was recruited with British officers and paid for by Delhi.*

On 31 July, the Governor arrived to find &#8220;all the officers of the British Government had opted for service in Pakistan&#8221;. The Gilgit Scouts&#8217; commander, a Major William Brown aged 25, and his adjutant, a Captain Mathieson, planned openly to engineer a coup d&#233;tat against Hari Singh&#8217;s Government. Between August and October, Gilgit was in uneasy calm. At midnight on 31 October 1947, the Governor was surrounded by the Scouts and the next day he was &#8220;arrested&#8221; and a provisional government declared.

Hari Singh&#8217;s nearest forces were at Bunji, 34 miles from Gilgit, a few miles downstream from where the Indus is joined by Gilgit River. The 6th J& K Infantry Battalion there was a mixed Sikh-Muslim unit, typical of the State&#8217;s Army, commanded by a Lt Col. Majid Khan. Bunji controlled the road to Srinagar. Further upstream was Skardu, capital of Baltistan, part of Laddakh District where there was a small garrison.

On 4 November 1947, Brown raised the new Pakistani flag in the Scouts&#8217; lines, and by the third week of November a Political Agent from Pakistan had established himself at Gilgit. Brown had engineered Gilgit and its adjoining states to first secede from J&K, and, after some talk of being independent, had promptly acceded to Pakistan. 

According to Alister Lamb a noted historian of Kashmir, the actions of India have cast several doubts on the article of accession. The events as noted by several Indian historians do not make sense. Recently both the timing of the event as well as the intentions of the Indian National Congress have come under close scrutiny. India&#8217;s claim to accession is in dispute. The U.N. recognized the dispute, and treats Kashmir as disputed territory between India and Pakistan.

According to Alister Lamb, the Northern Areas rose up in revolt against the Dogra rule before the annexation that supposedly was signed between the Dogras and India. This makes them independent of the rest of Kashmir and the accession document does not apply to them. The article of accession was never given to Pakistan or the United Nations. India now claims that the &#8220;article of accession&#8221; is lost if it ever existed. There are several errors in the published version of the article of accession. The dates do not match and show that the Indian forces had moved into Srinagar before the article had been &#8220;signed&#8221;._?Pakistan?s 5th province?: ?Gilgit-Baltistan has no connection to Kashmir? | Pakistan Daily http://independentindian.com/2009/02/18/a-brief-history-of-gilgit/


----------



## Materialistic

Scenario 5,6 are impossible to happen since its impossible for such a small state to independently state to exist in Nuclear Giants with such pushing each other over the map.


----------



## ejaz007

*Singhs Kashmir plan in shambles*

** Progress report says only half of 67 projects sanctioned by Indian prime minister in 2004 completed*

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: While the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh begins his Srinagar visit on Monday, the Prime Ministers Office (PMO) submitted to him an unflattering report on the progress of a Rs 240 billion reconstruction plan the PM announced six years ago to fast-track development in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK).

The report on gross delays on part of the state government in implementing projects under the PMs plan has been prepared by the Delivery Monitoring Unit (DMU).

The unit was set up in the PMO under the PMs Principal Secretary TKA Nair to keep track of the United Progressive Alliance governments flagship programmes.

Completion: The report said that only half of the 67 projects that Singh sanctioned during his two-day trip to Srinagar in November 2004 have so far been completed.

These include the expansion of the economic infrastructure to provide basic services and enhance local employment opportunities for victims of militancy and families uprooted from the Kashmir valley.

Singhs reconstruction plan included a project to bring electricity to all villages in IHK by March 2010, but the state government now says it will only be completed by March 2012.

The DMU report said only 40 percent work had been done until now on the project, for which an agreement was signed between the IHK government and the National Hydro Power Corporation back in 2005.

The state government has noted the concern of the ministry of power regarding slow progress, security and non- availability of manpower, the report said.

The PMs plan included upgradation of the Jammu Medical College to All India Institute of Medical Sciences. The DMU report added that progress on this was so slow that it could not meet the target date.

The Indian government had deposited Rs 27.6 million in 2006-07 for land acquisition required for the Uri-Salamabad-Kamanpost road project, but the land was yet to be handed over to the Border Road Organisation, which was to construct the road up to the Line of Control.

There is no progress since last review dated May 31, 2009. The chief secretary has agreed to review all land acquisition cases. No progress report has been received by the state government, the DMU said.

It also lamented that another road project for providing access to Swalkot was sanctioned at an estimated cost of Rs 1.19 billion, but there was hardly any progress on the project.

Also, the power transmission and distribution network involving 67 schemes (32 grid stations and 35 transmission lines) was facing similar slow progress, the report added.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> NA and AK are part of Pakistan just like any other province/city and it can send whatever it likes there. None of your business. It is india who needs to prove its illegal occupation or Kashmir and illegitimate claim over NA and AK, not us, so there is nothing that requires a proof, you pathetic attempt to show us Pakistan on the receiving end is hereby ignored.


To this I will say the same thing I had said to a friend of yours a while back.

This is called cognitive dissonance. A self-serving version of reality has been drip fed to you by your State and you have convinced yourself that it _is _the_ truth. _So when you are faced with the_ real _reality that completely contradicts your_ perceived _reality, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, for you to rationalize the dichotomy between_ what you perceive it should be _and_ what you see it really is._ Instinctively, you just reject the real reality, out of hand and cling on to your perception, because it is easier for you to rationalize your perception than the dichotomy.



> _*Historically The Gilgit and Northern Areas have never been part of Jammu and Kashmir.*
> 
> *In 1935, the British demanded J&K lease to them for 60 years Gilgit town plus most of the Gilgit Agency and the hill-states Hunza, Nagar, Yasin and Ishkuman. The leased region was then treated as part of British India, administered by a Political Agent at Gilgit responsible to Delhi, first through the Resident in J& K and later a British Agent in Peshawar. J& K State no longer kept troops in Gilgit and a force, the Gilgit Scouts, was recruited with British officers and paid for by Delhi.*
> _?Pakistan?s 5th province?: ?Gilgit-Baltistan has no connection to Kashmir? | Pakistan Daily A Brief History of Gilgit Independent Indian: Work & Life of Dr Subroto Roy


It appears that your appetite for embarrassment is insatiable.

Firstly, Article 2 of the Lease agreement recognizes that Gilgit was part of _dominions of His Highness, the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir_ and undertakes, accordingly to _honour_ the tradition of the land and to hoist _the flag of His-Highness_ at the _official headquarters of the Agency, throughout the year_. It reads:

_In* recognition of the fact that the said territory continues to be included within the dominions of His Highness the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir,* salutes and customary honours shall be paid in the said territory by the administration on the occasion of the birth day of His Highness, Baisakhi, Dussehra, Basant Panchmi and on such other occasions as may be agreed upon by His Highness and the Viceroy and the Governor-General of India. The flag of His-Highness will be flown at the official headquarters of the Agency throughout the year._​
Clearly, except for restricting it, the lease didn't end Maharaja's sovereignty over Gilgit. Also, the fact that the Brits took the lease from the Maharaja and not from any Afghans, Pathans, Sikhs or any pink giraffe under my bed, is an attestation of Maharaja's ownership of Gilgit.

Secondly, the lease agreement was officially terminated on 1st August, 1947, just before the transfer of power and Gilgit reverted back to the Maharaja. So when the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession he had complete ownership of Gilgit and as such the legal rights passed over to India on signing of the Instrument.

Thirdly, even if the lease agreement hadnt been terminated just before the date of transfer of power, it still wouldnt have made any difference, because according to _Section 7(1)(b) of Indian Independence Act, 1947_, all outstanding agreements between the British India and the Princely States stood automatically terminated. 

For an even better and thorough debunking of your amusing claim, you may read this.

So soldier boy, are we done yet?

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## KS

*@ toxic_pus:*

Excellent reply factually refuting all his claims...but surely a reply in vain.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harish

This entire debate with Xeric, stimulating as it has been, has proved to me beyond doubt that all Pakistan really wants is the land of Kashmir. The people of Kashmir are simply a convenient and acceptable front for the true motive in coveting Kashmir. You may couch your excuses and words in any which way, but the facts are indisputable. Kashmir will remain with India. If you are concerned about the people of Kashmir, then you are welcome to those who appreciate your concern. The sentiment on the ground is clear, and will polarize increasingly against you the more you send across your proxies who claim to be freedom fighters, but who have been killing more civilian Kashmiris than they have Indian forces. Pakistan can either come to the table and solve the problem with a solution that involves no loss of face to both nations, or it can continue the path it has been leading to date. Either way, India is prepared and ready. If you feel you have the capability to fight us for and over Kashmir and have demonstrated that in the past, I am sure you no doubt appreciate that we would have the same if not superior capability, as too we have demonstrated in the past. So forget about confrontation with India. Its not worked for you in the past and its off the table for good now. Come forward to work out a solution that does not start on the premise of territorial exchange. Anything else is mere lip service and rhetoric, playing to an increasingly troubled and disillusioned gallery.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> To this I will say the same thing I had said to a friend of yours a while back.
> 
> This is called cognitive dissonance. A self-serving version of &#8216;reality&#8217; has been drip fed to you by your State and you have convinced yourself that it _is _the_ truth. _So when you are faced with the_ real _&#8216;reality&#8217; that completely contradicts your_ perceived _&#8216;reality&#8217;, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, for you to rationalize the dichotomy between_ what you perceive it should be _and_ what you see it really is._ Instinctively, you just reject the real &#8216;reality&#8217;, out of hand and cling on to your perception, because it is easier for you to rationalize your perception than the dichotomy.
> 
> 
> It appears that your appetite for embarrassment is insatiable.



Infact as you have gone immune to to 'embarrassment' you try to cloak it by posting it all over others. As we have also seen that you have been short of logic lately, so you instead of posting any relevant details, resort to these yaps in order to gain cheap popularity. It aint working doc!


> Firstly, Article 2 of the Lease agreement recognizes that Gilgit was part of _&#8216;dominions of His Highness, the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir&#8217;_ and undertakes, accordingly to _&#8216;honour&#8217;_ the tradition of the land and to hoist _&#8216;the flag of His-Highness&#8217;_ at the _&#8216;official headquarters of the Agency, throughout the year&#8217;_. It reads:
> 
> _In* recognition of the fact that the said territory continues to be included within the dominions of His Highness the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir,* salutes and customary honours shall be paid in the said territory by the administration on the occasion of the birth day of His Highness, Baisakhi, Dussehra, Basant Panchmi and on such other occasions as may be agreed upon by His Highness and the Viceroy and the Governor-General of India. The flag of His-Highness will be flown at the official headquarters of the Agency throughout the year._​
> Clearly, except for restricting it, the lease didn't end Maharaja's sovereignty over Gilgit. Also, the fact that the Brits took the lease from the Maharaja and not from any Afghans, Pathans, Sikhs or any pink giraffe under my bed, is an attestation of Maharaja's ownership of Gilgit.
> 
> Secondly, the lease agreement was officially terminated on 1st August, 1947, just before the transfer of power and Gilgit reverted back to the Maharaja. So when the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession he had complete ownership of Gilgit and as such the legal rights passed over to India on signing of the Instrument.
> 
> Thirdly, even if the lease agreement hadn&#8217;t been terminated just before the date of transfer of power, it still wouldn&#8217;t have made any difference, because according to _Section 7(1)(b) of Indian Independence Act, 1947_, all outstanding agreements between the British India and the Princely States stood automatically terminated.
> 
> For an even better and thorough debunking of your amusing claim, you may read this.
> 
> So soldier boy, are we done yet?


Speaking frankly your post doesnt merit a refutation as you already did that by doubting and vacillating betwixt and between the 'termination of the lease', anyway here's what Subroto Roy has to say about the events:
_
The actions of the then-new British Dominion of Pakistan with respect to Gilgit in August-November 1947 were tantamount to ending the status in international law of the old State of Jammu & Kashmir that had originated in 1846. The then-new British Dominion of *India did not ever have de facto control of Gilgit as a result.* Hence, Gilgit never belonged to India. Due to Pakistan&#8217;s action in Gilgit and then later the attack commencing October 22, the old State of J&K disintegrated between August and October 1947 into an ownerless entity in international law. Its territories came to be annexed by military decision by the new Pakistan and new India, and hence we have the LOC being the valid demarcation in international law._

Face-palm!

Apart from above the the following says the same thing but as it comes from an independent source, it might be able to push some sense into you Islamic Republic of Gilgit 1947 (Pakistan)

A closer look at the above mentioned link would also refute some of the claims (especially the one saying: _As far as the formation of an &#8220;Islamic Republic of Gilgit&#8221; in 1947 is concerned it was not recognized by anybody, not even by the government of Pakistan. The latter, however, entered into what came to be known as Karachi Agreement on April 28, 1951)_ as infact, _The Republic came to an end on November 16,1947 with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession_.

Face palm-2!

-----

BTW, let's be clear on this atleast; what exactly have you been trying to prove since the day you landed here in this thread? Is it that once (upon a time) Gilgit was part of J & K or that the 'happening's post 1935 and especially 31 July 1947 by virtue of which Giglit became Pakistan is the point that bothers you? Seriously i find your posts quite intuitionalized!


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

I was just listening to the song ''Regulators'', by Warren G.

Xeric I don't personally know you -- but you were the first person that come to my mind.


to indian --- draw your maps continue the yaps the realities on the ground speak for themselves. You should be the ones taking initiative to solve all your disputes (i stress the plural)

To move forward, you need a good relations with your neighbours. For our own success, we need good relations with neighbours --including the one on the east.

Mr Harish -- Kashmir is a land dispute. Not a dispute over people. Being a Muslim majority region, it is inevitable that we will stand in solidarity to the people there facing injustices. And many injustices have taken place. You already know this fact. India reaps what it sows in Kashmir. It plays dirty politics, practises state sponsored terrorism, deception, manipulation, abuses human rights, and terrorizes the lives of millions. And then when majority in Kashmir is not happy, India whines and cries and offers excuses and justifications for its rogue behaviour. 

Any resistance you meet there is purely Kashmiri phenomenon in pure powder form. Always you are accusing Pakistan of sending militants from our soil; I wont deny that there are no cross border infilitrations; but most of your media and official stories are bullshits.


for God's sakes, you even arrest a Pakistani pigeon and put it in detention center......hysteria and paranoia will only cause you to grow more gray hairs and maintain certain psychological complexes that keep you from ''running smoothly''





any valuable intel from ''pigeon'' ?? Has the serum been administered, and if so, is the little bugger talking yet? 


LOLLLLLLLLLLL

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> I was just listening to the song ''Regulators'', by Warren G.
> 
> Xeric I don't personally know you -- but you were the first person that come to my mind.






> to indian --- draw your maps continue the yaps the realities on the ground speak for themselves. You should be the ones taking initiative to solve all your disputes (i stress the plural)


Infact the most easy thing to do when you yourself cant play is to bar others from playing too. The easiest thing one can do when he cant justify his claim is to post ostentatious replies and earn that cheap acknowledgments from his likes. The easiest thing to do when one cant prove the actual point is to pour in irrelevant BS and instead of discussing the matter at hand, argue over nondescript details!



> To move forward, you need a good relations with your neighbours. For our own success, we need good relations with neighbours --including the one on the east.


We have been trying this since long, but then someone on the east is shrewd enough to find an excuse to jeopardize the entire peace process.


> Mr Harish -- Kashmir is a land dispute. Not a dispute over people. Being a Muslim majority region, it is inevitable that we will stand in solidarity to the people there facing injustices. And many injustices have taken place. You already know this fact. India reaps what it sows in Kashmir. It plays dirty politics, practises state sponsored terrorism, deception, manipulation, abuses human rights, and terrorizes the lives of millions. And then when majority in Kashmir is not happy, India whines and cries and offers excuses and justifications for its rogue behaviour.


What bothers me is the the blatant refusal of crime against humanity that had been commited by india forces in Kashmir, moreover instead of mending ones own house they have the cheeks to tell the freedom fighters not to finger them. Infact the indians have mastered dirty-tactics and we see that evident in every move made by india. They probably think that by extorting the innocents they may subdue the fight against aggression, but they forget (as you very correctly have pointed out) that they would reap what they have always sown!



> Any resistance you meet there is purely Kashmiri phenomenon in pure powder form. Always you are accusing Pakistan of sending militants from our soil; I wont deny that there are no cross border infilitrations; but most of your media and official stories are bullshits.


i think they have forgotten the time when the regular indian forces at the LoC used to turn their faces away from the infiltrating fighters (so that they dont have to engage them - or should i say, the infiltrators should spare their poor lives).




> for God's sakes, you even arrest a Pakistani pigeon and put it in detention center......hysteria and paranoia will only cause you to grow more gray hairs and maintain certain psychological complexes that keep you from ''running smoothly''
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> any valuable intel from ''pigeon'' ?? Has the serum been administered, and if so, is the little bugger talking yet?
> 
> 
> LOLLLLLLLLLLL



And they tell us that GB is not part of Pakistan today


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

like i said, let them keep day-dreaming. They have no locus standi on GB matters, they have no locus standi on Kashmiri affairs.

it's good to dream sometimes. But to be numb and ignore realities, tis a crime!


----------



## KS

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> to indian --- draw your maps continue the yaps the realities on the ground speak for themselves. *You should be the ones taking initiative to solve all your disputes *(i stress the plural)



Sorry not interested...we r fine with the ground realities in Kashmir and we know how to deal with them.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> To move forward, you need a good relations with your neighbours. For our own success, we need good relations with neighbours --including the one on the east.



Absolutely my friend....we need good relations to move forward...*but if that forward growth is at the cost of the territorial integrity of my country...sorry we r not interested in that *"moving forward".
I (whole of India) would not like/let the blood of countless martyrs who spilled their blood in the 4 wars and in terrorist acts go in vain. 



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Mr Harish -- Kashmir is a land dispute. Not a dispute over people. Being a Muslim majority region, it is inevitable that we will stand in solidarity to the people there facing injustices. And many injustices have taken place. You already know this fact. India reaps what it sows in Kashmir. It plays dirty politics, practises state sponsored terrorism, deception, manipulation, abuses human rights, and terrorizes the lives of millions. And then when majority in Kashmir is not happy, India whines and cries and offers excuses and justifications for its rogue behaviour.



Comeon....we all know better..Pakistan has its lifeline (rivers) flowing thru Kashmir and thence controlled by India.
So please dont try to mask ur strategic interest in Kashmir with a benevolent goal.
If so concerned abt ppl of Kashmir pls take note its because of the cross border infiltration the IA is there in Kashmir and hence the "so called" state terrorism,human rights violations etc etc.
Stop supporting cross border infiltration...IA will have no reason to be in Kashmir and hence everything turns out to be good.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Any resistance you meet there is *purely Kashmiri phenomenon* in pure powder form. Always you are accusing Pakistan of sending militants from our soil; I wont deny that there are no cross border infilitrations; but most of your media and official stories are bullshits.



I think LeT,JeM are as Kashmiri as OBL is American...So wats their business in Kashmir..?
And regarding the pure Kashmiri phenomenon thing....I just have one word...Dont get fooled by thinking the whole of Kashmir is Geelani type.

*@ ALL*

P-O-K,NA on the Pak side, J&K on the Indian side are disputed territories whose fate will be sealed thru the referendum wen the time is ripe for it.
Till tat as u guys say P-O-K and NA will be parts of Pakistan and J&K will be part of India.Period.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nihat

> P-O-K,NA on the Pak side, J&K on the Indian side are disputed territories whose fate will be sealed thru the referendum wen the time is ripe for it.



Absolutly not - referrendum was out of the question when the armed insurgency began. All pro-India elements in Kashmir were brutally rooted out , be it Kashmiri pundits or pro-India groups of Muslim origin, the only ones allowed to survive were those who had seperatist agendas or were direct proxies of Pakistan.

Violence and armed movement meant an end to the possibility of referrendum.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Infact as you have gone immune to to 'embarrassment' you try to cloak it by posting it all over others. As we have also seen that you have been short of logic lately, so you instead of posting any relevant details, resort to these yaps in order to gain cheap popularity. It aint working doc!


Not on you, I know. 

Let me answer your last question first.


> BTW, let's be clear on this atleast; what exactly have you been trying to prove since the day you landed here in this thread? Is it that once (upon a time) Gilgit was part of J & K or that the 'happening's post 1935 and especially 31 July 1947 by virtue of which Giglit became Pakistan is the point that bothers you? Seriously i find your posts quite intuitionalized!


I am responding to your very specific claim that any reference to J&K doesnt include GB. For example:


xeric said:


> the fact remains that no independent source, western mapping agencies and international map makers agree with you. They all have been delineating NA and AK in such a way that both of these areas shown OUT of J & K. *So if someone want to prove the opposite he needs to quote a map that i posted in my post # 1082, but then it should be from a credible and independent source and not some BR shyt*!


Since you wanted a map, I had given you one right from the horses mouth  _The Imperial Gazetteer of India (1908)_. You found it so hard to explain away that you started narrating history from the troglodyte era. 

Anyway, my point is that since Pakistan considers entire Kashmir as something pending final solution, GB, being a part of Kashmir, is therefore, not yet a part of Pakistan. This in turn means that by virtue of Instrument of Accession, legally it _still_ belongs to India, irrespective of history of Kashmir, during the era of troglodytes. Now if Pakistan wants to reach a final solution as envisaged by UN resolutions, GB must also come under plebiscite. But before that, the preconditions to plebiscites, viz complete withdrawal of Pak nationals and army from GB has to be performed in the same manner as it is to be performed in AJK.

I am least bothered by what goes on in GB and frankly I wouldnt give an ants azz if Pak incorporates GB as part of Pakistan. But when Pakistanis, such as yourself, scream and shout about plebiscite as per UN resolutions I feel like reminding them that it would put Pakistanis in greater discomfort than Indians.

Now coming back to your claim that GB _was_ never a part of Kashmir and by extension India do not have any locus standi on GB. Before that let me remind you that on 31st July, 1947, Pakistan didnt exist for GB to be part of it. Amusing part is that you dont know the date of your countrys birth and here you are debating about Kashmirs history.



> Speaking frankly your post doesnt merit a refutation as you already did that by doubting and vacillating betwixt and between the 'termination of the lease'...


It was you who referred to that lease as a last ditch attempt to make your point that Gilgit wasnt a part of Kashmir, at least not at the time of transfer of power. Little did you know that the lease agreement explicitly recognized the Maharajas sovereignty over Gilgit and the Brits had eventually retroceded Gilgit to Maharaja right before transfer of power. You would refute if you knew how to.


> anyway here's what Subroto Roy has to say about the events:
> _
> The actions of the then-new British Dominion of Pakistan with respect to Gilgit in August-November 1947 were tantamount to ending the status in international law of the old State of Jammu & Kashmir that had originated in 1846. The then-new British Dominion of *India did not ever have de facto control of Gilgit as a result.* Hence, Gilgit never belonged to India. Due to Pakistans action in Gilgit and then later the attack commencing October 22, the old State of J&K disintegrated between August and October 1947 into an ownerless entity in international law. Its territories came to be annexed by military decision by the new Pakistan and new India, and hence we have the LOC being the valid demarcation in international law._


Mr Roy is right that India never had a _de facto_ control over Gilgit. But then India didnt have _de facto_ control over any part of Kashmir between August and October, 1947. On and from 26th Oct, 1947 India got _de jure_ ownership of Kashmir by virtue of Instrument of accession. However it was only upto the current LoC that India could establish _de facto_ control and the rest of Kashmir to the west of LoC has remained _de jure_. This is actually a strawman argument since no Indian claims _de facto_ ownership and control of NA and AJK. It is the _de jure_ ownership that India claims of.



> Apart from above the the following says the same thing but as it comes from an independent source, it might be able to push some sense into you Islamic Republic of Gilgit 1947 (Pakistan)
> 
> A closer look at the above mentioned link would also refute some of the claims (especially the one saying: _As far as the formation of an Islamic Republic of Gilgit in 1947 is concerned it was not recognized by anybody, not even by the government of Pakistan. The latter, however, entered into what came to be known as Karachi Agreement on April 28, 1951)_ as infact, _The Republic came to an end on November 16,1947 with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession_.


This is called shooting in the foot, just like your reference to that lease. I will come to it shortly. If simply taking over the area from the current owner, who had forcefully taken over that piece of land, is enough to be considered as part of Pakistan, then how come acceding on the basis of Instrument of accession, signed by the current owner of Kashmir and vetted by the largest opposition party in Kashmir, is not a valid way of acceding Kashmir to India? Both the cases are principally same  taken over from the owner without a plebiscite (although in Indias case it is based on a recognized legal set up).

Nevertheless, it is again invalid argument, since the _de jure_ ownership had already passed on to India on 26th Oct, 1947 and the calendar I follow shows Oct to precede Nov.

Now about foot shooting. The article opens thus:

_In August 1947, the Governor-General of the Union of India, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, negotiated with the Maharaja of Kashmir, Hari Singh, the accession of *his domain* to the Union of India, *that included the Northern Area, known commonly as Gilgit-Baltistan*, which were assigned by the British only recently to the Maharaja of Kashmir._​
This is the second time I have used your source to disprove your claim that Gilgit-Baltistan is/was not a part of J&K. 

If I start facepalming, I have to do that for so many times I might just end up hurting my face. So pardon me if instead of facepalming I do a whole lot of ROFLOL.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Karthic Sri said:


> Sorry not interested...we r fine with the ground realities in Kashmir and we know how to deal with them.



what is this nonsense? If everything is fine, then why are the issues not solved or addressed yet?


''sorry not interested''







> Absolutely my friend....we need good relations to move forward...*but if that forward growth is at the cost of the territorial integrity of my country...sorry we r not interested in that *"moving forward".



the rebellion and freedom fighting are local phenomenon. Shed away with that burden!



> I (whole of India) would not like/let the blood of countless martyrs who spilled their blood in the 4 wars and in terrorist acts go in vain.



yes they fought for their freedom. Glad you recognize the price of the blood of Kashmiri freedom-seekers. 

hopefully the curfews, targetted killings and other forms of terrorism and hard tactics will cease once you give Kashmiris the rights to what is absolutely theirs.



> Comeon....we all know better..Pakistan has its lifeline (rivers) flowing thru Kashmir and thence controlled by India.



tis true! So stop building dams and limiting our water. As it is our ''lifeline'' we will do anything to fight for our survivial.


anything..... 




> So please dont try to mask ur strategic interest in Kashmir with a benevolent goal.



that would be inhuman, and a violation of our religion and our culture and upbringing. 



> If so concerned abt ppl of Kashmir pls take note its because of the cross border infiltration the IA is there in Kashmir and hence the "so called" state terrorism,human rights violations etc etc.
> Stop supporting cross border infiltration...IA will have no reason to be in Kashmir and hence everything turns out to be good.



indians are always exaggerating these infiltrations. Even bird cannot fly without being harassed.




> I think LeT,JeM are as Kashmiri as OBL is American...So wats their business in Kashmir..?



I have no information on these groups. My point is that civil disobedience is considered terrorism in Kashmir, and your state condones heavy handed tactics on the peoples of Kashmir.



> And regarding the pure Kashmiri phenomenon thing....I just have one word...Dont get fooled by thinking the whole of Kashmir is Geelani type.



I do think majority of Kashmiris do not want to be part of hindustan.



(by the way, that was 12 words )




> P-O-K,NA on the Pak side, J&K on the Indian side are disputed territories whose fate will be sealed thru the referendum wen the time is ripe for it



indians will just find a distraction to stray the ''audience'' away from referendum. Why? Because you know the ruling would not be in your favour.





> Till tat as u guys say P-O-K and NA will be parts of Pakistan and J&K will be part of India.Period.



J&K were never parts of hindustan to begin with. Like us, you didnt even have a country until 1947 -- a day after we got ours


----------



## psychedelic_renegade

> what is this nonsense? If everything is fine, then why are the issues not solved or addressed yet?
> 
> 
> ''sorry not interested''



Indeed things weren't perfect but not so messed up like today until u tried to replicate an Afghanistan in Kashmir! death by 1000 cuts, wasn't it the call?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

psychedelic_renegade said:


> Indeed things weren't perfect but not so messed up like today until u tried to replicate an Afghanistan in Kashmir! death by 1000 cuts, wasn't it the call?



baseless emotional propaganda

come back when u are ready for proper discussion


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> Not on you, I know.
> 
> Let me answer your last question first.
> 
> I am responding to your very specific claim that any reference to J&K doesn&#8217;t include GB. For example:
> 
> Since you wanted a map, I had given you one right from the horse&#8217;s mouth &#8211; _The Imperial Gazetteer of India (1908)_. You found it so hard to explain away that you started narrating history from the troglodyte era.


You are a thickhead as ever. If i would pick up a map of the 1700s it would still probably show the 13 Colonies under the English control!

So, welcome to the real world! Its 2010!!

Face-palm.



> Anyway, my point is that since Pakistan considers entire Kashmir as something &#8216;pending final solution&#8217;, GB, being a part of Kashmir, is therefore, not yet a part of Pakistan. This in turn means that by virtue of Instrument of Accession, legally it _still_ belongs to India, irrespective of history of Kashmir, during the era of troglodytes. Now if Pakistan wants to reach a &#8216;final solution&#8217; as envisaged by UN resolutions, GB must also come under plebiscite. But before that, the preconditions to plebiscites, viz complete withdrawal of Pak nationals and army from GB has to be performed in the same manner as it is to be performed in AJK.


You are again just shyting out just anything that land on your head.

Pakistan dont have 'entire Kashmir' phrase in its dictionary. It's just Kashmir that includes the present occupied territory of J & K by the indian army that commits atrocities at a vast rate and that too on daily basis.

Two, GB is something that was part of Pakistan since 16 Nov '47.

Three, you can frame, varnish and bullet proof (like that of Mona Lisa's) that I of A (a BS) that too which india found difficult to 'create' (and if for instance we assume that it was real), because on 1 Nov '97 Gilgit was an Independent Republic and just after 16 days it was in safe (Pakistani) hands. So much for the I of A. Keep rolling and playing with THE paper 

Four, Pakistan have no tribals and freedom fighters anywhere in "Kashmir", however it would keep on providing the necessary assistance in terms of Pakistan Armed Forces to its provinces and the AK (as provided in UNCIP.)



> I am least bothered by what goes on in GB and frankly I wouldn&#8217;t give an ant&#8217;s azz if Pak incorporates GB as part of Pakistan. But when Pakistanis, such as yourself, scream and shout about plebiscite as per UN resolutions I feel like reminding them that it would put Pakistanis in greater discomfort than Indians.


So now you feel defeated, get up boy we still have to go a long way.

As for the plebiscite, well it may not happen (though it must happen), but then you can continue to kill and rape and get killed and rape (use your imagination) in Kashmir.



> Now coming back to your claim that GB _was_ never a part of Kashmir and by extension India do not have any locus standi on GB.


It was Abu 

Take another sip of that something you were drinking 



> Before that let me remind you that on 31st July, 1947, Pakistan didn&#8217;t exist for GB to be part of it. Amusing part is that you don&#8217;t know the date of your country&#8217;s birth and here you are debating about Kashmir&#8217;s history.


What a d!c...

Since 31st July '47 the process which ultimately resulted into the inclusion of Gilgit in Pakistan had started. As you have a weak memory and a thicker skull, here let me help you out (i hope you could figure out at what point of time during this 'process did india born):

~ 31st July '47 - Hari Singh&#8217;s Governor arrived to find &#8220;all the officers of the British Government had opted for service in Pakistan&#8221;

~ The Gilgit Scouts&#8217; commander, a Major William Brown, and his adjutant, a Captain Mathieson, planned openly to engineer a coup d&#233;tat against Hari Singh&#8217;s Government.

~ Between August and October - Gilgit was in uneasy calm. (india, Pakistan take birth)

~ At midnight on 31 October 1947 - the Governor was surrounded by the Scouts and the next day he was &#8220;arrested&#8221; and a provisional government declared. *(I of A goes for a SIX!!! )*

~ On November 1,1947 - the Islamic Republic of Gilgit was proclaimed with Raja Shah Rais Khan, (member of the local ruling dynasty) as its president. The flag of the new republic was raised over the governor's mansion and the new government claimed the area of Gilgit-Baltistan, several princely states, Kargil and Ladakh as its territory. with the aim of joining the Dominion of Pakistan. 

~ On 4 November 1947 - Brown raised the new Pakistani flag in the Scouts&#8217; lines.

~ November 16,1947 - with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession.

*~ 16 Nov 1947 onwards - Face-palm!
*


> It was you who referred to that lease as a last ditch attempt to make your point that Gilgit wasn&#8217;t a part of Kashmir, at least not at the time of transfer of power. Little did you know that the lease agreement explicitly recognized the Maharaja&#8217;s sovereignty over Gilgit and the Brits had eventually retroceded Gilgit to Maharaja right before transfer of power. You would refute if you knew how to.


It was due on 1 Aug, did it happen?



> Mr Roy is right that India never had a _de facto_ control over Gilgit.



You got that right.

And here goes your de jure down the gutter:



> But then India didn&#8217;t have _de facto_ control over any part of Kashmir between August and October, 1947. On and from 26th Oct, 1947 India got _de jure_ ownership of Kashmir by virtue of Instrument of accession. However it was only upto the current LoC that India could establish _de facto_ control and the rest of Kashmir to the west of LoC has remained _de jure_. This is actually a strawman argument since no Indian claims _de facto_ ownership and control of NA and AJK. It is the _de jure_ ownership that India claims of.



First, i have already 'praised' this I of A for quite some time now. For the latest one just see above.

Ok, having for an instance assumed that the I of A was something of the real world (which was infact 'lost' and then magically recreated - as per Alitar Lamb), india got the owner of Kashmir as it is of today less there was no AK at that time. Gilgit was at that time under rebellion and soon after it was an independent entity. The I of A can go take a walk as Gilgit got itself liberated and was the rest of Kashmir OCCUPIED by india. If india could play jungle jungle, so did we, infact the jungle jungle thing stands guud for india only as the struggle in Gilgit was indigenous and that in the REST of Kashmir was from and oppressor, aggressor and occupant!

So much for the the de jure - face palm combo!




> This is called shooting in the foot, just like your reference to that lease. I will come to it shortly. If simply &#8216;taking over&#8217; the area from the current &#8216;owner&#8217;, who had forcefully taken over that piece of land, is enough to be considered as part of Pakistan, then how come acceding on the basis of Instrument of accession, signed by the current owner of Kashmir and vetted by the largest opposition party in Kashmir, is not a valid way of acceding Kashmir to India? Both the cases are principally same &#8211; &#8216;taken over&#8217; from the &#8216;owner&#8217; without a plebiscite (although in India&#8217;s case it is based on a recognized legal set up).
> 
> Nevertheless, it is again invalid argument, since the _de jure_ ownership had already passed on to India on 26th Oct, 1947 and the calendar I follow shows Oct to precede Nov.


Above, is something palaver and intellectually vacuous; ignored!



> Now about foot shooting. The article opens thus:
> 
> _&#8216;In August 1947, the Governor-General of the Union of India, Lord Mountbatten of Burma, negotiated with the Maharaja of Kashmir, Hari Singh, the accession of *his domain* to the Union of India, *that included the Northern Area, known commonly as Gilgit-Baltistan*, which were assigned by the British only recently to the Maharaja of Kashmir.&#8217;_​
> This is the second time I have used your source to disprove your claim that Gilgit-Baltistan is/was not a part of J&K.




Like i said you are such a cherry picking anal-retentionist that you would even pick up a comma that would suite the indian dream dwelling claims and post/reproduce it with all the pomp and shine that idiots among here would start thanking you profoundly, but it doesnt come handy always, here allow me to offer you another facepalm. The SAME article ends thus:

_On November 1,1947 the Islamic Republic of Gilgit was proclaimed with Raja Shah Rais Khan, (member of the local ruling dynasty) as its president. The flag of the new republic was raised over the governor's mansion and the new government claimed the area of Gilgit-Baltistan, several princely states, Kargil and Ladakh as its territory. with the aim of joining the Dominion of Pakistan. The Republic came to an end on November 16,1947 with the arrival of the Pakistani Agent, Sardar Mohammad Alam, who took the area into Pakistani possession.​_


> If I start facepalming, I have to do that for so many times I might just end up hurting my face. So pardon me if instead of facepalming I do a whole lot of ROFLOL.


You mean like this:  ..??

Go ahead, may be this exercise could make your brain twitch!


--------


BTW, ooooo.. it looks so guud when we run in circles....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RollingStones

Nihat said:


> Absolutly not - referrendum was out of the question when the armed insurgency began. All pro-India elements in Kashmir were brutally rooted out , be it Kashmiri pundits or pro-India groups of Muslim origin, the only ones allowed to survive were those who had seperatist agendas or were direct proxies of Pakistan.
> 
> Violence and armed movement meant an end to the possibility of referrendum.



Well, actually you have to go before to the very genesis of the UN resolutions themselves. There is an unwritten rule in International Law, akin to the Statuette of Limitations. If you dont act upon a resolution or a treaty within some years, then the treaty or the resolution dies. It can be established in Law that neither Pakistan nor India intended to act upon the UN resolutions and therefore the resolutions are void. This type of judgment is a well established concept in law. Unfortunately, for Pakistan, it has failed to establish a legal intent to pursue the UN resolutions and therefore it has unwittingly contributed to it becoming void. I am reminded of other international treaties that Pakistan was about to lose - maritime rights and orbital slots for satellites. Pakistan needs to get international law professionals in its government. So, does India. No point crying over spilt milk.


----------



## Xeric

*indians are always exaggerating these infiltrations. Even bird cannot fly without being harassed.*


----------



## karan.1970

In my view, the future of Kashmir for a foreseeable future is exactly what its present is. 

There is a small percentage of people who are screaming for separation from India hoping for a more prominant role/position in politics than what they can ever dream of while J&K stays as one of the states of India

Pakistan in large part, as a part of its over all direction of increasing control over the strategic Kashmir region is supporting the above in expectation that it would have a significantly higher influence in an independent Kashmir than India. This has an added high of trying and avenge 1971

India on its part is not interested in any discussion that changes ground realities in terms of territorial ownership. India while maintaing the claim on Azad(so called) Kashmir and GB areas, has offered to accept the LoC as IB which has not yet found any takers in Pakistan. 

Pakistan based Non State actor groups  continue to engage Indian armed forces in a guerilla war of attrition. Lately it seems that IA is gaining an upper hand but that is a fluid situation


All this while the general population of Kashmir who like any other comman man of India or Pakistan, is most interested in living a peaceful troublefree and economically stable life (whether in India, in Pakistan or in an independent country) is getting crushed between the rivaly of the 2 nations. He is targetted sometimes by the Pakistan based terrorists and sometimes by IA (accidently or by some rotten apples in the Army).

In reality neither India nor Pakistan is anyway near exhaustion in this war of attrition, except that most Indians today hope that the claims of Pakistan about India doing a tit-for-tat in NWFP and Balochistan are really true and India is paying Pakistan back in the same coin.

So unless an event of immense magnitude changes this stalemate or there comes a bigger crisis where the stalemate on Kashmir is broken by one of the sides as a quid pro quo to a concession on the said crisis, the Future of Kashmir does not seem any different than present. Except in a few years there will be a different set of people taking this arguement forward on this forum


----------



## RollingStones

karan.1970 said:


> In my view, the future of Kashmir for a foreseeable future is exactly what its present is.
> 
> There is a small percentage of people who are screaming for separation from India hoping for a more prominant role/position in politics than what they can ever dream of while J&K stays as one of the states of India
> 
> Pakistan in large part, as a part of its over all direction of increasing control over the strategic Kashmir region is supporting the above in expectation that it would have a significantly higher influence in an independent Kashmir than India. This has an added high of trying and avenge 1971
> 
> India on its part is not interested in any discussion that changes ground realities in terms of territorial ownership. India while maintaing the claim on Azad(so called) Kashmir and GB areas, has offered to accept the LoC as IB which has not yet found any takers in Pakistan.
> 
> Pakistan based Non State actor groups  continue to engage Indian armed forces in a guerilla war of attrition. Lately it seems that IA is gaining an upper hand but that is a fluid situation
> 
> 
> All this while the general population of Kashmir who like any other comman man of India or Pakistan, is most interested in living a peaceful troublefree and economically stable life (whether in India, in Pakistan or in an independent country) is getting crushed between the rivaly of the 2 nations. He is targetted sometimes by the Pakistan based terrorists and sometimes by IA (accidently or by some rotten apples in the Army).
> 
> In reality neither India nor Pakistan is anyway near exhaustion in this war of attrition, except that most Indians today hope that the claims of Pakistan about India doing a tit-for-tat in NWFP and Balochistan are really true and India is paying Pakistan back in the same coin.
> 
> So unless an event of immense magnitude changes this stalemate or there comes a bigger crisis where the stalemate on Kashmir is broken by one of the sides as a quid pro quo to a concession on the said crisis, the Future of Kashmir does not seem any different than present. Except in a few years there will be a different set of people taking this arguement forward on this forum



But that doesnt mean India cant improve things in Kashmir. One of the things the Indian police in Kashmir need to be educated on is how to make arrests. The police in India still doesnt get it that making an arrest means cuffing that person and preventing that person from carrying out activities against the law. It does not involve beating that person or treating them unfairly or disrespectfully. After seeing some of the pictures in Indian Kashmir, I have to say that police there need a course on how to cuff, how to get a prisoner into a vehicle and remove them from the scene as quickly as possible. You could perhaps use a taser or something to immobilize a person if he or she resists arrest. How can you beat that person? That's disrespectful and violates the fundamental rights of that person.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## karan.1970

^^ Absolutely valid point. Despite what most on this forum would like to believe, there has been improvements. There never has been such public exposures of the occasional misdeeds of sec forces as you see now. And your point on improvement in police procedures is so true. And not only in Kashmir but whole of India...


----------



## Nihat

If Pak ever desires any sort of peace in the valley and when it gets tired of playing little proxy games, I believe they will approach India on their own and accept LoC as IB.

There is incredible futility in engaging Pak in meaningful dialouge right now. India just ought to concentrate on Internal security of J&K and rapid development of state economy and Infrastructure.

Negotiation can bear meaningful result only from a position of streangth and India is in one right now with Terrorism at an ll time low, US being a so called "strategic ally" of India and a far away stance from Cold war days, Russia as always backing India and China mantaining a stance of Non-Interference.

In has a greater voice and power at UN forums too and is not going to be bullied around into accepting anything. So in theory, India shuld just turn a deaf yr. to Pak and keep nodding along with the oft repating line of constructive engagement.

Pakistan will accept the obvious when it feels like.It' Not India's problem anymore.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> You are a thickhead as ever. If i would pick up a map of the 1700s it would still probably show the 13 Colonies under the English control!
> 
> So, welcome to the real world! Its 2010!!
> 
> Face-palm.


The transfer of power happened on the basis of British maps of early 20th Century and post 1860 there hadn&#8217;t been any major change in geo-political structure of Kashmir. So if one intends to figure out what constituted J&K in 1947, the map of 1908 is more relevant than a map of 1700, if at all you can find one. 

Anyway, instead of replying to the rest of your jibber jabber how about I post a map from the cartographic section of UN depicting the entire J & K as on *2005*. (I should have done that long time back ) For the original pdf file click here. For the *2009* version, that shows UNMOGIP deployment, click here.







Note:

1. The label &#8216;Jammu and Kashmir&#8217; is affixed in a way to cover the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir.

2. AJK is not shown separately.

3. Pakistan, India and J & K are separately labeled, as in 3 separate entities, without indicating which country controls which part or if J & K is a &#8216;disputed&#8217; territory. It simply indicates the LoC as per Shimla Agreement and mentions that _&#8216;the final status of J & K has not yet been agreed upon by the parties&#8217;_. This is a clear indication that UN considers GB to be an integral part of J & K, pending &#8216;final status&#8217;.

4. The map completely ignores the Chinese held territories of Aksai Chin and Saksam Valley.

Given the Pakistani penchant for making unprotected love with UN resolutions at the slightest hint of opportunity, this should ideally settle the issue of whether GB comes under the UN envisaged plebiscite or not. However, I am pretty sure our soldier boy will manage to amuse us a little bit more.

Lemme grab my coke and popcorn...

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## KS

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> what is this nonsense? If everything is fine, then why are the issues not solved or addressed yet?
> 
> ''sorry not interested''



That means we r *not interested in a solution that compromises our territorial integrity* and we know very well how to deal with the present situation.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the rebellion and freedom fighting are local phenomenon. Shed away with that burden!



Local phenomenon ..my foot.
The only local(that too partial) indigenous movement is the Hizb and that too has been considerably weakened by the recent killings of their commanders and they want talks.
The only active group that is engaged now in cross border activities in LeT and as i said it is as Kashmiri as Osama is American.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes they fought for their freedom. Glad you recognize the price of the blood of Kashmiri freedom-seekers.



Yeah sure we have to respect the blood of the Hindu pundits,the pro-India Muslims too that have been shed by the terrorists.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> hopefully the curfews, targetted killings and other forms of terrorism and hard tactics will cease once you give Kashmiris the rights to what is absolutely theirs.



I dont know wat ur speaking about since the Kashmiris already have wat every other Indian has...sometimes they even get more benefits due to Article 370 than me ,an ordinary Indian.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> tis true! So stop building dams and limiting our water. As it is our ''lifeline'' we will do anything to fight for our survivial.
> anything.....



Thanx for acknowledging.So from now on No more rapes,state-terrorism,azaadi,Kashmiri aspirations etc,etc in the discussion.
Pakistan is purely interested in the strategic objective of securing its water resources and India is engaged(till now sucessfully) in denying Pakistan that goal and *will do anything in the future for that.*




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> indians are always exaggerating these infiltrations. Even bird cannot fly without being harassed.



I think u being a think tank definitely know better .




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> I have no information on these groups. My point is that civil disobedience is considered terrorism in Kashmir, and your state condones heavy handed tactics on the peoples of Kashmir.



U have no information on those groups...duh not surprising.
Similary we dont know wat u r talking abt (state-terrorism,human rights violations,rapings etc).
Think for a moment ..if civil disobediance was considered terrorism Geelani would not be still alive shouting his stupid slogans.He would have been done away long back.
U would not be seeing these shutdowns,bandhs etc in Kashmir every now and then.

State terrorism is wat Israel does in Gaza. (though their reasons are different).



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> I do think majority of Kashmiris do not want to be part of hindustan.



Then ur thinking wrong my friend.Jammu and Ladakh wants to be India and i think u would agree with me on that.
As for the valley even though they m,ight not want to be with India..neither do they want to be with Pakistan.

Proof: the recently done poll wich said only 2&#37; (Geelani and his cohorts)want to join Pak.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> indians will just find a distraction to stray the ''audience'' away from referendum. Why? Because you know the ruling would not be in your favour.



Ruling in our favour/not in our favour is a second thing.
The primary question is why the heck we should even go for that ruling.
The instrument of accession was signed to India and we go by that.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> J&K were never parts of hindustan to begin with. Like us, you didnt even have a country until 1947 -- a day after we got ours



watever makes u sleep peacefully.We may not have been a nation politically...but spiritually we were always one.


----------



## toxic_pus

An addendum to my previous reply


xeric said:


> Pakistan dont have 'entire Kashmir' phrase in its dictionary. It's just Kashmir that includes the present occupied territory of J & K by the indian army that commits atrocities at a vast rate and that too on daily basis.
> 
> Two, GB is something that was part of Pakistan since 16 Nov '47.
> 
> Three, you can frame, varnish and bullet proof (like that of Mona Lisa's) that I of A (a BS) that too which india found difficult to 'create' (and if for instance we assume that it was real), because on 1 Nov '97 Gilgit was an Independent Republic and just after 16 days it was in safe (Pakistani) hands. So much for the I of A. Keep rolling and playing with THE paper


Article 6 of Sino-Pakistan Frontier Agreement, 1963 (by virtue of which Pakistan gifted Saksam Valley to Chin) states:

_The two parties have agreed that *after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute* between Pakistan and India, *the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations with the Government of the People&#8217;s Republic of China* on the boundary as described in Article Two of the present agreement, so as to sign a formal boundary treaty *to replace the present agreement*, provided that *in the event of the sovereign authority being Pakistan, the provisions of the present agreement and of the aforesaid protocol shall be maintained* in the formal boundary treaty to be signed between the People&#8217;s Republic of China and Pakistan.​_
The wording of this article clearly indicates that Pakistan envisages a possibility of change in possession of GB and in the event the 'sovereignty' passes to India after 'settlement of the Kashmir dispute', the current agreement shall lapse and new negotiations with China would have to be reopened. This means Pakistan recognizes, that it has no claim to 'sovereignty' over land from which Saksam Valley had been carved out, and is in fact subject to 'settlement' along with 'settlement of Kashmir dispute'. 

Of course, the agreement is null and void, for being _ex parte_, but it does reflect Pakistan's position on GB, circa 1963.

Game, set and match....


----------



## rubyjackass

Nihat said:


> If Pak ever desires any sort of peace in the valley and when it gets tired of playing little proxy games, I believe they will approach India on their own and accept LoC as IB.
> 
> There is incredible futility in engaging Pak in meaningful dialouge right now. India just ought to concentrate on Internal security of J&K and rapid development of state economy and Infrastructure.
> 
> Negotiation can bear meaningful result only from a position of streangth and India is in one right now with Terrorism at an ll time low, US being a so called "strategic ally" of India and a far away stance from Cold war days, Russia as always backing India and China mantaining a stance of Non-Interference.
> 
> In has a greater voice and power at UN forums too and is not going to be bullied around into accepting anything. So in theory, India shuld just turn a deaf yr. to Pak and keep nodding along with the oft repating line of constructive engagement.
> 
> Pakistan will accept the obvious when it feels like.It' Not India's problem anymore.


Exactly what I think, I mean to the last letter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Karthic Sri said:


> That means we r *not interested in a solution that compromises our territorial integrity* *and we know very well how to deal with the present situation.:*agree:



do you? 




> Local phenomenon ..my foot.
> The only local(that too partial) indigenous movement is the Hizb and that too has been considerably weakened by the recent killings of their commanders and they want talks.



Every year, Kashmiris on Pakistani & indian-occupied sides raise a black flag on August 15 and 27 October. To the standard indian, any form of dissent is called terrorism (learning from the israilys).

it is fashionable for hindustan to talk about infiltrators and terrorists; but like i said, it's a purely local phenomenon. I condemn any attack on civilians, but your forces have suppressed Kashmiris on so many occasions. It is justified if they encounter resistance from the freedom fighters.



> The only active group that is engaged now in cross border activities in LeT and as i said it is as Kashmiri as Osama is American.



no such group exists



> Yeah sure we have to respect the blood of the Hindu pundits,the pro-India Muslims too that have been shed by the terrorists.



pro-india Muslims? LoL. The "Muslims" who want it to be apart of hindustan are nothing but nationalist idiots brainwashed and paid by hindu.

Yes the demographics have changed. I have little sympathy for these so called hindu pundits when Muslim Kashmiris who always did dominate the region are oppressed by your side, and their political representatives are always being placed under house-arrest; including the Hurriyet members. Spare me the crap.



> I dont know wat ur speaking about since the Kashmiris already have wat every other Indian has...sometimes they even get more benefits due to Article 370 than me ,an ordinary Indian.



what every other indian has? do you speak as a common indian person? Because the common indian doesnt have much, sir.






> Thanx for acknowledging.So from now on No more rapes,state-terrorism,azaadi,Kashmiri aspirations etc,etc in the discussion.
> Pakistan is purely interested in the strategic objective of securing its water resources and India is engaged(till now sucessfully) in denying Pakistan that goal and *will do anything in the future for that.*



hindustan will cave in eventually, when is most convenient for us (and them too)




> U have no information on those groups...duh not surprising.
> Similary we dont know wat u r talking abt (state-terrorism,human rights violations,rapings etc).



pictures speak thousand words































> Think for a moment ..if civil disobediance was considered terrorism Geelani would not be still alive shouting his stupid slogans.He would have been done away long back.





how many times has he been placed under house arrest and 'detention' since, say, 2005?




> State terrorism is wat Israel does in Gaza. (though their reasons are different).



The Palestinians are demanding freedom and an America-backed israel is denying the right. Kashmiris just ask for a referendum, and you deny them this right. Your mr. nehru is tossing and turning in his grave.




> Then ur thinking wrong my friend.Jammu and Ladakh wants to be India and i think u would agree with me on that.



I don't.



> As for the valley even though they m,ight not want to be with India..neither do they want to be with Pakistan.



mixed views on a difficult subject. 

by the way, you can replace ''might'' with ''without a doubt''



> Proof: the recently done poll wich said only 2% (Geelani and his cohorts)want to join Pak.



if this ''poll'' is to be believed (and assuming 4,000 respondents were wisely chosen) ---1/5 of the population in J&K believes that violence and uprising is the solution 




> The instrument of accession was signed to India and we go by that.



and undone by your nehru who himself called for plebiscite, as demanded by our Quaid-e-Azam




> watever makes u sleep peacefully.We may not have been a nation politically...but spiritually we were always one.



that's got to be the gayest thing i've ever read..

spiritually my ***. Your spirituality helped stop genocide of Muslims Sikhs and Christians --all of whom you called hindustany

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KS

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> do you?



Going by the recent news I think we do. 

LeT commander feels the heat, seeks Pakistan return




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Every year, Kashmiris on Pakistani & indian-occupied sides raise a black flag on August 15 and 27 October. To the standard indian, any form of dissent is called terrorism (learning from the israilys).
> 
> it is fashionable for hindustan to talk about infiltrators and terrorists; but like i said, it's a purely local phenomenon. I condemn any attack on civilians, but your forces have suppressed Kashmiris on so many occasions. It is justified if they encounter resistance from the freedom fighters.



As much it is fashionable in Pakistan to attribute RAW to all ur ills it is as much in India but much more substantiated.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> no such group exists



Duh...why am i not surprised..?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> pro-india Muslims? LoL. The "Muslims" who want it to be apart of hindustan are nothing but *nationalist idiots* brainwashed and paid by hindu.



Nationalist idiots.....

so do u think the 140 million odd in India still root for pakistan..?

if so ...sorry for arguing with u...nothing can cure u.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Yes the demographics have changed. I have little sympathy for these so called hindu pundits when Muslim Kashmiris who always did dominate the region are oppressed by your side, and their political representatives are always being placed under house-arrest; including the Hurriyet members. Spare me the crap.



wen ur so straight faced in saying that u dont have sympathy for those pundits who were hounded out of their home by these blood thirsty terrorists....i dont give a shyt to the other community living in Kashmir.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> what every other indian has? do you speak as a common indian person? Because the common indian doesnt have much, sir.



Oh thank u...we have a country called India that is today a economic and military giant and we dont live on the aid of other countries.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> hindustan will cave in eventually, when is most convenient for us (and them too)



Ur one bloody hell of a optimist man......




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> pictures speak thousand words



Like i said it wouldn take us much time to cleanse Kashmir of all seapratists,settle down Hindus there and give a shyt as to wat Pakistan thinks.
But we dont operate that way..Otherwise why would we hitting with Lathis wen there is an AK slung over the shoulder.?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> how many times has he been placed under house arrest and 'detention' since, say, 2005?



BTW do u know how many times he was treated for his cancer in India at the taxpayers cost..?

Source

BTW it also answers ur questions abt LeT.

Consider him lucky that he has only been under house arrest and not killed as he would have been in case of any other country.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> The Palestinians are demanding freedom and an America-backed israel is denying the right. Kashmiris just ask for a referendum, and you deny them this right. Your mr. nehru is tossing and turning in his grave.



Refrendum is not simple my friend..there are many pre-conditions as laid down by the same UNSC resolutions.
Ceasing violence,re-settlement of Pundits,re-settlement of Punjabis settled in Kashmir,Getting back the land unilaterally gifted to China by ur country.
Fulfill those..then we ll think of referendum.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> I don't.



Ok let me enlighten u....



> But in the predominantly Hindu Jammu division to the south, support is under 1&#37;


.

BBC News - 'First' Kashmir survey produces 'startling' results

Still u dont believe..?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> if this ''poll'' is to be believed (and assuming 4,000 respondents were wisely chosen) ---1/5 of the population in J&K believes that violence and uprising is the solution



Wer did u get that...?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> and undone by your nehru who himself called for plebiscite, as demanded by our Quaid-e-Azam



The same survey says this also...



> Dr Bradnock said that it was "clear" that a plebiscite on the future of Kashmir - along the lines envisaged in UN resolutions of 1948-49 - is "extremely unlikely to offer a solution today".






Abu Zolfiqar said:


> spiritually my ***. Your spirituality helped stop genocide of Muslims Sikhs and Christians --all of whom you called hindustany



Cmon wats thihs got to do with the discussion..?BTW did ur ummah concept stop u from bombing the shyt out of FATA or Balochistan..?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Karthic Sri said:


> Going by the recent news I think we do



who has the watch, who has the time



> As much it is fashionable in Pakistan to attribute RAW to all ur ills it is as much in India but much more substantiated.



read our media; we are also critical about mistakes we have made too. Nobody is in denial except you. I know that RAW is engaged in anti-Pakistan activity in Pakistan, ''my'' government chooses not to bring it to the world stage. But we have other ways of keeping you cows in check.




> Duh...why am i not surprised..?



it was banned under previous regime and is a defunct organization. As for JuD which you people love to obcess about, as far as I know it is an Islamic charity and they have done good things in Pakistan --from earthquake relief efforts to education to infrastructure projects for even the minority groups in Pakistan (like the Christians)

so spare me your rhetorical bullshit




> Nationalist idiots.....
> 
> so do u think the 140 million odd in India still root for pakistan..?



i've heard a lot of interesting stories in deccan hyderabad. But as i dont reside in hindustan (thank God!), I cannot dictate to you what this person or that person says.




> wen ur so straight faced in saying that u dont have sympathy for those pundits who were hounded out of their home by these blood thirsty terrorists....i dont give a shyt to the other community living in Kashmir.



i could damn care less for the ''pundits''.....at least i'm being honest about it.




> Oh thank u...we have a country called India that is today a economic and military giant and we dont live on the aid of other countries.



yes economic giant where almost half the population falls under the international poverty line and most of the (over)population lives in rural underdeveloped slums....by the way, india does take aid too

(I'm personally against any country giving another country ''aid'' for political purposes)



> Ur one bloody hell of a optimist man......



I'm just patient.




> Like i said it wouldn take us much time to cleanse Kashmir of all seapratists,settle down Hindus there and give a shyt as to wat Pakistan thinks.



good luck with that one, lol




> But we dont operate that way..Otherwise why would we hitting with Lathis wen there is an AK slung over the shoulder.?



to your victims, it makes little difference. They'd rather die by the bullet than live to be humiliated. Inshallah they will get their freedom, hopefully if not in my lifetime, at least that of my offspring.



> Consider him lucky that he has only been under house arrest and not killed as he would have been in case of any other country.



india is doing us a favour, dont worry why dont you keep doing what you are doing to the activists and demanders of freedom 




> Wer did u get that...?



ToI article




> The same survey says this also...



The same survey says this also


Despite the complexity, some conclusions are clear. 

81% say unemployment is the most significant problem facing Kashmiris (66% in AJK, 87% in J&K). 

Government corruption (22% AJK and 68% J&K)

Poor economic development (42% AJK, 45% J&K)

Human rights abuses (19% AJK, 43% J&K) 

Kashmir conflict itself (24% AJK, 36% J&K) are all seen as major problems. 80% of Kashmiris say that the dispute is very important to them personally, it says.

'Majority Kashmiris Favour Independence'






> Cmon wats thihs got to do with the discussion..?BTW did ur ummah concept stop u from bombing the shyt out of FATA or Balochistan..?



we bomb areas where anti-Pakistan elements operate. Follow the news rather than resort to the stupidest smear I have read today.

did your self-created notion of ''shining india'' come into play when you allowed home grown naxal movement (consisting mostly of lightly armed farmers and tribals) to humiliate your security forces, bomb trains and engage in as bad terrorism as the TTP are doing?


you indians never fail to make me laugh. I thank you for that. I like laughing, it feels good.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gaurish

RollingStones said:


> But that doesnt mean India cant improve things in Kashmir. One of the things the Indian police in Kashmir need to be educated on is how to make arrests. The police in India still doesnt get it that making an arrest means cuffing that person and preventing that person from carrying out activities against the law. It does not involve beating that person or treating them unfairly or disrespectfully. After seeing some of the pictures in Indian Kashmir, I have to say that police there need a course on how to cuff, how to get a prisoner into a vehicle and remove them from the scene as quickly as possible. You could perhaps use a taser or something to immobilize a person if he or she resists arrest. How can you beat that person? That's disrespectful and violates the fundamental rights of that person.



Indian Police is much better then the American army, whose acts in Iraq have been seen by all world....


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

> The US-based group Human Rights Watch says India's policing system facilitates and even encourages abuses.
> 
> It says there has been little change in attitudes, training or equipment since the police was formed in colonial times with the aim to control the population.
> 
> It says the government must take major steps to overhaul a failing system.
> 
> There was no immediate response from the Indian authorities.
> 
> 
> 
> .....................
> 
> 
> The BBC's Damian Grammaticas in Delhi says the catalogue of abuses by India's police detailed in this report is long and shocking - arbitrary arrests, beatings and torture to force confessions, even the cold-blooded gunning down of innocent people.
> 
> The police are often a law unto themselves, say campaigners
> 
> "[M]y hands and legs were tied; a wooden stick was passed through my legs. They started beating me badly on the legs with lathis [batons] and kicking me," the report quoted a fruit vendor in the city of Varanasi as saying.
> 
> "They beat me until I was crying and shouting for help. When I was almost fainting, they stopped the beating... Then they turned me upside down... They poured water from a plastic jug into my mouth and nose, and I fainted," he said.
> 
> Human Rights Watch spent a year investigating claims of human rights violations to compile the 118-page report, entitled "Broken System: Dysfunction, Abuse and Impunity in the Indian Police".
> 
> It says the report is based on interviews with more than 80 police officers of varying ranks, 60 victims of police abuses and numerous discussions with experts and civil society activists.
> 
> The report says that "abysmal conditions for police officers contribute to violations".
> 
> Human Rights Watch says it spoke to 80 police officers
> 
> Ill-equipped and under pressure to fight crime, police officers often take the law into their own hands, it says.




Indian police accused of abuses | NowPublic News Coverage

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RollingStones

gaurish said:


> Indian Police is much better then the American army, whose acts in Iraq have been seen by all world....



What is the point in comparing with the US Army? Dont you want your own policies and standards that comprehensively protect your own citizens? The point is the US Army and/or police cannot behave like the Indian Army/Police do within the US. The constitutional protections including things such as Miranda rights are there. The operative sentence is how is YOUR Army or Police behaving with your OWN citizens not those of other countries. Are the rights of Indian Citizens being trampled upon and do they have a forum to correct those violations? These are the questions you should be asking and not comparing yourself to what the US or the Russians or Chinese did or did not do.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## KS

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> who has the watch, who has the time



rite now we have it....and i dont see it coming to pakistan in the near (or far) future....



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> read our media; we are also critical about mistakes we have made too. Nobody is in denial except you. I know that RAW is engaged in anti-Pakistan activity in Pakistan, ''my'' government chooses not to bring it to the world stage.



Thats wat i said...RAW is the cause of all ur ills...right from water,bombblasts right to wen ur neighbours undies are stolen..



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> But we have other ways of keeping you cows in check.



Should i start with the name of a certain animal starting with P..?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> it was banned under previous regime and is a defunct organization. As for JuD which you people love to obcess about, as far as I know it is an Islamic charity and they have done good things in Pakistan --from earthquake relief efforts to education to infrastructure projects for even the minority groups in Pakistan (like the Christians)



yeah yeah...one of a kind charity group whose leader calls for armed jihad against another country for an ill that is of their own making.
Serioulsy enuff jokes for today.. 




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i've heard a lot of interesting stories in deccan hyderabad. But as *i dont reside in hindustan (thank God!)*, I cannot dictate to you what this person or that person says.



The feeling is mutual...thank god u dont reside in Hindustan.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i could damn care less for the ''pundits''.....at least i'm being honest about it.



u should be ashamed for being so honest in this regard..




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes economic giant where almost half the population falls under the international poverty line and most of the (over)population lives in rural underdeveloped slums....by the way, india does take aid too



u forgot abt the toilets mate.....



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> (I'm personally against any country giving another country ''aid'' for political purposes)



Ok so y dont u say to americans..."we dont need ur aid" and we r not going to fight ur war..



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> I'm just patient.



But in vain.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> good luck with that one, lol



We dont need ur wishes on that as we r not going in that path.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> to your victims, it makes little difference. They'd rather die by the bullet than live to be humiliated. Inshallah they will get their freedom, hopefully if not in my lifetime, at least that of my offspring.



To u who covets their land it doesnt...but to them it matters.
We r pumping in more economy and infrastructure and in another generation or two u ll see the difference.Ok y two generations,wen that old man Geelani dies everything will be normal..Eagerly waiting for that day




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> india is doing us a favour, dont worry why dont you keep doing what you are doing to the activists and demanders of freedom



We dont need ur permissions on that mate.We ll do wat we think is good for our country and couldn care for u less.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ToI article



So u as a Pakistani believe ToI..??
Shall i give u a ToI article that says Pakistan is the epicentre of World terrorism..Would u believe that too...




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> The same survey says this also
> Despite the complexity, some conclusions are clear.
> 
> 81&#37; say *unemployment* is the most significant problem facing Kashmiris (66% in AJK, *87% in J&K*).
> 
> *Government corruption* (22% AJK and *68% J&K*)
> 
> *Poor economic development* (42% AJK, *45% J&K*)
> 
> Human rights abuses (19% AJK, 43% J&K)



A very very special thank u for bringing to my notice wat the Kashmiris really want..They want jobs,economic development,less corruption and for all these India is in a much much better position to provide them than pakistan.
We have already started that and as i said just wait one or two generations..everything will be fine.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> we bomb areas where anti-Pakistan elements operate. Follow the news rather than resort to the stupidest smear I have read today.



Similarly we take action against those whom we consider anti-india elements.Nothing wrong i suppose.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> did your self-created notion of ''shining india'' come into play when you allowed home grown naxal movement (consisting mostly of lightly armed farmers and tribals) to humiliate your security forces, bomb trains and engage in as bad terrorism as the TTP are doing?



Do u want me to go down to the level of mocking ur security forces who were killed at the hands of the rag-tag taliban armed with just AKs and RPGs...?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you indians never fail to make me laugh. I thank you for that. I like laughing, it feels good.



yup..as some wise man once said....Ignorance is bliss....Keep Laughing.


----------



## Xeric

toxic_pus said:


> The transfer of power happened on the basis of British maps of early 20th Century and post 1860 there hadn&#8217;t been any major change in geo-political structure of Kashmir. So if one intends to figure out what constituted J&K in 1947, the map of 1908 is more relevant than a map of 1700, if at all you can find one.
> 
> Anyway, instead of replying to the rest of your jibber jabber how about I post a map from the cartographic section of UN depicting the entire J & K as on *2005*. (I should have done that long time back ) For the original pdf file click here. For the *2009* version, that shows UNMOGIP deployment, click here.
> 
> Note:
> 
> 1. The label &#8216;Jammu and Kashmir&#8217; is affixed in a way to cover the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir.
> 
> 2. AJK is not shown separately.



Lolz...

Ok.

The map that you cherry-picked were primarily to show the LoC without any specific relation to the any of the Three Regions (Jammu, the Kashmir valley and Ladakh) and has just given a very cursory reference to (minor) locations.



> 4. The map completely ignores the Chinese held territories of Aksai Chin and Saksam Valley.


Well gentlemen, this would be THE Faceplam of this thread:

Sir, the maps the you quoted infact have screwed india as it has shown Shaksam Valley as a part of Chine, here's how:

Here's the map that you posted. People please give special attention to the area circled in Red






In this above map, infact the cartographers has INCLUDED Shaksam Vally in China!!

See how....

Have a look at these maps (compare the following 3 maps with the one posted above as if they are placed over each other by matching K-2 in each map):

From google earth:







From google maps:






One from another source:






(Ok, screw the sources) And just compare the maps, i have used K-2 as a reference point so that you can compare all the above 4 maps with ease and see that infact in the first map (the one posted by TP claiming the map has no 'Saksam' is it is still part of TP's J & K) the *Valley of Shakasm is shown as an integral part of China!!*

TP, you made me show this face-palm not only to yourself but whole of india, sorry guys.

And as for the 'map completely ignores the Chinese held territories of Aksai Chin', dude the map ends at *78 degrees East * on its right side and doesn not include the area of Askai Chin, so you, infact this time again has just tried to dick around and distort the facts as usual!

Anywaz, my wild guess on this is that even if the map showed the area East of '78 degree East', they probably have included Askai Chin in China (as they did in case of Shaksam Valley).



> Given the Pakistani penchant for making unprotected love with UN resolutions at the slightest hint of opportunity, this should ideally settle the issue of whether GB comes under the UN envisaged plebiscite or not.


First, keeping illicit relations is not permitted in our religion.

Second, the map that you posted itself shows a disclaimer: _The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations._

These maps were infact 'Mission' Maps and the UN itself hasnt done any vetting of these maps.

So above in view, coupled with the fact that the MAP that YOU posted just gave a cursory reference to the ground details, we can easily conclude that your assertion and the wet dream as quoted above is a BS!

Moreover, even if we screw the disclaimer (as you would probably do) and assume that the map is indeed a map of J & K, then why would the *same* Website show GB as PART of Pakistan, as shown on this globe from from a map of Pakistan (note the area in circled in Red), see the full map here http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/pakistan.pdf:










Your claim is further put to a shut because if the UN wanted to show GB as _not_ part of Pakistan, it logically would have shown Pakistan as it is in this map taken from an indian website:







> 3. Pakistan, India and J & K are separately labeled, as in 3 separate entities, without indicating which country controls which part or if J & K is a &#8216;disputed&#8217; territory. It simply indicates the LoC as per Shimla Agreement and mentions that _&#8216;the final status of J & K has not yet been agreed upon by the parties&#8217;_. This is a clear indication that UN considers GB to be an integral part of J & K, pending &#8216;final status&#8217;.


Very true less the last sentence as it is just a typical BS from The TP. For an answer on why, re-read the face-palms above.




> However, I am pretty sure our soldier boy will manage to amuse us a little bit more.


i hope you were assumed and again, the pleasure was all mine.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Jade

It is no use arguing over facts. The fact is Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh, ***, Aksai chin, Gilgit-Baltistan, and Shaksgam valley constitute the disputed state of Jammu & Kashmir. This is what UN defines the disputed state of Jammu & Kashmir to be. Even, Pakistan by keeping Gilgit-Baltistan in a constitutional limbo, and referring it to as Northern Areas instead of a province of Pakistan called Gilgit-Baltistan has tactical admitted it to be a part of disputed state of Jammu & Kashmir.


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


> Lolz...
> 
> Ok.
> 
> The map that you cherry-picked were primarily to show the LoC without any specific relation to the any of the Three Regions (Jammu, the Kashmir valley and Ladakh) and has just given a very cursory reference to (minor) locations.


So using a UN map is also a matter of &#8216;cherry picking&#8217;. The rest of it is of course a pathetic attempt to explain away your cognitive dissonance. Given that UN map is referred to by every cartographer, it is not going anywhere, at least for a long time.


> Sir, the maps the you quoted infact have screwed india as it has shown Shaksam Valley as a part of Chine, here's how:
> 
> Here's the map that you posted. People please give special attention to the area circled in Red
> http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/1558/32544883.png
> 
> In this above map, infact the cartographers has INCLUDED Shaksam Vally in China!!
> 
> See how....
> 
> Have a look at these maps (compare the following 3 maps with the one posted above as if they are placed over each other by matching K-2 in each map):
> 
> From google earth:
> http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/2828/googlev.png
> 
> 
> 
> From google maps:
> http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/8641/googlemapc.png
> 
> 
> One from another source:
> http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/5843/jammukashmirandladakh1.jpg
> 
> 
> (Ok, screw the sources) And just compare the maps, i have used K-2 as a reference point so that you can compare all the above 4 maps with ease and see that infact in the first map (the one posted by TP claiming the map has no 'Saksam' is it is still part of TP's J & K) the *Valley of Shakasm is shown as an integral part of China!!*


Ergo, _&#8216;(t)he map completely* ignores the Chinese held territories  of* Aksai Chin and *Saksam Valley*&#8217;_

Maybe if you pay attention and actually make an attempt to comprehend what is being said, you will save yourself a lot of sweat, and us, a lot of bandwidth. 



> And as for the 'map completely ignores the Chinese held territories of Aksai Chin', dude the map ends at *78 degrees East * on its right side and doesn not include the area of Askai Chin, so you, infact this time again has just tried to dick around and distort the facts as usual!
> 
> Anywaz, my wild guess on this is that even if the map showed the area East of '78 degree East', they probably have included Askai Chin in China (as they did in case of Shaksam Valley).


You might want to quit guesstimating. In the South Asia map, Kashmir is shown thus:






Note how Aksai Chin is _not_ labeled. Note how it is not indicated if it is part of India or part of China. It merely draws the boundaries _as claimed_ by both the countries (impressive!), making it appear as an entirely separate entity, and leaving the rest to imagination. And yet, in the map that specifically intends to show J & K, UN intentionally leaves this portion out, while being crystal clear in depicting the rest of J & K as neither a part of Pakistan nor of India. That is an amazing legal jugglery to avoid controversy.

Saksam couldn&#8217;t be avoided because it sits smack in the middle in a way that it can&#8217;t be cropped out. In any case, Article 6 of Sino-Pakistan Frontier Agreement 1963, signed _ex parte_, makes the transfer provisional not permanent.



> Second, the map that you posted itself shows a disclaimer: _The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations._
> 
> These maps were infact 'Mission' Maps and the UN itself hasnt done any vetting of these maps.
> 
> So above in view, coupled with the fact that the MAP that YOU posted just gave a cursory reference to the ground details, we can easily conclude that your assertion and the wet dream as quoted above is a BS!


That disclaimer is legal requirement for any document prepared by a third party. All maps prepared by UN carry this disclaimer. Don&#8217;t loose sleep on it. 

The point, which you have conveniently missed, however is that, even UN maps show GB as part of J & K, just like the colonial maps of early 20th Century. Details are irrelevant since Gilgit, Baltistan, Hunza can easily be made out from the map. Funny part is that the map completely disregards the existence of AJK and doesn't even give any indication where that Shangri La exists.



> Moreover, even if we screw the disclaimer (as you would probably do) and assume that the map is indeed a map of J & K, then why would the *same* Website show GB as PART of Pakistan, as shown on this globe from from a map of Pakistan (note the area in circled in Red), see the full map here http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/pakistan.pdf:
> http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/6739/captureufd.png
> http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/595/picture11k.jpg


And yet, when the map is shown in detail, it delimits entire J & K. Even when a map shows South Asia, it delimits J & K.

Pakistan:






South Asia:






The teeny-tiny shaded portion, which you have clung on to with all your might, is merely to give an idea of Pakistan controlled area in the region. Again don't sweat.



> Your claim is further put to a shut because if the UN wanted to show GB as _not_ part of Pakistan, it logically would have shown Pakistan as it is in this map taken from an indian website:
> http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/803/pakistanmap7481906.jpg


Actually it does show GB as _not a part_ of Pakistan, first in the J&K map itself, second in the Pakistan map, third in the South Asia map. UN is pretty consistent there. 



> Very true less the last sentence as it is just a typical BS from The TP. For an answer on why, re-read the face-palms above.


In which case UN is also BSing. After having labeled the entire region of GB as J & K, consistently in J & K map, Pakistan map and South Asia map, why else would they provide the following caveat, in all those maps?








> i hope you were assumed and again, the pleasure was all mine.


Can't thank enough for the entertainment. Keep 'em coming.

BTW, what of this:



toxic_pus said:


> An addendum to my previous reply
> 
> Article 6 of Sino-Pakistan Frontier Agreement, 1963 (by virtue of which Pakistan gifted Saksam Valley to Chin) states:
> 
> _The two parties have agreed that *after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute* between Pakistan and India, *the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations with the Government of the People&#8217;s Republic of China* on the boundary as described in Article Two of the present agreement, so as to sign a formal boundary treaty *to replace the present agreement*, provided that *in the event of the sovereign authority being Pakistan, the provisions of the present agreement and of the aforesaid protocol shall be maintained* in the formal boundary treaty to be signed between the People&#8217;s Republic of China and Pakistan.​_
> The wording of this article clearly indicates that Pakistan envisages a possibility of change in possession of GB and in the event the 'sovereignty' passes to India after 'settlement of the Kashmir dispute', the current agreement shall lapse and new negotiations with China would have to be reopened. This means Pakistan recognizes, that it has no claim to 'sovereignty' over land from which Saksam Valley had been carved out, and is in fact subject to 'settlement' along with 'settlement of Kashmir dispute'.
> 
> Of course, the agreement is null and void, for being _ex parte_, but it does reflect Pakistan's position on GB, circa 1963.
> 
> Game, set and match....



PS: Can you please reduce the image size while posting inline.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## toxic_pus

On another note, here is a view of another Pakistani - a sane and rational one this time around. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

&#8216;Gilgit has remained part of Kashmir&#8217;


By Saalim Salam Ansari


This is in response to Mr Aziz Ali Dad&#8217;s article titled &#8220;The case of Gilgit-Baltistan is different&#8221; (Encounter, January 28) in which he argued that the Northern Areas are not part of Jammu and Kashmir state. I do not agree with him.

The fact remains that under the Amritsars Treaty executed in 1846 between Maharaja Gulab Singh and the British authorities, as provided in the Article 1 of the treaty, the &#8220;British Government transferred and made over for ever in independent possession to Maharaja Gulab Singh and the heirs male of his body all the hilly or mountainous country with its dependencies situated to the eastward of the River Indus and the westward of the River Ravi including Chamba and excluding Lahul, being part of the territories ceded to under the provisions of the Article IV of the Treaty of Lahore, dated 9th March, 1846&#8221;.

According to Article 3, this transfer was made &#8220;upon a consideration of 7,500,000 Nanak Shahies rupees&#8221;. In other words, the valley of Kashmir along with all hilly, mountainous territories was sold to the Maharaja and the British also surrendered their rights from the Northern Areas in favour of him.

No word of &#8220;rent&#8221; or &#8220;lease&#8221; was used in the Amritsar Treaty. As far as the appointment of a British political agent at Gilgit is concerned, one may note that his appointment was for the whole territory of Northern Areas which was partly (only an area of about 1300 sq. miles) leased by the Maharaja by virtue of a lease agreement made on April 3, 1935.

*The appointment of a British Political Agent at Gilgit and/or of a British Resident Commissioner at Srinagar, the capital, did not affect the status of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.* The Political Agent in Gilgit was called Assistant Resident and was subordinate to the British Resident stationed at Srinagar.

*According to the lease agreement, the sovereignty was kept in favour of the Maharaja Hari Singh Dogra* and the lease period was for 60 years, not 100 years.

The flag of the Maharaja was kept raised throughout the lease period at Gilgit agency (being a leased area). Even birthdays of the Maharaja were officially celebrated throughout the Northern Areas including Gilgit agency.

*After the announcement of the June 3 Partition Plan the lease agreement was suspended by the both parties and on July 31, 1947 the lease was again regained by the Maharaja Hari Singh Dogra and Brigadier Ghansara Singh was appointed governor of Gilgit.* Brig. Singh later wrote a book &#8220;Gilgit before 1947&#8221;.

*The local Rajas, Mirs, chieftains were in fact local jagirdars and were subjects of the Maharaja of Kashmir and they were never given the status of princely states.* They use to give gold, horses and money as khiraj and used to appear in the official functions as &#8220;darbaries&#8221; before the Maharaja at Srinagar and were granted sanads. Poonch and other Jagirs were situated within the territory of princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.

It is a matter of historical record that a statute regarding the Gilgit Scouts under the name and style of Gilgit Scouts Law (Act No XVI) of 2004 Bakrami Calendar was promulgated by the Maharaja.

The citizens of Northern Areas were prosecuted and tried under the Rambhir Panel Code (R.P.C) which was promulgated by Maharaja Rambhir Singh of Jammu and Kashmir State.

*As far as the formation of an &#8220;Islamic Republic of Gilgit&#8221; in 1947 is concerned it was not recognized by anybody, not even by the government of Pakistan.* The latter, however, entered into what came to be known as Karachi Agreement on April 28, 1951 with the government of Azad Kashmir. Under this agreement, the affairs of Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) relating to defence, foreign affairs, etc., of the government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir state were given to the government of Pakistan by the former on a temporary basis.

*Under Article 6 of the &#8216;Sinkiang Agreement&#8217; dated March 2, 1963 executed between China and Pakistan, the Northern Areas are a disputed territory and this agreement is subject to a solution of the dispute of Kashmir.* Pakistan government&#8217;s stand is that the area of the Jammu and Kashmir State, (the largest one among about 584 princely states of the subcontinent) is 84,471 square miles. It consists of (a) Valley of Kashmir &#8212; 8,539 square miles (b) Ladakh &#8212; 35,554 square miles (c) Gilgit and Baltistan (or Shumali Wazarat) &#8212; 28,000 square miles, and (d) Jammu &#8212; 12,378 square miles.

*If the area of Gilgit and Baltistan (Northern Areas) is not included in the disputed state, then its total area comes to 56,000 square miles. But the Pakistan government, in the last 50 years of the dispute over the Kashmir state, never claimed that the disputes areas come to 56,000 square miles but that these were 84,000 square miles which include Gilgit and Baltistan.*

*According to the maps issued by the Survey of Pakistan or printed by the Oxford Atlas/World Atlas Bartholomew, 1985, Historical Atlas of World, 1965 (USA), and the Encyclopaedia Britannica as well as in the official maps of World Bank, UNO, the area of Gilgit and Baltistan has been part of the Jammu and Kashmir state during the Mughal, Afghans, Sikhs, Dogra regimes.*

In 1934, the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly (Parjha Sabha) as constituted by Maharaja Hari Singh included representation of the Northern Areas. The members from the Northern Areas were Raja Fateh Ali Khan of Skardu, Mr Ahmed Ali Khan of Kargil, Raja Raza Ahmed of Gilgit Wazarat and Muhammad Jawwad Ansari of Shumali Wazarat. In 1935, Gilgit and Baltistan were given by Maharaja of Kashmir to the British on lease for 12 years and on its expiry these areas were returned to the Maharaja.

*According to the judgments, PLD 1993 AJK Page 1, and PLD 1995 AJK-SC page-1, in the case of Malik Mohammad Maskeen vs. Government of Pakistan and others, delivered by Superior Courts of the Azad Kashmir, it was held that &#8220;the Northern Areas are part and parcel of the Jammu and Kashmir.&#8221; Hence, these areas are legally and historically a part of the Jammu and Kashmir State and fall within the &#8220;disputed territory&#8221; like other parts of the state.*

Besides, *as per Article 1 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) do not fall within the territorial limits of Pakistan. Sub-article (2), of Article 1 of the 1973 Constitution describes and defines the territorial limits of Pakistan as under: &#8220;(a) the provinces of Balochistan, the North-West Frontier, the Punjab and Sindh; (b) the Islamabad capital territory; (c) the Federally Administered Tribal Area; and (d) such states and territories as are or may be included in Pakistan, whether by accession or otherwise.&#8221;
*
On August 14, 1947, Gilgit and Baltistan were part of the state and Brig. Ginshara Singh, a cousin of Maharaja Hari Singh Dogra, ruler of the state, was governor of the province of Ladakh, Gilgit and Baltistan. However, later in the same year, the people of Gilgit and Baltistan formed a liberation army and liberated their area from the Dogra rule and arrested Brig Ghinsar Singh.

One may recall that Brig (retd) Takhar Rehmat Khan, father of Air Marshal (retd.) M. Asghar Khan, had also served as governor of the province of Gilgit and Baltistan. He was appointed to this post by Maharaja Hari Singh Dogra.

*So, as per Article 257 of the 1973 Constitution, the future of Jammu and Kashmir including Gilgit and Baltistan will be determined according to the wishes of their people. This article says: &#8220;When the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir decide to accede to Pakistan, the relationship between Pakistan and that State shall be determined in accordance with the wishes of the people of the State.&#8221;*

*Nagar and Hunza were not princely states on August 14, 1947, but, as per historical record, these were the Jagirs, situated within the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, of &#8220;Shumali Wazarat&#8221; or &#8220;Gilgit Wazarat&#8221;. According to June 3 partition plan, only princely states had the right to accede to either India or Pakistan or to maintain their independent status. This right could not be exercised by the Jagirs.
*
However, an appropriate solution of the problem of the status of the Northern Areas lies in making them a part of Azad Kashmir and giving representation to their people in the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Assembly on the basis of population.

_The writer is a Karachi-based lawyer._

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

RAW agent?

Btw, here is Article 1 of Pakistani Constitution:

_The Republic and its territories
(1) Pakistan shall be a Federal Republic to be known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, hereinafter referred to as Pakistan.
(2) The territories of Pakistan shall comprise :-
(a) the Provinces of Baluchistan, the North-West Frontier, the Punjab and Sind;
(b) the Islamabad Capital Territory, hereinafter referred to as the Federal Capital;
(c) Federally Administered Tribal Areas; and
(d) such States and territories as are or may be included in Pakistan, whether by accession or otherwise.​(3) [Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament)] may by law admit into the Federation new States or areas on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit.]​_​
And here is Article 257:

_When the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir decide to accede to Pakistan, the relationship between Pakistan and the State shall be determined in accordance with the wishes of the people of that State._ 

So much for GB being part of Pakistan.


----------



## Xeric

 . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ~,_. . . ..~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .=,_. . . .-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .=-._. . .;,,./`. . / . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

xeric said:


>  . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
> . . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-.,
> . . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :,
> . . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
> . . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
> . . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
> . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:. . . ./
> . . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
> . . . . . . . /__.(. . .~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
> . . . . . . /(_. . ~,_. . . ..~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
> . . . .. .{.._$;_. . .=,_. . . .-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~; /. .. .}
> . . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .=-._. . .;,,./`. . / . . . ./. .. ../
> . . . .. . .\`~,. . ..~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
> . . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-
> . . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
> . . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
> ,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
> . .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
> . . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--



I'll see your single facepalm, and raise you a triple


----------



## gaurish

RollingStones said:


> What is the point in comparing with the US Army? Dont you want your own policies and standards that comprehensively protect your own citizens? The point is the US Army and/or police cannot behave like the Indian Army/Police do within the US. The constitutional protections including things such as Miranda rights are there. The operative sentence is how is YOUR Army or Police behaving with your OWN citizens not those of other countries. Are the rights of Indian Citizens being trampled upon and do they have a forum to correct those violations? These are the questions you should be asking and not comparing yourself to what the US or the Russians or Chinese did or did not do.



Wow .. you seem to point out exception that your army has the right to behave anyhow with other countries citizen? if one is not American citizen he is not human? Thanks u told it yourself...

How many times have u visited our country to see the torture of our police on our own citizens? i live here daily... so u think u have better experience than me?

Odd incidents happen everywhere in the world.. Human rights are violated all over the world

Dont bring your crap propaganda here


----------



## RollingStones

gaurish said:


> Wow .. you seem to point out exception that your army has the right to behave anyhow with other countries citizen? if one is not American citizen he is not human? Thanks u told it yourself...
> 
> How many times have u visited our country to see the torture of our police on our own citizens? i live here daily... so u think u have better experience than me?
> 
> Odd incidents happen everywhere in the world.. Human rights are violated all over the world
> 
> Dont bring your crap propaganda here



You are missing the point and there is absolutely no need to be defensive. The point is NOT to compare but to evolve policies that will ABSOLUTELY (as in NOT relatively) enforce civil liberties and rights in India. It is ridiculous and disingenuous to even suggest that there are violations inside the US anywhere near the scale of what happens in India. Indian police have been proved to be abusive and insensitive in several well researched reports by Human Rights organizations around the world, including local Indian ones. To cast aside all that and make tenuous statements is doing a grave injustice to victims of HR abuses in India. For instance, I am deeply anguished by the recent Bhopal gas tragedy verdict. The Indian justice system has miserably failed by delivering a much delayed verdict and that too with minimal punishment. You cannot see such miserable justice delivered in the US, if you want to compare. I am asking you again: these are your own people, dont you feel the need to safeguard their rights and liberties, without comparing to what is going on in rest of the world? Not to be patronizing, but take some time to ponder!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harish

RollingStones said:


> You are missing the point and there is absolutely no need to be defensive. The point is NOT to compare but to evolve policies that will ABSOLUTELY (as in NOT relatively) enforce civil liberties and rights in India. It is ridiculous and disingenuous to even suggest that there are violations inside the US anywhere near the scale of what happens in India. Indian police have been proved to be abusive and insensitive in several well researched reports by Human Rights organizations around the world, including local Indian ones. To cast aside all that and make tenuous statements is doing a grave injustice to victims of HR abuses in India. For instance, I am deeply anguished by the recent Bhopal gas tragedy verdict. The Indian justice system has miserably failed by delivering a much delayed verdict and that too with minimal punishment. You cannot see such miserable justice delivered in the US, if you want to compare. I am asking you again: these are your own people, dont you feel the need to safeguard their rights and liberties, without comparing to what is going on in rest of the world? Not to be patronizing, but take some time to ponder!



Please stop derailing the thread with your superior pontificating on issues not remotely related to Kashmir. Please stop lecturing us on human rights. As an American whose ancestors wiped out an entire people to set up home on someone else's land because your own people had cast you out as the dregs of society from mainland Europe, you have absolutely no social moral or ethical standing to do so. And you are an extremely poor example of a human being for pulling the Bhopal tragedy into this, again as an American to an Indian. Your people are crying bloody murder today when BP's oil is killing your pelicans and dolphins. And asking BP for more money per pelican and dolphin killed than your American Union Carbide deemed fit to pay for every Indian who perished in Bhopal, leave aside an entire generation (if not more) horribly mutilated and disabled. Disgusting, despicable, inhumane, hypocritical, immoral, arrogant, take your pick. You are more than all of those combined, and then some sir. I have nothing against America or Americans in general, but you are doing a piss poor job of representing your country here, flying the stars and stripes, and regurgitating bs.


----------



## RollingStones

harish said:


> Please stop derailing the thread with your superior pontificating on issues not remotely related to Kashmir. Please stop lecturing us on human rights. As an American whose ancestors wiped out an entire people to set up home on someone else's land because your own people had cast you out as the dregs of society from mainland Europe, you have absolutely no social moral or ethical standing to do so. And you are an extremely poor example of a human being for pulling the Bhopal tragedy into this, again as an American to an Indian. Your people are crying bloody murder today when BP's oil is killing your pelicans and dolphins. And asking BP for more money per pelican and dolphin killed than your American Union Carbide deemed fit to pay for every Indian who perished in Bhopal, leave aside an entire generation (if not more) horribly mutilated and disabled. Disgusting, despicable, inhumane, hypocritical, immoral, arrogant, take your pick. You are more than all of those combined, and then some sir. I have nothing against America or Americans in general, but you are doing a piss poor job of representing your country here, flying the stars and stripes, and regurgitating bs.



I am not sure what you have been reading or hearing about America in India, but you probably have no idea about real American people, their ingenuity and hard work, which brought America to where it is today. You need to learn more about real America. Two or three things:there is no point being defensive, there is absolutely no reason to compare yourself against any other country on HR abuse issues (evolve your own absolute standards for implementation and impress the world), and the BP is a case in point (BP is being made to pay justly for all the damages that they have caused; can we say the same of Bhopal?).

The point is the Indian police do indulge in excessive HR abuses, as pointed out by various international and local Indian organizations. And I am still not sure what American actions vis-a-vis its own HR situation has got anything to do with how HR abuses are prevented or not in India?? And, I do not see any need for comparison at all. Bill of rights for citizens are absolute rights in any country and does NOT depend on the Bill of Rights of citizens in other countries. You cannot cite America or any other country to have a poor HR abuse prevention policy. It has got to be an absolute constitutional standard, measurable by its own standing. Why are you comparing with America? (Also, if you were by any chance talking about how whites prevailed against native Americans, I think you've been reading a lot of bull **** somewhere - perhaps a well researched reading on American history would help. Ignorance is NOT bliss in this case!)


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Karthic Sri said:


> rite now we have it....and i dont see it coming to pakistan in the near (or far) future....



our culture is radically different. You fear death as much as we don't. Look at events unfolding and tell me, where is your ''time''

you are wasting time on failed diplomatic initiatives, meanwhile you have hostile neighbours all around you and it's all your own making.



> Thats wat i said...RAW is the cause of all ur ills...right from water,bombblasts right to wen ur neighbours undies are stolen..



re-read my post and avoid emotional outbursts



> Should i start with the name of a certain animal starting with P..?



How about ''Pigeon''? You arrested one 2 weeks ago, is he providing valuable inteligence? 



> yeah yeah...one of a kind charity group whose leader calls for armed jihad against another country for an ill that is of their own making.
> Serioulsy enuff jokes for today..




a.) he doesnt have widespread support among the policy makers and parliamentary elite

b.) most of the fighting in Kashmir is purely Kashmiri local phenonmenon. You give Pakistan too much credit for your miseries in indian occupied Kashmir

c.) it was Christians and Pakistani hindus who protested and were shouting slogans against hindustan when india demanded UN censure of the group Jam'at ud-Dawa



> The feeling is mutual...thank god u dont reside in Hindustan.



Forget what the headlines tell you. Pakistan is a free country, a bit too free in my opinion. My religion condemns any classification of people into ranks or caste, therefore yes I reiterate:

Thank God.

Actually, none of my ancestors hailed from former hindustan and I take huge pride on this fact. We didnt see the bloodshed and violence the way our Punjabi and Sindhi brothers/sisters did.




> u should be ashamed for being so honest in this regard..



Truth fears no questions



> u forgot abt the toilets mate.....



a Morroccan friend of mine was ranting and raving about delhi airport bathroom condition. Enough talk of toilets, ''mate''



> Ok so y dont u say to americans..."we dont need ur aid" and we r not going to fight ur war..



better federal/local governance, improved infrastructure -especially in industrial/rural areas, and a more favourable security environment are worth much more to us (and more useful) than cheques handed out that end up in the hand of corrupt civilan bureaucrats

the war was initially not ours, it was in Afghanistan. But as Afghanistan is our conjoined twin, if things are bad there; things will be bad here. Historically, this is the case.

We are fighting the war on our own terms. NATO is fighting theirs on their own. Consultations are made between both sides, but the realities on both sides are different. They are 2 different wars, with 2 different enemies.



> We dont need ur wishes on that as we r not going in that path.



couldnt anyways....unless you want another Gujraty type state genoicde taking place. 



> To u who covets their land it doesnt...but to them it matters.
> We r pumping in more economy and infrastructure and in another generation or two u ll see the difference.Ok y two generations,wen that old man Geelani dies everything will be normal..Eagerly waiting for that day



that's what I say. No matter how much you ''pump'' the wells seems to be drying. You cant bribe existentialists and freedom fighters (some may be corruptible of course)



> We dont need ur permissions on that mate.We ll do wat we think is good for our country and couldn care for u less.



Agha you are caring for us actually because for every latthi-charge, it further alienates/alienated occupied Kashmiris . Put yourself in their shoes, how would you feel to be under inhumane occupation?



> So u as a Pakistani believe ToI..??



ToI editorials have me believed that india still hasnt gotten over its obcession over Pakistan. But the truth is, a lot of their news stories are just copied verbatim from other news sources - like RTT and PTI.

i read newspapers from all countries



> Shall i give u a ToI article that says Pakistan is the epicentre of World terrorism..Would u believe that too...



I opine that the Afghan-Pakistan border is indeed the most dangerous part of the world. In all honesty, I would even to this day feel a lot safer in Kohat or Bannu than I would in sh*tholes like Anacostia, Washington DC or parts of Detroit (among other world cities). But I come from a school of thought where I could get killed crossing the street 8 hours from now. I could die in my sleep before I damn knew what happened. Whatever happens, happens. I don't really care, we put our faith in God and our destiny. 

Things could get worse before they get better. But I have a feeling that our country is maturing in many ways, and the problem will be solved over time. Security and development go hand in hand. Your naxal affected areas are underdeveloped and neglected, that is why 1/3 of india could prove to be an even more dangerous part of the world; especially since a lot of your sensitive nuclear sites are in those ''affected areas''

Our security forces are doing their best to fight the terrorists; more so the anti-Pakistan terrorists rather than the ''global jihadist terrorists'' like Al Qaeda. 


(that was the job of the americans in 2001 till now, you can talk to them about their achievements)





> A very very special thank u for bringing to my notice wat the Kashmiris really want..They want jobs,economic development,less corruption and for all these India is in a much much better position to provide them than pakistan.



the indicators were less in your favour. Kashmiris in Pakistan have their own representation, and greater autonomy. We see much fewer problems on our side, whereas iOK makes the news on almost a weekly basis -not for the right reasons as far as hindustan is concerned



> We have already started that and as i said just wait one or two generations..everything will be fine.



everything would have been fine from the beginning if you allowed the Kashmiris their existential right to self-determination, rather than being greedy and rather erratic in your behaviour [towards them, and I might add, your neighbours]



> Similarly we take action against those whom we consider anti-india elements.Nothing wrong i suppose.



take action against Shiv Sena, ULFA and the naxals. Those are your biggest internal threats; especially the latter group --as per your own Prime Minister



> Do u want me to go down to the level of mocking ur security forces who were killed at the hands of the rag-tag taliban armed with just AKs and RPGs...?



our foot soldiers are doing a fantastic job. Obviously casualties will take place. But for every martyr of the soil, a new tree grows; the roses never rot; their bodies never decompose.

And it furthers our resolve. Yes we've lost troops. look how many men our enemy has lost as well. 

In some sort of way or another, I don't really respect the taleban who are fighting Pakistan. But I ''appreciate'' that they are good fighters, and a determined enemy. If only they uniformed themselves rather than hide among local peaceful tribesmen. Time will tell who gains the upper hand. And Pakistan is commended for its role.




> yup..as some wise man once said....Ignorance is bliss....Keep Laughing.



i will keep laughing. It's better than sulking, finger-pointing and diffusing responsibility! 

that is all you hindustanys are good for....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> our culture is radically different. *You fear death as much as we don't*. Look at events unfolding and tell me, where is your ''time''



Your culture may be radically different from us. There is no denying it; However, please remove your misconception that we fear death as much as you don&#8217;t. Nothing is further from the truth. Try us and we would become half humans. It is easy for a person like you sitting before your computer to talk about the war and death. Ask any solider,they are not easy. 

This is what one of your own soldier's experiences during Kargil war. 

*Peaks and Troughs*

_Subedar Tahir Jan spent five months on various Indian ridges in Kargil. His last few weeks, till July 6, were at Tiger Hill when he and a few of his colleagues, who survived, abandoned it in the darkness of the night. Here is his eyewitness account:_

Subedar Tahir Jan


I left Gilgit for Kargil in February. The task was specific. We were supposed to build bunkers at the Indian ridges across the LoC. In winter, the Indians usually abandon these posts.

We were given white tents, snow-shielding uniforms and other accessories. It was a huge operation. All the units of the nli were sent to the ridges. In the early days it was a gigantic task&#8212;to trek through several feet of snow, climb the ridges and build bunkers.

Till April, *nobody from the Indian side detected our presence*. There was some air patrolling, but our camouflage was so good that their air-surveillance failed to detect our presence. 

And then one day we saw them coming towards us from the plains below. We waited for them to come near us. Then we mowed all of them down. *The Kargil war had begun.* At that time, our main task was on dumping the ammunition. *We paid less attention to food which we later regretted.* 

We knew those were not our ridges. *But we were about to teach India a lesson. Avenging the insult which we had been through at Siachen. *

In the beginning, we had the upper hand. *What happened there in the next few weeks was horrifying. The Indians went mad. Their guns rained on us. And from below there was this constant stream of men. They climbed the mountains like ants.* 

*The last few days were like mad. I don't remember having even a few seconds to chat*

Then the situation started changing. We were running out of ammunition. The food too was disappearing fast. There were severe delays in the supplies, which were cut off by the constant barrage of the Bofors. 

We were at least 35 km inside India. On the adjoining hills, there were incidents when some of my colleagues threw stones and boulders on the Indians coming from below. They had run out of ammunition. 

*I still can't forget several of my colleagues who got injured while fighting the Indians. We knew we could not rescue them or shift them to any hospital. Everything was cut off. We left them there in the night promising to take them home in the morning. But we knew that they wouldn't be able to survive the night. *

The plight of our wounded colleagues strengthened the resolve of those of us at Tiger and nearby ridges who had somehow survived the fighting. *We were clear that we were left with no other option but to die.* 

*The gorges and nullahs near us were filled with the stench of death. We didn't even have time to give our colleagues a proper burial.* We would just recite a kalma and bury our dead in the snow. We couldn't do anything else. 

*And then came the withdrawal orders*. Since we were very deep within India, we received these orders very late. By this time Lalik Jan, who was injured on the Tiger Hill, asked the others to leave. The same happened on other ridges. Col Sher Khan died in an attack on the Indians hiding behind boulders at one of the ridges. *He had no other option. *

Because he knew that if he didn't charge at them first, *the Indians would attack him at night. 
*
Being a senior soldier, I had to carry out the withdrawal orders. *But the young soldiers who had already seen the deaths of many of their colleagues were angry. They kept crying.* They didn't want to leave those ridges. In fact, they were willing to die fighting with stones. 

It took me a hard time to convince them, to remind them that they didn't have enough ammunition. 

We left those ridges with a heavy heart. *All of us were crying.* But the withdrawal wasn't easy. We were completely cut off from our side. So we left the ridges during the night. And for the next few nights we maintained this routine&#8212;travelling only during the night and hiding during the day. 

But before climbing down we destroyed the weapons which we knew we couldn't carry. *There was chaos and panic everywhere. 
*
This short journey back to Pakistan, however, was worse than fighting on the ridges. Without food and water, we lost several of our colleagues to the Indian guns. *In fact, the ones who managed to reach Pakistan were the luckiest ones*

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## KS

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> our culture is radically different. You fear death as much as we don't. Look at events unfolding and tell me, where is your ''time''



Try me........u ll be surprised like hell.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you are wasting time on failed diplomatic initiatives, meanwhile you have hostile neighbours all around you and it's all your own making.



Shall i show u the mirror......Look around ...U have India and Afganistan(atleast now) as ur enemies.....Pot calls the kettle black.

BTW pls dont call B'Desh,SL,Bhutan and Nepal our enemies.....It shows ur ignorance.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> How about ''Pigeon''? You arrested one 2 weeks ago, is he providing valuable inteligence?



Haha..u know wat i meant...so im not going into it further.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> a.) he doesnt have widespread support among the policy makers and parliamentary elite



Oh is it..?thats y he s freely making speeches urging armed terrorism against India and none condemns him...Lol thats news to me..



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> b.) most of the fighting in Kashmir is purely Kashmiri local phenonmenon. You give Pakistan too much credit for your miseries in indian occupied Kashmir



Read this and enlighten urself...Link




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Forget what the headlines tell you. Pakistan is a free country, a bit too free in my opinion. My religion condemns any classification of people into ranks or caste, therefore yes I reiterate:



No one is cursing ur religion...everyone is speaking abt the few idiots who have hijacked ur beautiful religion for their own bigoted cause.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Thank God.
> 
> Actually, none of my ancestors hailed from former hindustan and I take huge pride on this fact. We didnt see the bloodshed and violence the way our Punjabi and Sindhi brothers/sisters did.



My reply stands...Thank god..ur not there in my country.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Truth fears no questions



Mayb no questions...but there is certain amount of shame associated with it.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> better federal/local governance, improved infrastructure -especially in industrial/rural areas, and a more favourable security environment are worth much more to us (and more useful) than cheques handed out that end up in the hand of corrupt civilan bureaucrats
> 
> the war was initially not ours, it was in Afghanistan. But as Afghanistan is our conjoined twin, if things are bad there; things will be bad here. Historically, this is the case.
> 
> We are fighting the war on our own terms. NATO is fighting theirs on their own. Consultations are made between both sides, but the realities on both sides are different. They are 2 different wars, with 2 different enemies.



On ur own terms...?!?! so y dont u ask the CIA to stop the drone attacks that explicitly violates the sovereignity of Pakistan.
And please dont BS me abt how its the ISI thats operating the drones and wat not.
Frankly the US doesnt give a dime as to wat u think.....US thinks,Pakistan does.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> couldnt anyways....unless you want another Gujraty type state genoicde taking place.



FYI thats an internal matter of India and we know how to solve it...unless u want me to start with Balochistan. 




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> that's what I say. No matter how much you ''pump'' the wells seems to be drying. You cant bribe existentialists and freedom fighters (some may be corruptible of course)



Time will say.....But surely Geelani's death will be a catalyst for that.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Agha you are caring for us actually because for every latthi-charge, it further alienates/alienated occupied Kashmiris . Put yourself in their shoes, how would you feel to be under inhumane occupation?



There is no un-humane occupation in Kashmir.....Strikes occur evrywere and invaryingly Indian police use Lathis on them...does that mean un-humane occupation..?

So wat u think of this..? Link





Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ToI editorials have me believed that india still hasnt gotten over its obcession over Pakistan. But the truth is, a lot of their news stories are just copied verbatim from other news sources - like RTT and PTI.
> 
> i read newspapers from all countries



and ur point is..? 




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Things could get worse before they get better. But I have a feeling that our country is maturing in many ways, and the problem will be solved over time. Security and development go hand in hand. Your naxal affected areas are underdeveloped and neglected, that is why 1/3 of india could prove to be an even more dangerous part of the world;* especially since a lot of your sensitive nuclear sites are in those ''affected areas''*



Thax for ur concern..but that is not happening...Operation Green Hunt is well underway and the recent acts of the Maoists targetting the civilians only shows their desperation and the heat they r feeling.
And dont worry soon they ll be history.

And moreover even if they capture the nukes dont worry they r not gonna use against Pakistan..rather they lll use against India only.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Our security forces are doing their best to fight the terrorists; more
> so the anti-Pakistan terrorists rather than the ''global jihadist terrorists'' like Al Qaeda.
> 
> 
> (that was the job of the americans in 2001 till now, you can talk to them about their achievements)



No one is belittling ur soldiers..I respect soldiers whomever they r...But I exopect the same courtesy from everyone .My response was for u bringing in the soldiers dying due to Maoist attacks.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the indicators were less in your favour. Kashmiris in Pakistan have their own representation, and greater autonomy. We see much fewer problems on our side, whereas iOK makes the news on almost a weekly basis -not for the right reasons as far as hindustan is concerned



Yeah thats because we dont entertain our puppets demanding freedom in P-O-K or we dont send in proxies labelling them freedom fighters to take away P-O-K or NA.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> everything would have been fine from the beginning if you allowed the Kashmiris their existential right to self-determination, rather than being greedy and rather erratic in your behaviour [towards them, and I might add, your neighbours]



We have never been erratic....Always consistent in our position that sovereignity/territorial integrity is never under discussion.
BTW if one was erratic it was rather Pakistan which first demanded UNSC resolutions,then an armed solution (1965),then again peaceful means,then again armed struggle (terrorism),again a peace initiative (Lahore bus),then armed attempt (Kargil) and so on......





Abu Zolfiqar said:


> take action against Shiv Sena, ULFA and the naxals. Those are your biggest internal threats; especially the latter group --as per your own Prime Minister



Shiv sena..they were never an internal threat...they are a nationalistic party.
And BTW since u mentioned Internal threats..its none of ur concern.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> our foot soldiers are doing a fantastic job. Obviously casualties will take place. But for every martyr of the soil, a new tree grows; the roses never rot; their bodies never decompose.
> 
> And it furthers our resolve. Yes we've lost troops. look how many men our enemy has lost as well.
> 
> In some sort of way or another, I don't really respect the taleban who are fighting Pakistan. But I ''appreciate'' that they are good fighters, and a determined enemy. If only they uniformed themselves rather than hide among local peaceful tribesmen. Time will tell who gains the upper hand. And Pakistan is commended for its role.



Same is true for India in case of Maoists.Hope u got the answer.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i will keep laughing. It's better than sulking, finger-pointing and diffusing responsibility!
> 
> that is all you hindustanys are good for....



As long as ur just laughing in front of ur PC...who in the holy world cares...


----------



## Xeric

@Jade
Being a soldier myself i dont grade my opponent as a coward or stupid, coz they are not. Levels of bravery can differ as bravery is not a constant, surprisingly it can be altered with the influences of external factors - motivation, aim, gains, religion, even alcohol.

i have seen more indians as belligerents then anyone here, so no one knows them better then me. i wont go into the details but then terming them flat cowards is not right, though people can differ.


And Jade, the source to your article is indian outlook or some shyt like BR? Not guud 

And BTW if you were trying to prove indian bravery by this article, sorry to break your bubble, but you failed.


----------



## Xeric

*unless u want me to start with Balochistan. *

Please do so if you want me to make you look like a stupid!


----------



## Jade

xeric said:


> @Jade
> Being a soldier myself i dont grade my opponent as a coward or stupid, coz they are not. Levels of bravery can differ as bravery is not a constant, surprisingly it can be altered with the influences of external factors - motivation, aim, gains, religion, even alcohol.
> 
> i have seen more indians as belligerents then anyone here, so no one knows them better then me. i wont go into the details but then terming them flat cowards is not right, though people can differ.



First, I was reply to a previous poster&#8217;s comment on &#8220;Indian fearing death as much as Pakistanis don't&#8221;. Nothing less and nothing more.



xeric said:


> And Jade, the source to your article is indian outlook or some shyt like BR? Not guud
> 
> And BTW if you were trying to prove indian bravery by this article, sorry to break your bubble, but you failed.



No, if that&#8217;s what you understand then I cannot help. This is nothing to do with Indian bravery. I believe Pakistani solider is as brave as any Indian solider. This has to do with war and death not being easy as was thought by that poster otherwise


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

jade1982 said:


> Your culture may be radically different from us. There is no denying it; However, please remove your misconception that we fear death as much as you don&#8217;t.



actually you're right i should take those words back, considering the suicide rate among indian soldiers is alarmingly high

and this is in peace mode, not war time! 



www.dancewithshadows.com/society/army-suicides.asp

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6178421.stm


----------



## RollingStones

jade1982 said:


> First, I was reply to a previous posters comment on Indian fearing death as much as Pakistanis don't. Nothing less and nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> No, if thats what you understand then I cannot help. This is nothing to do with Indian bravery. I believe Pakistani solider is as brave as any Indian solider. This has to do with war and death not being easy as was thought by that poster



Some of the posts are hilarious here. Anyone who has a home to go to, a family and children, would be terribly afraid of death. Unless the contention is that Pakistani soldiers dont have families or homes to return to, it is highly insensitive to suggest that they are unafraid of death and can be used as cannon fodder in the attrition war between India and Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## deckingraj

this is what India uses internally







This is what India uses internationally

http://www.indianembassy.org/new/Kargil/J&K_Map.html

This is what International community shows

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_Kashmir_Standoff_2003.png

This is what UN shows

http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/kashmir.pdf


*Source* : Maps of Jammu and Kashmir


This is what CIA reports suggests










*Source:* Kashmir Maps - Perry-Castaeda Map Collection - UT Library Online

This is how it is shown by world atlas


Indian version
Map of India - India Map, Indian States, India Information Landforms - Worldatlas.com
Paksitan version
Pakistan Map, Pakistan Information, Southwest Asia, Map of Pakistan Cities - worldatlas.com

and this is what they portray

*Source:* Kashmir Region Map, Landforms of Kashmir, Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan Map, Western China



Now can someone explain what is the confusion here?? India and Pak can live with their own maps.... As far as world community goes then they consider all part of J@K including Gilgit as disputed


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Some of the posts are hilarious here. Anyone who has a home to go to, a family and children, would be terribly afraid of death. Unless the contention is that Pakistani soldiers dont have families or homes to return to, it is highly insensitive to suggest that they are unafraid of death and can be used as cannon fodder in the attrition war between India and Pakistan.



And is it because of this you lose so many in Afghanistan?

Dont be absurd, you are better than the indians, atleast in thoughts.


----------



## deckingraj

RollingStones said:


> Some of the posts are hilarious here. Anyone who has a home to go to, a family and children, would be terribly afraid of death. Unless the contention is that Pakistani soldiers dont have families or homes to return to, it is highly insensitive to suggest that they are unafraid of death and can be used as cannon fodder in the attrition war between India and Pakistan.



Those who are claiming that either side is not afraid of death are living in fools paradise..this is insane to think.... At the heat of the moment when emotions are high individuals do lot of brave activities which are uncommon and there is every chance that in right frame of mind they would not have done the same....

Here people are suggesting as if IA or PA cadres are desperate to die for their country.....


----------



## deckingraj

xeric said:


> And is it because of this you lose so many in Afghanistan?
> 
> Dont be absurd, you are better than the indians, atleast in thoughts.



Sorry but what that has to do with fear of death ???


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Ataturk Pasha ordered his men not just to go out and fight. He ordered them to die.



fight to the death.....a coward dies a thousands deaths.


A soldier dies but once.


----------



## Xeric

deckingraj said:


> Sorry but what that has to do with fear of death ???



You and that Rolling guy probably wanted to suggest that there isnt anything known as bravery and courage in this world. But guess what, it exists. Though there's a hair line difference between bravery and stupidity, but then i supposed you were sensible enough to make out that difference, or perhaps not?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> *unless u want me to start with Balochistan. *
> 
> Please do so if you want me to make you look like a stupid!



Much more stupid than someone wen he strted about gujarat - an internal matter of India. ??


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> Much more stupid than someone wen he strted about gujarat - an internal matter of India. ??



Well massacring 2K humans isnt exactly 'internal' in today's world.


----------



## ROSH

xeric said:


> Well massacring 2K humans isnt exactly 'internal' in today's world.



Chcek this link

genocide

and see they are back here preaching civilized behaviour. 

Xeric....don't you see, this is just not in you guys....


----------



## Xeric

ROSH said:


> Chcek this link
> 
> genocide
> 
> and see they are back here preaching civilized behaviour.
> 
> Xeric....don't you see, this is just not in you guys....



And now this smart-a$$ brings in '71. 

So predictable!

And BTW, we never did claim it as our internal afair nor did we cherish it as we have seen you people shamelessly ducking away from Gujrat. You even lack the basic integrity to atleast call the incident 'bad', instead you shamelessly refuse to face it and start terming the GENOCIDE in Gujrat as your own personal affair!


----------



## deckingraj

xeric said:


> You and that Rolling guy probably wanted to suggest that there isnt anything known as bravery and courage in this world. But guess what, it exists. Though there's a hair line difference between bravery and stupidity, but then i supposed you were sensible enough to make out that difference, or perhaps not?



Care to point any single post of mine which is giving you that inclination??? I can easily call you stupid as well but then what's the point...I need to keep the decorum....

Bravery does not mean that there is no fear...They go hand in hand....mark my words Bravery is not absence of fear...Brave is one who overcomes it....

So saying that Indian or Pakistani soldiers do not fear death is ridiculous....It is the heat of movement and your emotions which lead you to do something extra ordinary which you will not otherwise.......if that was not the case then every one would have got a MahaVir Chakra on my side and vice-versa for yours.....


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> And so i guess that standard applies to innocent Balochis who also have been suppressed and exploited...
> 
> And bt give credible/neutral sources for ur 2K magic figure.



Those 100-200 indian supported balochs, yes they have been suppressed and exploited and would be dealt even harsher if they would not stop the miscreant activity.

Baloch only form 50 % of the Province, and even out of those 50% not more than a few 100 are against the state. The remaining 50% Pathans, sindhis, sairkis etc in Balochistan dont even give hoot over the Balochistan problem.

Atleast we kill those who openly confess of target killings, bombing gas pipelines and damaging state infrastructure as opposed to you people who just sucked the blood out of 2K humans whom you consider your part and parcel and then also shamelessly claim to be blind to religion.


----------



## Xeric

deckingraj said:


> Care to point any single post of mine which is giving you that inclination??? I can easily call you stupid as well but then what's the point...I need to keep the decorum....



So now you dont even know that 'there's REALLY is a hairline difference between bravery and stupidity i.e. to get killed because of blind emotions and misplaced sense of no-fear'?



> Bravery does not mean that there is no fear...They go hand in hand....mark my words Bravery is not absence of fear...Brave is one who overcomes it....


Who disagree with that?



> *So saying that Indian or Pakistani soldiers do not fear death is ridiculous.*...It is the heat of movement and your emotions which lead you to do something extra ordinary which you will not otherwise.......if that was not the case then every one would have got a MahaVir Chakra on my side and vice-versa for yours.....



That's what you have been pushing down my throat, not me.

So stop acting smart.


----------



## deckingraj

xeric said:


> So now you dont even know that 'there's REALLY is a hairline difference between bravery and stupidity i.e. to get killed because of blind emotions and misplaced sense of no-fear'?



And what made you say that??? Are you reading before replying??? I am saying exactly opposite to what you interpret...



> That's what you have *been pushing down my throat, n*ot me.
> 
> So *stop acting smart*.



I must say i stand corrected here....I confused you with Abu who wrote this..
*our culture is radically different. You fear death as much as we don't.* 
Apologies for the confusion


----------



## Xeric

Karthic Sri said:


> knowing ur track record i assume u ll just badmouth everyone and act arrrogant as if ur the only genius out here....but hey i asked u the sources for the 2K magic figure...



So now as you dont have an answer you would act like just another anal-retentive toxic_pus, well guess what, it isnt surprising.

Anywaz, at a random thought here's where you can soothe yourself:
UK reads the riot act to Narendra Modi - India - The Times of India


----------



## Xeric

*This is what you wrote...

our culture is radically different. You fear death as much as we don't.

May be i misunderstood but care to exaplin what you mean by this??? *

Duh..???

Hey deckingraj... pass on that something to me which you have been sipping since you joined the discussion, i am sure it must be guud.


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> You and that Rolling guy probably wanted to suggest that there isnt anything known as bravery and courage in this world. But guess what, it exists. Though there's a hair line difference between bravery and stupidity, but then i supposed you were sensible enough to make out that difference, or perhaps not?



I happen to think about what a US Army sergeant mentioned. You have to fear death to stay alive. And then he said, you have to stay alive to even fear death. I took it as how important it meant for them to stay alive and return to their families. If Pakistanis think the other way and actually label that as bravery, that definitely requires a correction in logic and thinking. I would NOT want to be in an Army that believes that. An Army that believes in going back to their families will more likely win and that is the Army I'd want to be in anyways.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

Ok, eff it.

i am out of here.

You cant discuss Kashmir so you try to hide behind Kargil and self-created bravado there, how not so impressive!

And @ Rolling

Did you even read my post # 1200?

Dont feed BS to me and put words in my mouth.


----------



## deckingraj

xeric said:


> *This is what you wrote...
> 
> our culture is radically different. You fear death as much as we don't.
> 
> May be i misunderstood but care to exaplin what you mean by this??? *
> 
> Duh..???
> 
> Hey deckingraj... pass on that something to me which you have been sipping since you joined the discussion, i am sure it must be guud.



 ... I apologized for the confusion and have already corrected the mistake...see the post above....this was written by Abu and i thought it was you....Though i am not sipping anything but seems effect is there ....


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Karthic Sri said:


> Try me........u ll be surprised like hell.



i think by default, it's not in your hands. but let's see



> Shall i show u the mirror......Look around ...U have India and Afganistan(atleast now) as ur enemies.....Pot calls the kettle black.



Afghanistan is our enemy? News to me. Their lifeline is in mutual trade with Pakistan, access to our ports, and of course -- lets not forget that we house MILLIONS of Afghan refugees --many of whom now call Pakistan their home. They have children raised here who have never even seen their ancestral country. We have cultural and ethnic ties to Afghanistan.

Pakistan's net worth of investments there is over $500 million, we send doctors, medics, surgeons, engineers and have many NGOs and other aid agencies active there in the 'field'


Be sure to learn about these initiatives as well:

*Allama Iqbal Faculty of Arts Kabul University
*






*Under construction Jinnah Hospital in Kabul
*

http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/mar-2007/7/index16.php






*Liaqat Ali Khan Engineering Faculty Blockat Mizar-e-Sharef
*



*Kidney Center Jalalabad
*



*Science Block, Jalalabad
*






Karzai of the Northern Alliance  has even corrected his attitude and has made it clear that Afghanistan needs Pakistan and its friendship; Afghanistan is the conjoined twin of Pakistan. 

that is why i once again reiterate, we cannot have peace in FATA (or Pakistan as a whole) if there is instability in Afghanistan. We are working for the good of Afghanistan, since they are our neighbour. Your country has no business in Afghanistan, except to stir up tensions between neighbours. Your strategy is clearly FAILING. 

Security comes through development. Development comes when there is security. You cant have one without the other.




> BTW pls dont call B'Desh,SL,Bhutan and Nepal our enemies.....It shows ur ignorance.



under Bangladesh's current ''setup'' yes the OFFICIAL relations are cordial. I am always hearing about Bangladesh border forces abusing the indians, and regular Bengalis chastizing the indians. 

Sri Lanka --- you had your chance. They look to China and Pakistan now. I guess supporting the LTTE (which terrorized them for 1/4 century was not too smart on your part)

glad Pakistan and China were there to help crush this group




> Haha..u know wat i meant...so im not going into it further.



I guess the truth serum never worked.



> Oh is it..?thats y he s freely making speeches urging armed terrorism against India and none condemns him...Lol thats news to me..



the KKK openly does rallies (even to this day) in many parts of the United States of America. Bal Thakeray of the Shiv Sena openly called for a formation of hindu suicide squads to be used not on Pakistanis per se -- but on 'indian' Muslims.

As for the case of Hafiz Saeed, it is noteworthy that the speech was given during the annually held Kashmir Solidarity Day. Does he not have the democratic right to speak?

For decades, Kashmiri separatists have been holding regular rallies. Why should you get so attached only on Mr. Saeed --whose house arrest was deemed ILLEGAL by the Lahore High Court --which is a free, fair and competent court of the Pakistani nation. 

He even went so far as to say (dare) hindustan to &#8220;prove&#8221; charges against him &#8220;in any court,&#8221; and he would &#8220;accept everything.&#8221; hindustan failed miserably.

As for the remarks he made, he was discussing it in the context of war. 

I.E. if a war were to break out between both countries, it would be necessary to ''stand united and fight [against] India''


is this not a fair statement? I would proudly arm and prepare myself to fight india in the event of hostilities breaking out. This is my country. 

I don't spend too much time thinking about him. Most of the thinking and whining is done by you indians.




> Read this and enlighten urself...Link



what a great non-indian source 




> My reply stands...Thank god..ur not there in my country.



yes, thank God.

(Alhamdolillah)

CASTE DISCRIMINATION:

India's Muslims in Crisis - TIME



> Mayb no questions...but there is certain amount of shame associated with it.



*I have no shame.*



> On ur own terms...?!?! so y dont u ask the CIA to stop the drone attacks that explicitly violates the sovereignity of Pakistan.



b/c the gov't has allowed them 





> And please dont BS me abt how its the ISI thats operating the drones and wat not.



oye hindustany, dont put words in my mouth. Ever.

I dont even remember talking to you on this subject. As for what you said, I believe agencies coordinate with the 'operators' on these strikes. 

_U.S. and Pakistani intelligence officials are drawing up a fresh list of terrorist targets for Predator drone strikes along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, part of a U.S. review of the drone program, according to officials involved.

Pakistani officials are seeking to broaden the scope of the program to target extremists who have carried out attacks against Pakistanis, a move they say could win domestic support. 
_

U.S. Plans New Drone Attacks in Pakistan - WSJ.com




> Frankly the US doesnt give a dime as to wat u think.....US thinks,Pakistan does.



Pakistan stays where it is, foreign NATO troops (including those of U.S.) depart 

2011?

It seems ''schools of thought'' and ''mission parameters'' have drastically changed since 2001.

I think you would understand. 

Just remember, what you read in the newspapers and what you see on the news channels is never the 'whole picture' 



> FYI thats an internal matter of India and we know how to solve it...unless u want me to start with Balochistan.



there is a thread on Baluchistan. I would be more than happy to talk about Baluchistan if you like. Xeric would too, as he politely offered.

He did make a good point that when thousands are massacred in cold blood, it becomes an external matter.

Incident @ Tiananmen Square was an internal matter -- then what happened?



> Time will say.....But surely Geelani's death will be a catalyst for that.



people die, people take their place. 




> There is no un-humane occupation in Kashmir.....Strikes occur evrywere and invaryingly Indian police use Lathis on them...does that mean un-humane occupation..?



Rapes, tortures, disapperences, forced confessions and illegal detention......these are all what Kashmiris have faced for decades, by your forces. 


by the way, the word is ''inhumane''



> So wat u think of this..? Link



as unfortunate as this

Indian police injures dozens of protesters in Nadihal

Army officer booked for civilian killings in Kashmir - 1 - *National News ? News ? MSN India



*&#1575;&#1606;&#1617;&#1575; &#1604;&#1604;&#1729; &#1608; &#1575;&#1606;&#1617;&#1575; &#1575;&#1604;&#1740;&#1729; &#1585;&#1575;&#1580;&#1593;&#1608;&#1606;*





> Thax for ur concern..but that is not happening...Operation Green Hunt is well underway and the recent acts of the Maoists targetting the civilians only shows their desperation and the heat they r feeling.



you may have forgotten they killed 76 policemen in April, and took away their arms and ammunitions

a mere example of how much more powerful and daring they have gotten




> And dont worry soon they ll be history.



i also hope this home grown terrorist group will be dealt with decisively. I just dont see much political will. 



> And moreover even if they capture the nukes dont worry they r not gonna use against Pakistan..rather they lll use against India only.



you could be right. Ever heard of nuclear fall-out?


Realistically, i dont think they will be able to capture and fire your nukes. But I was merely pointing out that your nuclear sites (several of them in fact) are existing in highly affected naxal areas. It is worth raising an eye-brow, consider your other recent security breaches at such sites



> Yeah thats because we dont entertain our puppets demanding freedom in P-O-K or we dont send in proxies labelling them freedom fighters to take away P-O-K or NA.



no but you did do something similar in 1971. So if what you are saying is true, then its a very good payback.




> We have never been erratic....Always consistent in our position that sovereignity/territorial integrity is never under discussion.



i am referring to disputed territory, not hindstan



> Shiv sena..they were never an internal threat...they are a nationalistic party.



how nationalistic of them to threaten to smash trains that dont display marathi language, and threaten Muslims happening to live in hindustan




> As long as ur just laughing in front of ur PC...who in the holy world cares...




I like to laugh. I also like to play squash and go for latenight drive on weekends. It's healthy and uplifting.


have a cool glass of water, and try it sometime. Dont be emotional, don't be foolish.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

RollingStones said:


> I happen to think about what a US Army sergeant mentioned. You have to fear death to stay alive. And then he said, you have to stay alive to even fear death. I took it as how important it meant for them to stay alive and return to their families. *If Pakistanis think the other way and actually label that as bravery, that definitely requires a correction in logic and thinking.* I would NOT want to be in an Army that believes that. An Army that believes in going back to their families will more likely win and that is the Army I'd want to be in anyways.


The tribe of 'martial race', that our soldier boy belongs to, can't tell the difference between _bravery_ and _bravado_, and think both are same. We Indians have been listening to this amazing chest thumping for the last 63 years. And while we listened to this out of tune music, we took two third of Kashmir from them (1947-48), took Kargil from them (1965, 1971), broke them in two pieces (1971), made them gracefully perform one of the largest surrender of armies after WW II (90,000 men in 1971), took Siachen from them (1983), etc. etc. 

Its all good. You are new to this. Hence your bewilderment. You will get used to it soon enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## KS

]y


Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i think by default, it's not in your hands. but let's see



I dont fault u...but this concept of "Coward Hindus" is the source of all the wars,and the ills in South Asia.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Afghanistan is our enemy? News to me. Their lifeline is in mutual trade with Pakistan, access to our ports, and of course -- lets not forget that we house MILLIONS of Afghan refugees --many of whom now call Pakistan their home. They have children raised here who have never even seen their ancestral country. We have cultural and ethnic ties to Afghanistan.
> 
> Pakistan's net worth of investments there is over $500 million, we send doctors, medics, surgeons, engineers and have many NGOs and other aid agencies active there in the 'field'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Karzai of the Northern Alliance  has even corrected his attitude and has made it clear that Afghanistan needs Pakistan and its friendship; Afghanistan is the conjoined twin of Pakistan.



By enemy i mean not being friends...to the level u were wen under the Taliban.
For example u had the co-operation of the Taliban wen hijacking the flight IC 814 but can u expect the same under Karzai - NO -.
I have seen many senior Pakistan members openly condemning Afghanistan for supporting terror in Pakistan themselves and by allowing RAW to operate within Afghanistan.
Now wat "friend" would do so..?

Moreover Pakistan mayb the twin....but there are ample cases of twins becoming mortal enemies..but close friends ..no.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> that is why i once again reiterate, we cannot have peace in FATA (or Pakistan as a whole) if there is instability in Afghanistan. We are working for the good of Afghanistan, since they are our neighbour. Your country has no business in Afghanistan, except to stir up tensions between neighbours. Your strategy is clearly FAILING.



Good for u ur working in Afghanistan.But u dont have the locus standi to dictate who should be in Afghan and who should not.
Afghanistan is a sovereign country..not the fifth province of Pak.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> under Bangladesh's current ''setup'' yes the OFFICIAL relations are cordial. I am always hearing about Bangladesh border forces abusing the indians, and regular Bengalis chastizing the indians.



Thats wat matters...where there is a contentious border there ought to be disturbances.There are numerous cases of Mexicans getting caught or being shot while trying to cross into US.But does that mean US and Mexico are enemies..? NO. 
BD has been a great friend to us and in recent times there has been a huge spurt in co-op especially in the security front.

Link 1

Link 2

Now wat kind of enemy does that..?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Sri Lanka --- you had your chance. They look to China and Pakistan now. I guess supporting the LTTE (which terrorized them for 1/4 century was not too smart on your part)
> 
> glad Pakistan and China were there to help crush this group



Now this is one big myth that if it was not for the Pakistanis LTTE would not have been crushed.I ll dispel that.

Link 3

Of course with a 65 million Tamils in India the central Govt. can provide explicit support to the genocide of Tamils in SL.

It was the Indian Navy's critcal intelligence that lead to SL Navy to destroy the floating arm's caches of the Tigers.
If India has still been supporting the Tigers..even if the whole Of Pak army had come u wouldn have defeated them.As sim ple as that.

And some food for thought.

Link 4




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the KKK openly does rallies (even to this day) in many parts of the United States of America. Bal Thakeray of the Shiv Sena openly called for a formation of hindu suicide squads to be used not on Pakistanis per se -- but on 'indian' Muslims.
> 
> As for the case of Hafiz Saeed, it is noteworthy that the speech was given during the annually held Kashmir Solidarity Day. Does he not have the democratic right to speak?
> 
> For decades, Kashmiri separatists have been holding regular rallies. Why should you get so attached only on Mr. Saeed --whose house arrest was deemed ILLEGAL by the Lahore High Court --which is a free, fair and competent court of the Pakistani nation.
> 
> He even went so far as to say (dare) hindustan to &#8220;prove&#8221; charges against him &#8220;in any court,&#8221; and he would &#8220;accept everything.&#8221; hindustan failed miserably.
> 
> As for the remarks he made, he was discussing it in the context of war.
> 
> I.E. if a war were to break out between both countries, it would be necessary to ''stand united and fight [against] India''
> 
> 
> is this not a fair statement? I would proudly arm and prepare myself to fight india in the event of hostilities breaking out. This is my country.
> 
> I don't spend too much time thinking about him. Most of the thinking and whining is done by you indians.



First regarding Thackeray ji...wen has he ever sent 10 men to Karachi to go on a carnage and is Shiv Sena a UN banned terrorist group.

Hafiz sayeed and Thackeray...apples and Oranges. 

Secondly regarding Sayeed how can we ever prove anything against him wen he is cozily protected by the ISI and any dossier sent against him is conviniently rejected as insufficient and not credible.
Send him here and we ll prove the charges.
BTW Kasab has already implicated his role and Headley is just now "singing" how ISI aided LeT and aided them in the mumbai attacks.
U may conviniently reject my statements.But truth stays.

So much for his democratic right threatening War against another nation India.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> thank God.
> 
> (Alhamdolillah)
> 
> CASTE DISCRIMINATION:



http://www.zmo.de/dietrich/Sectarianism.pdf

Feudalism in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> India's Muslims in Crisis - TIME



Massacre at Ahmadiyya Muslim Mosque; Random act of violence or State Sanctioned Terrorism - iNewP.com, USA

Persecution of the Ahmadiyya Community in Pakistan: An Analysis Under International Law and International Relations

COMMENT: Blasphemy Laws and the Persecution of Minorities in Pakistan Religion Compass Exchanges


Take care of the ills in ur house first before commenting on others.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> b/c the gov't has allowed them



Do u ppl still believe that the drone attacks take place only wen the govt allows them and will be stopped by the US once ur govt decides so..?  




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> oye hindustany, dont put words in my mouth. Ever.
> 
> I dont even remember talking to you on this subject. As for what you said, I believe agencies coordinate with the 'operators' on these strikes.
> 
> _U.S. and Pakistani intelligence officials are drawing up a fresh list of terrorist targets for Predator drone strikes along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, part of a U.S. review of the drone program, according to officials involved.
> 
> Pakistani officials are seeking to broaden the scope of the program to target extremists who have carried out attacks against Pakistanis, a move they say could win domestic support.
> _
> 
> U.S. Plans New Drone Attacks in Pakistan - WSJ.com



Thats precisley for ur (com,on ppl's) consumption and thats not the policy.
If the US decise so..it goes ahead no matter ur govt agrees or not.
And in many cases the drone attacks are not even mentioned in advance in the fear that rogue officials may alert the militants.
So my point stays.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Pakistan stays where it is, foreign NATO troops (including those of U.S.) depart
> 
> 2011?
> 
> It seems ''schools of thought'' and ''mission parameters'' have drastically changed since 2001.
> 
> I think you would understand.
> 
> Just remember, what you read in the newspapers and what you see on the news channels is never the 'whole picture'



that time will tell...but frankly if u think the US does wat Pakistan wishes..ur mistaken sir.Its the opposite thats true.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> there is a thread on Baluchistan. I would be more than happy to talk about Baluchistan if you like. Xeric would too, as he politely offered.
> 
> He did make a good point that when thousands are massacred in cold blood, it becomes an external matter.
> 
> Incident @ Tiananmen Square was an internal matter -- then what happened?



What does Balochistan hold for me...nilch....thats ur pure internal matter that i cant/should not comment.
As is Gujarat which is our internal matter.
And as regards Tianmen square wat happened ..? Nothing
Has Democracy implemented in China,,? NO.....Have u criticised China - NO.

So leave Gujarat to us..its our issue..u ve got no locus standi on it.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> people die, people take their place.



Lets see..but watever happens Kashmir stays with India. 




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Rapes, tortures, disapperences, forced confessions and illegal detention......these are all what Kashmiris have faced for decades, by your forces.



Good propaganda...but nothings gonna change.
The world doesnt give a damn as to wat u(Pak) think,India doesnt give a damn as to wat u think...We have just now started investing heavily in Kashmir and in the next generation u ll see the difference.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> by the way, the word is ''inhumane''



The word used by U...not by everybody.





Abu Zolfiqar said:


> as unfortunate as this
> 
> Indian police injures dozens of protesters in Nadihal
> 
> Army officer booked for civilian killings in Kashmir - 1 - *National News ? News ? MSN India
> 
> 
> 
> *&#1575;&#1606;&#1617;&#1575; &#1604;&#1604;&#1729; &#1608; &#1575;&#1606;&#1617;&#1575; &#1575;&#1604;&#1740;&#1729; &#1585;&#1575;&#1580;&#1593;&#1608;&#1606;*



The fact Army officer was booked inspite of AFSPA being in effect shows our fair sense of Justice..doesnt it....?




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you may have forgotten they killed 76 policemen in April, and took away their arms and ammunitions
> 
> a mere example of how much more powerful and daring they have gotten



Actually that was a blessing in disguise for us...more like ur taliban taking away Swat.That awoke U...similarly till that day the establishment was in double minds..after that we started focussing.
By killing 76 of our brave souls those fools unknowingly shot themselves in the foot.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i also hope this home grown terrorist group will be dealt with decisively. I just dont see much political will.



Thanx for ur concern..they will be.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you could be right. Ever heard of nuclear fall-out?
> 
> 
> Realistically, i dont think they will be able to capture and fire your nukes. But I was merely pointing out that your nuclear sites (several of them in fact) are existing in highly affected naxal areas. It is worth raising an eye-brow, consider your other recent security breaches at such sites



first of all no-one knows were our nuclear sites are.
Secondly most of our secret facilities are rumoured to be in South India out of reach for most of Pak missiles and in this case Maoists.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> no but you did do something similar in 1971. So if what you are saying is true, then its a very good payback



Doesnot seem to be a good payback if u see if any of the objectives were accomplished.
Has the proxies been able to separate a single inch of my motherland and hand it back to Pak...? .




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i am referring to disputed territory, not hindstan



wat u call disputed.is integral for us and that is non-negotiable.
Pardon me if im being arrogant here.every Indian is like that in this issue.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> how nationalistic of them to threaten to smash trains that dont display marathi language, and threaten Muslims happening to live in hindustan



U dont have any idea as to wat ur speaking rite.?
Of course every state must have signs in its own language and how will the native population understand if its in an unintelligible language..?
threaten Muslims.....goto mumbai bhaisaab.There are muslim mla's in Shiv Sena too.U might find it hard to believe.But u gotta believe meon this.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> I like to laugh. I also like to play squash and *go for latenight drive on weekends*. It's healthy and uplifting.



And i share ur passion.



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> have a cool glass of water, and try it sometime. Dont be emotional, don't be foolish.



Dont worry its monsoon here and so having only hot water.
Yes we r emotional but certainly not foolish.if u think otherwise its at ur own peril.


----------



## ouiouiouiouiouioui

this country has got *1.25 billion *manpower

realise the *size greater than the whole europe*...

economy moving at *8-9&#37;* a year

they have produced *Nobel Laureates*

these people send *satellites to moon *to find water

their compagnie's are *acquiring Global Compagnie's*......Mergers worth Billions of Dollars

recently the indian govt collected nearly *25 billion dollars *just for telephone bandwith sale !!..thats a huge sum of money

world's *best information techies *are born here

they have got *missiles, rockets, fighter planes, tanks, million people army*


and above all the coolest thing is that "*they invented ZERO*"

still if anybody thinks on this planet that indians are giving kashmir.......i really doubt with those apprehensions....really the best solution is* "You Keep out of My FCKING part and i will keep out of your".*....i think thats the best part

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RollingStones

toxic_pus said:


> The tribe of 'martial race', that our soldier boy belongs to, can't tell the difference between _bravery_ and _bravado_, and think both are same. We Indians have been listening to this amazing chest thumping for the last 63 years. And while we listened to this out of tune music, we took two third of Kashmir from them (1947-48), took Kargil from them (1965, 1971), broke them in two pieces (1971), made them gracefully perform one of the largest surrender of armies after WW II (90,000 men in 1971), took Siachen from them (1983), etc. etc.
> 
> Its all good. You are new to this. Hence your bewilderment. You will get used to it soon enough.



If this is true, then Pakistanis need to introspect. Perhaps their misguided "bravado" is what's making them lose these wars. The other thing about "bravado" is you are likely going to get used. Anyone with a lot of passion but with a lot less thinking, ultimately gets misled by people who just appeal to their hearts and not to their minds. I need to learn more about Pakistani culture but if there is a generalization that Pakistanis think instinctively and not as a collective that take other people in the world along with them, I fear they'll get more isolated and this in turn is going to cause more alienation between pakistanis and the rest of the world. This cycles needs to be immediately stopped and ,if possible, even reversed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## H2O3C4Nitrogen

*India calls for &#8216;creative solutions&#8217; to Kashmir issue*

* Nirupama Rao says India wants stable, progressing Pakistan
* Pakistan must stop entry of radical ideology into religion

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: India has called for using &#8220;creative solutions&#8221; to settle the Kashmir problem, at the same time urging Pakistan to &#8220;shed its insecurity&#8221; and to stop looking at &#8220;India&#8217;s growth in subjective or negative terms&#8221;.

Addressing a closed-door session on Afghanistan-India-Pakistan trialogue organised by the Delhi Policy Group (DPG), Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao admitted that progress had been made on the Kashmir issue on the basis of an understanding that &#8220;boundaries cannot be redrawn&#8221;.

According to the text of Rao&#8217;s speech that was made public, she said that the idea behind the understanding was to make boundaries irrelevant and to enable people on both sides of the Line of Control (LoC) to move freely and trade with each other.

Rao stressed that India wanted a stable, peaceful and economically progressing Pakistan. &#8220;Secondly, we sincerely desire peace with Pakistan. Thirdly, we have to learn to live with the asymmetries in our sizes and capabilities. Pakistan should shed its insecurity on these counts,&#8221; she said.

She asked Pakistan to prevent the entry of radical ideology into the domain of religion, saying it could have grave implications for peace and security between India and Pakistan, and also make differences over Kashmir more pronounced.

&#8220;As an intrinsic part of the long-term vision of relations it desires with India, Pakistan must act effectively against those terrorist groups that seek to nullify and to destroy the prospects of peace and cooperation between our two countries,&#8221; Rao said.

She said the road ahead was a long and winding one. &#8220;But as fellow travellers, India and Pakistan must tackle the challenges of this rocky road with the belief that a secure and prosperous future vitally and crucially depends on our ability to do so,&#8221; she said.

&#8220;There is a trust deficit (between the two countries). Some also refer to a vision deficit, especially since India has over the years sought to spell out a broader vision of our relationship while a similar definition has not been easy for Pakistan to enunciate,&#8221; she said.

&#8220;We want to see a peaceful, stable, energy-secure and prosperous Pakistan that acts as a bulwark against terrorism for its own sake and for the good of the region. Asymmetries in size and development, should not prevent us from working together, and realising a vision of friendly bilateral relations,&#8221; she said.

Water issue: Noting that in recent years, unprecedented focus on the &#8220;water issue&#8221; between the two countries has also been witnessed, Rao said &#8220;propaganda and baseless charges about water theft and illegal construction of dams have been spread and poisoned the atmosphere of our relations further&#8221;.

She claimed that &#8220;the myth&#8221; of water theft did not stand the test of rational scrutiny or reason. &#8220;India has never sought to deny Pakistan its fair and stipulated share of the Indus waters,&#8221; she said.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

yes so creative that it's the same stories and same lines, same rhetoric we've been hearing since as far back as i can remember.


----------



## Jade

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes so creative that it's the same stories and same lines, same rhetoric we've been hearing since as far back as i can remember.



Is it not the same from Pakistan side also


----------



## vsdoc

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes so creative that it's the same stories and same lines, same rhetoric we've been hearing since as far back as i can remember.



As opposed to the brilliantly original solutions and constructive contributions to peace we have enjoyed from your side as far back as I can remember.

The other option of course is to continue on the path we have been following. 

I am sure even the most rabidly anti-Indian Pakistani amongst you realises that you are simply out of your league now when it comes to fighting us for anything.

Be happy that India is coming at you in peace. The alternative is not something you would enjoy.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## toxic_pus

RollingStones said:


> If this is true, then Pakistanis need to introspect. Perhaps their misguided "bravado" is what's making them lose these wars. The other thing about "bravado" is you are likely going to get used. Anyone with a lot of passion but with a lot less thinking, ultimately gets misled by people who just appeal to their hearts and not to their minds. I need to learn more about Pakistani culture but if there is a generalization that Pakistanis think instinctively and not as a collective that take other people in the world along with them, I fear they'll get more isolated and this in turn is going to cause more alienation between pakistanis and the rest of the world. This cycles needs to be immediately stopped and ,if possible, even reversed.


I am not an expert on Pakistani culture, but I sure believe that this 'bravado' is not an universal phenomenon among Pakistanis. However, having said that, I must admit that I find many takers of this presumptive superiority over 'Hindu' Indians, among the military fraternity of Pakistan.

Henry Kissinger, in his memoirs, 'The White House Years', narrated one such anecdote. In 1971, in the middle of massive civil unrest in East Pakistan, which later became Bangladesh, Mr Kissinger was visiting Pakistan. In one conversation, he was discussing with the (then) president Yahya Khan and his foreign secretary Sultan Khan, about the situation in East Pakistan. He writes:

_' I urged them to put forward a comprehensive proposal to encourage refugees to return home and to deny India a pretext for going to war. I urged Yahya and his associates to go a step farther in the internationalization of relief by admitting the United Nations to supervise its distribution. And I recommended the early appointment of a civilian governor for East Pakistan. Yahya promised to consider these suggestions. But fundamentally he was oblivious to his perils and unprepared to face necessities. *He and his colleagues did not believe that India might be planning war; if so, they were convinced that they would win. When I asked as tactfully as I could about the Indian advantage in numbers and equipment, Yahya and his colleagues answered with bravado about the historic superiority of Moslem fighters.*'
_

There are many such examples in many other writings. But I am sure you get the idea.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liberalindian8

I liked your photo presentations. 

I don't think India will accept any of these solutions. So If you really want to make this discussion fruitful, include the secret solution which Musharraf and Indian govt worked upon. That was acceptable to both countries.


----------



## Nihat

liberalindian8 said:


> I liked your photo presentations.
> 
> I don't think India will accept any of these solutions. So If you really want to make this discussion fruitful, include the secret solution which Musharraf and Indian govt worked upon. That was acceptable to both countries.



Pakistan has to accept status quo , it can be sooner or later because there is simply no other option open to them. It can accept this now or wage another 20 years of proxy war.

Makes no difference to India either way.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## deckingraj

Nihat said:


> Pakistan has to accept status quo , it can be sooner or later because there is simply no other option open to them. It can accept this now or wage another 20 years of proxy war.
> 
> Makes no difference to India either way.



it would be wrong if we say it makes no difference to India...500,000 of our Army is situated in Kashmir just because of this insurgency....So many lives and money have been lost due to it...However proxy war is not solving its purpose...it is not making India bend on it knees and sit on negotiating table to solve Kashmir as per Pakistan wishes...So there you are right that the only option available to pak is accept status quo and make the boundaries invisible....


----------



## iiindian

The only solution is to solve the issue is to make loc as IB(sooner the better). 
Or else it will be difficult for pak in the future.because 
india is becoming economicaly and militarily stronger.so in the future bargaines pak's position will only become weaker. 
infiltration of terrorists from pak to kashmir has become less and will be lesser as our armed forces will be better equipped to survive terrain,and latest technology will be there to detect and eliminate the infiltration attempts. 
pak cannot even think about a kargil like mis adventure because the military gap between india and pak will only become huge in the future. 
US Support for pak will be minimal once they met their objectives (elimination of terrorists).


----------



## Hulk

IMO the way it can be solved is when both sides become practical. People have to understand that neither insurgency nor war can lead to the solution, so when an approach cannot lead to solution we have to think differently.
We need to understand that it will not be possible to change the border as it will be something not easy to buy. The only solution lies in making the border irrelevant, people on both sides allowed moving freely within the territory.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

iiindian said:


> The only solution is to solve the issue is to make loc as IB(sooner the better).
> Or else it will be difficult for pak in the future.because
> india is becoming economicaly and militarily stronger.so in the future bargaines pak's position will only become weaker.
> infiltration of terrorists from pak to kashmir has become less and will be lesser as our armed forces will be better equipped to survive terrain,and latest technology will be there to detect and eliminate the infiltration attempts.
> pak cannot even think about a kargil like mis adventure because the military gap between india and pak will only become huge in the future.
> US Support for pak will be minimal once they met their objectives (elimination of terrorists).



you speak with so much zeal, so much conviction! 


The military gap was largest during Kargil campaign, a lot of our aircrafts were grounded due to sanctions. Even then you guys took quite the thrashing you had to call in your air force


----------



## foxbat

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you speak with so much zeal, so much conviction!
> 
> 
> The military gap was largest during Kargil campaign, a lot of our aircrafts were grounded due to sanctions. Even then you guys took quite the thrashing you had to call in your air force



The number and strength of the tools used is irrelavant as long as they get the job done. And diplomacy is one of the most potent tools available. The way the Kargil misadventure was handled by India forces without crossing the LoC (and taking the bait that Musharraf wanted India to take) is the reason why Pakistan's Prime minister was summoned to Washington and was given a dressing down by Clinton. 

And your comment about thrashing reminds me of one of the old Amitabh Starrers in India - Amar Akbar Anthony. In that Amitabh gets a solid beating by Vinod Khanna and is locked up in a holding cell. There he says " Tumne apun of dus mara and apun ne tum to 2 mara. But solid mara".
Sounds nice in a movie, but hey, the difference of 8 is too big to ignore in real life.. Isnt it?

Really some of the Pakistani members here talking about how PAF was better in 1971 than IAF or how it took so long for India to clear Kargil sound so much like a lamer version of the above statement.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

So if you are fed up of reading those things, then just get lost and don't log in again. Simple as that. 

You arent doing us some favour by posting here, indian.


----------



## foxbat

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> So if you are fed up of reading those things, then just get lost and don't log in again. Simple as that.
> 
> You arent doing us some favour by posting here, indian.



Did I touch a raw nerve.. ? Anyway to your question, no I am not fed up of reading those. Always gives me a good laugh. And no, I am certainly doing no one any favors by posting here. On the contrary, its the Admin team of this forum who is doing us all a favor by running such a popular forum..


But then we are going off topic here..


----------



## iiindian

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> you speak with so much zeal, so much conviction!
> 
> 
> The military gap was largest during Kargil campaign, a lot of our aircrafts were grounded due to sanctions. Even then you guys took quite the thrashing you had to call in your air force



so you are accepting the fact that it was your army men who infiltrated in kargil(pak govt always denied that).
And about thrashing..remember our pm was busy making peace process with pak civilian govt and your army stabbed my country from the back.Once you occupied that hills it was difficult for us to re capture that point because of terrain.But ultimatly we have done it and you guys failed in your attempt and you are still proud of your cheating and call it a bravery.


----------



## amit26uk

Kashmiri pandits dont want to live in Pakistan they want their own homeland called 'panum kashmir', most the kashmiri pandits live in camps in jammu and delhi because the indian goverment failed them.


----------



## iiindian

Make LOC the IB that is the only possible solution.This way we both can claim that we won and when there is peace, life in kashmir will certainly improve.
Then we can reduce army presence in kashmir (if pak stops supporting infiltraters)and both countries can reduce their defence budget also(that means more money for development).so this way its a win win situation for both parties.


----------



## RollingStones

amit26uk said:


> Kashmiri pandits dont want to live in Pakistan they want their own homeland called 'panum kashmir', most the kashmiri pandits live in camps in jammu and delhi because the indian goverment failed them.



I read a bit about Kashmiri solutions. It appears that Kashmiri pandits want a separate state (a separate district within Kashmir valley) within J&K, and under Indian constitution. Is this true? Wont this this complicate the solution? This problem is more complex than I thought.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

yes of course its extremely complicated....hindustany say plebicite is not possible at this point; i personally dont see why it isnt. 

If the new britisher ''report'' that came out on Kashmir is to be believed, then i dont see what objections hindustanys would have to it


----------



## sulemani keeda

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes of course its extremely complicated....hindustany say plebicite is not possible at this point; i personally dont see why it isnt.
> 
> If the new britisher ''report'' that came out on Kashmir is to be believed, then i dont see what objections hindustanys would have to it



Plebliscite is not possible because pakistany establishment has brought considerable changes in demographics of the region with the "locals" being outnumbered by outsiders. This would effectively manipulate the opinion of actual dwellers of the region.

India on its part have maintained the status quo as per the article 370 of Indian constitution. No outsider is allowed to reside permanently or buy property in kashmir


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

its a land dispute....not an ethnic dispute. Demographics have changed all over the place. Many Kashmiris also voluntarily left on Pakistani side and hindustany-occupied side -- to larger cities in search of jobs. 

forget the demographics....given status quo, just hold the plebicite. I personally think the whole thing about demographics is exaggerated and over-stated bullshit. But that's my view.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxbat

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> its a land dispute....not an ethnic dispute. Demographics have changed all over the place. Many Kashmiris also voluntarily left on Pakistani side and hindustany-occupied side -- to larger cities in search of jobs.
> 
> forget the demographics....given status quo, just hold the plebicite. I personally think the whole thing about demographics is exaggerated and over-stated bullshit. But that's my view.



The significance of the plebiscite was to allow the then population to chose. That population demos no longer exist. So a plebiscite today does not conform to the sentiment of Kashmiris to decide fate of Kashmir on which the whole concept was based. Hence impractical and nothing but a red herring in the ongoing rivalry between India and Pakistan


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

ask the people LIVING IN THE LANDS -- people who call those lands HOME -- what they want to do. 

the fact that hindustanys dont allow non-Kashmiris to purchase land is interesting. Then please don't feed me the lines that it is integral part of hindustan when you arent granting the 2 sides equal rights.

i heard of Muslim celebrities not being able to buy land in Mumbai. Same deal.


In Pakistan our mentality is different. If you have the cash, you can buy the land. Doesnt matter who you are --especially among Muslims. We dont think about ethnicity or other things. A Baluch Pakistani could pack up one day and go buy property in Gilgit if he wanted to, if he had the means to do so.


----------



## sulemani keeda

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ask the people LIVING IN THE LANDS -- people who call those lands HOME -- what they want to do.



We are simply not interested. What do you think, mere whinning of pakistanys will pursuade the GOI to alter its stand?


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

oye zardari, this thread is about solutions. That's my simple solution for a complicated matter like this.

It isn't just us ''whining'' do remember that. It is also the Kashmiris themselves. Quit being so self-centered, it's doing you no justice and no good.


----------



## Ras

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ask the people LIVING IN THE LANDS -- people who call those lands HOME -- what they want to do.
> 
> the fact that hindustanys dont allow non-Kashmiris to purchase land is interesting. Then please don't feed me the lines that it is integral part of hindustan when you arent granting the 2 sides equal rights.
> 
> i heard of Muslim celebrities not being able to buy land in Mumbai. Same deal.
> 
> 
> In Pakistan our mentality is different. If you have the cash, you can buy the land. Doesnt matter who you are --especially among Muslims. We dont think about ethnicity or other things. A Baluch Pakistani could pack up one day and go buy property in Gilgit if he wanted to, if he had the means to do so.



If that is the case then the Indian govt should abrogate Article 370 and bring in people from outside. The Kashmir valley (not the whole state of Jammu and Kashmir) will get inundated by mainland Indians who will turn the demographics in their favor within a short time and then hold the plebiscite. 

How fair is that not very isn't it?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxbat

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ask the people LIVING IN THE LANDS -- people who call those lands HOME -- what they want to do.


The folks living there(in Pakistan) at this point of time are not the ones for who this plebiscite was to be held...




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the fact that hindustanys dont allow non-Kashmiris to purchase land is interesting. Then please don't feed me the lines that it is integral part of hindustan when you arent granting the 2 sides equal rights.



Apart from Kashmir there are other states like Himachal Pradesh, Uttaranchal etc where non domiciles of the state can not purchase any land. This is done to maintain the ethinicity of the state. And there is no dispute in those states. And just like those states, J&K is an integral part of India for all concerned(except in wild dreams of some people across the border )



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i heard of Muslim celebrities not being able to buy land in Mumbai. Same deal.


Dreams again. Funny thing is that the same media which is treated as a joke on this forum, suddenly becomes oh so credible when it reports against India.. Lame ??




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> In Pakistan our mentality is different. If you have the cash, you can buy the land. Doesnt matter who you are --especially among Muslims. We dont think about ethnicity or other things. A Baluch Pakistani could pack up one day and go buy property in Gilgit if he wanted to, if he had the means to do so.



Yes. I know.. Money talks in Pakistan  .. btw.. am personally against not being able to buy land in hill states like Uttaranchal, Himachal and J&K. Had to seek 5000 permissions for my recent purchase of a small piece in Himachal.


----------



## foxbat

Ras said:


> If that is the case then the Indian govt should abrogate Article 370 and bring in people from outside. The Kashmir valley (not the whole state of Jammu and Kashmir) will get inundated by mainland Indians who will turn the demographics in their favor within a short time and then hold the plebiscite.
> 
> How fair is that not very isn't it?



Its a neat solution though. Problem solved in 5-7 years.


----------



## PakSher

But if settlers are attacked and there is ethnic violence then situation will be worst then before. Problem may be solved in 500-700 years.


----------



## PakSher

India needs to abide by the 2 passed UN resolutions. Whenever you remind India of the resolutions they dodge the question. If countries keep picking and choosing the UN resolutions they like and do not like there might not be any UN in 10 years. That could be a good thing though for smaller countries.


----------



## BJlaowai

PakSher said:


> India needs to abide by the 2 passed UN resolutions. Whenever you remind India of the resolutions they dodge the question. If countries keep picking and choosing the UN resolutions they like and do not like there might not be any UN in 10 years. That could be a good thing though for smaller countries.



OK. As per the UN resolutions, Pakistan should first vacate the parts of pre-1947 Jammu and Kashmir state. 
Also, Pakistan forfeited its right to demand implementation of the UN reoslutions once it tried force a military solution to the issue in 1965.
UN resolutions don't factor in the actual aspirations of the Kashmiris, which is complete independance from India and Pakistan.


----------



## foxbat

PakSher said:


> But if settlers are attacked and there is ethnic violence then situation will be worst then before. Problem may be solved in 500-700 years.



Keep hoping dude.. If you want to do a reality check, google BPO industry in Kashmir. The process has already started. When money talks, every one listens.. And that goes for the separatist folks in J&K as well..


----------



## foxbat

PakSher said:


> India needs to abide by the 2 passed UN resolutions. Whenever you remind India of the resolutions they dodge the question. If countries keep picking and choosing the UN resolutions they like and do not like there might not be any UN in 10 years. That could be a good thing though for smaller countries.



You need to read up the history a bit. There is no dodging. India rejected the resolution in 1950's. India and Pakistan both have their own versions of the reasons of that rejection. Today no other country except Pakistan talks about that resolution. Doesnt hurt us.. Go ahead.. knock your self out...


----------



## toxic_pus

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> yes of course its extremely complicated....hindustany say plebicite is not possible at this point; *i personally dont see why it isnt.*
> 
> If the new britisher ''report'' that came out on Kashmir is to be believed, then i dont see what objections hindustanys would have to it





Abu Zolfiqar said:


> its a land dispute....not an ethnic dispute. Demographics have changed all over the place. Many Kashmiris also voluntarily left on Pakistani side and hindustany-occupied side -- to larger cities in search of jobs.
> 
> forget the demographics....*given status quo, just hold the plebicite*. I personally think the whole thing about demographics is exaggerated and over-stated bullshit. But that's my view.


The reason why plebiscite can't be held now, inspite of the status quo, is that the three basic preconditions to plebiscite have yet not been fulfilled. Condition#1 is that Pakistan shall withdraw all its troops and citizens from the part of Kashmir that is 'currently under their control'. Condition#2 is that, subsequent to Pakistan's withdrawal, India shall reduce troop strength to a level acceptable to UN. Condition#3 is that, the land evacuated by Pak will be governed by 'local authority' under direct supervision of UN.

Only if these conditions are fulfilled, movement towards plebiscite can begin. 

Since you are suggesting a plebiscite now, in accordance to the situation that exists on the ground, you seem to want to bypass UN imposed conditions. So here is a quick question: would the result of a plebiscite conducted entirely by GoI be acceptable to you (leave GoP out because they have enough cranium power to suggest an extra-UN plebiscite)? If it is not, feel free to propose a mechanism to ensure neutrality (without referring to UN, of course). 



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ask the people LIVING IN THE LANDS -- people who call those lands HOME -- what they want to do.
> 
> the fact that hindustanys dont allow non-Kashmiris to purchase land is interesting. Then please don't feed me the lines that it is integral part of hindustan when you arent granting the 2 sides equal rights.


Yes, we should abolish Article 370 immediately, flood the valley with Indians from rest of the country, and when we have completely skewed the demographics in our favour, we will conduct a plebiscite.

Capiche. 



> i heard of Muslim celebrities not being able to buy land in Mumbai. Same deal.
> 
> 
> In Pakistan our mentality is different. If you have the cash, you can buy the land. Doesnt matter who you are --especially among Muslims. We dont think about ethnicity or other things. A Baluch Pakistani could pack up one day and go buy property in Gilgit if he wanted to, if he had the means to do so.


Yes, we are aware of Pakistani mentality. It is not for no reason that you lost your Eastern wing. Having no respect for indigenous populations and their aspirations, is not something to be proud of.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

Our Indian Kashmir state. Our Indian Kashmiri people. Our Indian Kashmir solution. By us Indians. For us Indians. All 1.2 billion Indians. Simple.

For too long we have pretended to be bothered by what Pakistan thinks or will do. 

For too long have we pretended to be bothered by what the world thinks of us as a fair and mature democratic player pitted against the exact opposite in this 6 decade old tussle.

For too long have we been playing footsie with ex-separatist now-official-system elements within Kashmir.

For too long have we pandered to one population of Kashmir at the cost of others, in the name of being fair to the minority religion of our country.

For too long have we called ourselves secular, yet been hostage to vote bank politics that threatens the very fabric of our nation.

For too long has each successive Indian government dragged its feet in Kashmir in a bid to maintain status quo during its tenure, passing the parcel of a definitive solution on to its successor.

Its been more than 20 years since the violence broke out.

10 years after the violence broke out, both countries officially went nuclear. We missed our opportunities before. We missed a golden opportunity then.

Kashmir since then and now is a zero sum game. Any other way of looking at it is flying in LSD and magic mushroom territory. Or Afghan black. Or Malana cream. Depending on your preference.

85 pages of discussions. Some civil, some not. But the bottom line from both sides remains the same. If a forum full of highly educated and intelligent people (for the most part) cannot come to some mutually satisfactory solution in cyber world in an imaginative non-binding no strings attached environment, then I am really sorry to say that in the real world, with some really spectacular loonies on both sides, with our leaders thrown in for good measure, in the backdrop of the history of blood and violence that we share, a solution to Kashmir is just not going to happen. Not now. Not ever. 

The Indians have put forth solutions to the Pakistanis. I have been one of them. The Pakistanis are bent on manipulation, cross border terrorism, playing the nuclear MAD card, and wet dreams of an untenable plebiscite.

So what do we do? Should we wait for eternity for the Pakistanis to give up to the inevitable, and maintain a military staus quo till then? Sure we do. We know Pakistan is never ever going to be in a position of aggression vis-a-vis India today or tomorrow. So we sit tight, and defend. That's what we have been doing, and what we should continue to do.

But that's not all. India wants more. Indians want more. And amongst those Indians, Kashmiris want more. Its really unfair for Pakistan to behave like a "dog in the manger" here, where if it cannot get something, it makes sure that others do not either. Especially seen in the backdrop of them holding the good of the Kashmiri people paramount in their hearts. Pakistan today needs to realise that they are not wanted. Not by Indians obviously. And increasingly not by the Kashmiris whom they claim to champion, whether the Kashmiris want it or not.

So in the interim, what should India and we Indians do? That is what we need to concentrate upon. That is what our leaders need to concentrate upon. That is what our Kashmiris, wherever they may be, need to concentrate upon. 

While our warriors ensure the peace and the space needed to make that happen.

And that is what we Indian posters here on PDF too should concentrate on, instead of regurgitating the same you said, I said, you did, I did, your Kashmir, our Kashmir, nawab vs UN rehashed content again and again and again ad nauseum all over the ******** forum. 

So hope to see some really constructive posts moving forward about what we Indians should be doing about our Kashmir and our Kashmiri brothers instead of the really boring and brain numbing regular Indo-Pak saas bahu tu tu main main ritual that is de rigeur here.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## vsdoc

Since I am the one whose brain is totally numbed here, and it was I who made the suggestion, let me also kick off the process of constructive Indian solutions for Indian kashmir, by Indians and for Indians.

I am in no way or form insinuating that Pakistanis are not wanted in this discussion (fully tongue in cheek seeing I am an Indian on a Pakistani forum ). I am merely trying to add some substance to a discussion and thread that has become very repetitive and boring, with each successive generation rehashing the same lines, and with some die hard fossils indulging in cross generational rehashing, yours truly included.

I say this with the luxury of distance and absence, coming back after an extended hiatus, and seeing old wine in an old bottle, where simply the drinkers have changed, as a natural progression of coming of legal age I suppose.

So let me start.

I saw this kickass movie last night. As with most good things in life, it happened by chance, as I was bored of Discovery Turbo and was flipping channels and happened on to it.

The movie is called *"Sikandar"*, set in Kashmir, and the usual protagonists - the Army, the People, and the Jihadis, seen from the eyes of the forgotten innocents - the children of Kashmir.

I am a father, I have kids of my own, and while I am not usually a softie, I was really touched. As were my kids who watched the movie along with me, with their mama grumbling about school the next day and how I would be responsible for waking them up. I truly from my heart invite all of you to see this movie. It has Madhavan as the upright army officer with soul. My old classmate from school, who we used to call _balaji_ for some reason.

It set me thinking. Obviously its an Indian movie, so lets not get into the dramatisation and the right and wrong of things. But look at the bigger message. The kids of Kashmir.

They are the Kashmiris we need to concentrate on. They are still young. Impressionable. Innocent. They are the generation not yet hardened by hate or pain or death or clash of loyalties or religious and social indoctrination or polarisation or isolation or hopelessness or fear or terror or poverty or despondency.

Not yet. But allowed to grow up like the generation before them in violence torn Kashmir, they will grow into the same mold of their mothers and fathers. It is inevitable, and India would lose another generation.

We need to find a way of engaging these kids into mainstream India. Class tours. Competitions. Sports. Exchange students. Subsidised boarding schools. Summer camps. Holiday tours. And for this we need it to be done not by the government, seen as "center" or "sarkar" by the Kashmiris in general. Neither should it involve the army as is being practiced as an exercise in rehabilitation of tamil kids in Sri Lanka. But it should be funded by Industry, by corporates, by institutions, with equal participation of common regular Indians, including our mainstream Muslim community and its elders and opinion leaders.

Let the kids of Kashmir into our day to day lives of mainstream India. Let them mix and play and learn and fight with our kids. Let them see the vastness and greatness and diversity of our country. Let them feel the love of all Indians, hindus, sikhs, christians, buddhists, jains, parsis. Let them see that we consider them to be our own. Let them see the wealth and the standard of living in regular Indians towns and villages and cities and homes. Let them see our roads and facilities and malls and factories and dairies and farms and dams and schools and colleges and movie halls. Let them see all this without the ever looming fear of the gun or the bomb.

What a strong line, so touching in its childlike simplicity - "Ab hum mahfooz hain."

Let this generation of Kashmiris grow up with Indians as Indians. Not as Kashmiris in isolation. Let them then go back to their families and homes and mosques and playgrounds and bazaars and question age old prejudices and lines of thought of their elders. Let them be the medium of change. And then let them grow into adults as fully integrated Indians. 

That is what we need to do.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## rubyjackass

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> ask the people LIVING IN THE LANDS -- people who call those lands HOME -- what they want to do.
> 
> the fact that hindustanys dont allow non-Kashmiris to purchase land is interesting. Then please don't feed me the lines that it is integral part of hindustan when you arent granting the 2 sides equal rights.


That is something India should decide for itself. Besides Indian constitution clearly is in sync with this. I dont see any contradiction. 



> i heard of Muslim celebrities not being able to buy land in Mumbai. Same deal.
> 
> 
> *In Pakistan our mentality is different. If you have the cash, you can buy the land. Doesnt matter who you are --especially among Muslims. We dont think about ethnicity or other things. A Baluch Pakistani could pack up one day and go buy property in Gilgit if he wanted to*, if he had the means to do so.


Thats not exactly something to be proud of in this matter. That is exactly what is alienating some provinces in Pak. It is not a muslim thing at all. It is a special safeguard applicable only to Kashmiris, not any form of racism.


----------



## vsdoc

The second step of re/mainstreaming Kashmir into the Indian success story is removing the archaic and in the current context discriminatory provisions of isolating Kashmir from the rest of India and non-Kashmiri Indians. I am not a great admirer of Nehru truth be told, and I think this was not one of his particularly bright brainwaves.

Of course we need to do this in a fair and transparent manner which does not alarm the local Kashmiris or cause them to ghetto-ise in insecurity with the influx from mainstream India. It should not be either seen as the opportunity to land grab by the ever ready and present opportunist land sharks all over our country. Also, as with the rest of our country, religion should steadfastly be refused entry as a consideration moving forward.

The formula needs to be worked out by us Indians, legislated on by our judiciary impartially, enacted upon by Parliament, and enforced and protected by our civilian police and paramilitary forces so that there is smooth, painless and peaceful assimilation of Kashmir and Kashmiris into industry, governance, agriculture, and social fabric. As also protect corporates who should come forward to invest heavily in Kashmir.

I feel there should still be restrictions on private individual land purchases, in order to prevent the inundation of the state and the complete commercialisation of the natural beauty and resources, thus spoiling one of the most beautiful parts of our country as we have done to so many of our once pristine hill stations. But industry has to come in.

As a result of Nehruvian stupidity, Kashmir never had any industry, and tourism was its only source of income. Great when things were ok and peaceful, but not so over the past quarter a century. The local population has suffered in grinding poverty as a result. And have been exploited by vested interests who desire just this as fertile ground to spread their message of hatred, discontent, and violence. Tourism basically gave way to Jihadism as a cottage industry, as the ONLY industry for the past few generations of Kashmiris who saw no better and easier alternative to meet their growing aspirations, but were bound in their own homeland, crippled by the lack of opportunity that the unrest brought with it.

But industry will not move in if their infrastructure investments are not protected. If their workers are not proected. And if there is no place for their workers to live. To be competitive, there will have to be an influx of talent from other states of India. But equally there would be a form of quota or reservation for the locals too. Thus it would be a win win situation for all. And once the wheels of commerce start turning, the same kids I spoke about in my last post, would have the opportunities and a shot at the standard of living their other compatriots enjoyed all over the country.

Less excuses to resort to the gun. More motivation for peace, settlement, and reintegration. Less opportunities for Jihadist recruiters from within the country and without. 

The power of the Indian rupee will be felt across the state, and then we would get a true representation of what is really important to the Kashmiri people.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> In Pakistan our mentality is different. If you have the cash, you can buy the land. Doesnt matter who you are --especially among Muslims. We dont think about ethnicity or other things. A Baluch Pakistani could pack up one day and go buy property in Gilgit if he wanted to, if he had the means to do so.



The people of Gilgit-Baltistan cannot even vote to elect the president, the prime minister, or the members of the National Assembly but you people want their land. What an irony. 

Anyway by allowing people from other areas of Pakistan to settle in NA, you yourself are diluting UN resolutions. Don't you know that NA is a part of 'disputed' J&K


----------



## vsdoc

Sport is an important national unifier. It has been proven true across sports, across continents, across people, across religions and races, throughout history.

One example that comes readily to mind, is the post-Apartheid coming together of black and white South Africa over what was, has always been, and still is their No.1 national passion - Rugby.

Who can forget the photos of a frail Nelson Mandela wearing the springbok yellow jersey and hugging the huge white captain after SA lifted the World Cup, after being out in the sporting wilderness for so many years. That one action did more to heal decades of hurt and pain than any other exercise in rapproachment could have achieved.

So if we are to pull Kashmir into our mainstream fold, we have to involve them in cricket. I would go as far as to say that for the next 10 years at least make sure that hook or crook we have at least two Kashmiri muslim players playing in our national senior team.

And then start playing Pakistan once again!

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rubyjackass

Excellent analysis doc

With regards to dilution of Article 370, India can set up some rules like you can buy a living place if you atleast this amount in Kashmir. This amount should run into crores. We can have investment and also development. Security should be entirely state's responsibility obviously.
Also teachers who teach in JK univ for more than x years, they can improve the education situation there. Additional regulations like they should know Kashmiri can be also fixed.


----------



## vsdoc

Thanks Ruby. I have purposely stayed away from the return of the hindu pandits cause we need to ease changes in gradually. We are looking at integration, and not alienation. But their day will come, of that I have no doubt. They are good people. Many of them my friends. And they are living like refugees, with sadness and pain in different parts of their own country.

The Kashmiris have already realised that one way or the other their future is with India. They want to live. They want to grow. They want peace. They want prosperity. Just like any other Indian. Yes, the presence of the Army at every chouraha in Kashmir is stifling. I have experienced that even as a visiting Indian from another state when I ride through the state on the Srinagar highway. Drass, Kargil .... the tension is palpable. Look at those places man ..... look at the standard of life there. But what to do? When you have signboards every 100 meters proclaiming "CAUTION! You are under enemy observation."

The Kashmiris will have to sit down and accept the advent of industry and people from the rest of India in the state. The government can sweeten the deal by promising the removal of one soldier for every out of state civilian who can add value to the state and reside there peacefully. The choice will be clear for the Kashmiris. Progress, prosperity, and integration, with a step-wise removal of the army from populated areas in return for peace and order.

And this will not happen suddenly. No one is pumping in one million non-Kashmiri Indians overnight. Industry will take time to set up. They will need land. They will need skilled and unskilled labour. The Kashmiris will get jobs. The standard of living will rise. Infrastructure like roads and airports and bridges and rail lines and schools and hospitals will be put in place to support this industry. All of this will need help and the involvement from the rest of India too. And those Indians will need homes to stay in. In safety. 

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## foxbat

Agree.. Remove all special status from J&K. Giving preferential treatment is also a kind of discrimination and we should end that in Kashmir. Make it like any other part of the country. Allow Ambanis and Tatas to go in there to set up industries. Now, post 26/11 lessons they can manage the security better than most state police apparatus. Plus they have the financial muscle to sustain the industry in the initial phases. Nothing like booming economy to counter the insurgency propoganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

The most important thing in the process of rapproachment and integration is having people the Kashmiris can talk to, people the Kashmiris would listen to, people the Kashmiris would accept, people who would not threaten the Kashmiris. I honestly feel, secularity and all, today we need prominent Indian muslims to step to the plate and speak to the Kashmiris. Be the link through which both sides can reach out. 

Salman Khan, Amir Khan, Shahrukh Khan, President Kalam, MJ Akbar, Javed Akhtar, Azim Premji. There must be so many more. Have guys like Faisal come back and serve his people and interact with them and speak to them. Get Irfan Pathan and Zaheer Khan to speak to them. Get our Indian moulvis and learned muslim scholars to speak to them. Get common muslims to speak to them. 

Any help is welcome here. At the end of the day the Kashmiris have been fed a lot of bullshit about India and Indians. Its time we speak out to them and clear the air. Use the media. Use radio. Something like a 24 hour Kashmir FM channel linked to the rest of India .... both ways. Have a blitz from all sides. Get people of all faiths to reach out and tell the Kashmiris that we are here for them. We consider them to be one of us. And we will wait for them to come "home", and make the journey back easy. 

Non-threatening involvement that is not seen as too pushy or politically motivated, but at a people to people grass root level is the key. You cannot continue to be hostile towards someone who is so obviously trying to be your friend!

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## desiman

vsdoc said:


> Since I am the one whose brain is totally numbed here, and it was I who made the suggestion, let me also kick off the process of constructive Indian solutions for Indian kashmir, by Indians and for Indians.
> 
> I am in no way or form insinuating that Pakistanis are not wanted in this discussion (fully tongue in cheek seeing I am an Indian on a Pakistani forum ). I am merely trying to add some substance to a discussion and thread that has become very repetitive and boring, with each successive generation rehashing the same lines, and with some die hard fossils indulging in cross generational rehashing, yours truly included.
> 
> I say this with the luxury of distance and absence, coming back after an extended hiatus, and seeing old wine in an old bottle, where simply the drinkers have changed, as a natural progression of coming of legal age I suppose.
> 
> So let me start.
> 
> I saw this kickass movie last night. As with most good things in life, it happened by chance, as I was bored of Discovery Turbo and was flipping channels and happened on to it.
> 
> The movie is called *"Sikandar"*, set in Kashmir, and the usual protagonists - the Army, the People, and the Jihadis, seen from the eyes of the forgotten innocents - the children of Kashmir.
> 
> I am a father, I have kids of my own, and while I am not usually a softie, I was really touched. As were my kids who watched the movie along with me, with their mama grumbling about school the next day and how I would be responsible for waking them up. I truly from my heart invite all of you to see this movie. It has Madhavan as the upright army officer with soul. My old classmate from school, who we used to call _balaji_ for some reason.
> 
> It set me thinking. Obviously its an Indian movie, so lets not get into the dramatisation and the right and wrong of things. But look at the bigger message. The kids of Kashmir.
> 
> They are the Kashmiris we need to concentrate on. They are still young. Impressionable. Innocent. They are the generation not yet hardened by hate or pain or death or clash of loyalties or religious and social indoctrination or polarisation or isolation or hopelessness or fear or terror or poverty or despondency.
> 
> Not yet. But allowed to grow up like the generation before them in violence torn Kashmir, they will grow into the same mold of their mothers and fathers. It is inevitable, and India would lose another generation.
> 
> We need to find a way of engaging these kids into mainstream India. Class tours. Competitions. Sports. Exchange students. Subsidised boarding schools. Summer camps. Holiday tours. And for this we need it to be done not by the government, seen as "center" or "sarkar" by the Kashmiris in general. Neither should it involve the army as is being practiced as an exercise in rehabilitation of tamil kids in Sri Lanka. But it should be funded by Industry, by corporates, by institutions, with equal participation of common regular Indians, including our mainstream Muslim community and its elders and opinion leaders.
> 
> Let the kids of Kashmir into our day to day lives of mainstream India. Let them mix and play and learn and fight with our kids. Let them see the vastness and greatness and diversity of our country. Let them feel the love of all Indians, hindus, sikhs, christians, buddhists, jains, parsis. Let them see that we consider them to be our own. Let them see the wealth and the standard of living in regular Indians towns and villages and cities and homes. Let them see our roads and facilities and malls and factories and dairies and farms and dams and schools and colleges and movie halls. Let them see all this without the ever looming fear of the gun or the bomb.
> 
> What a strong line, so touching in its childlike simplicity - "Ab hum mahfooz hain."
> 
> Let this generation of Kashmiris grow up with Indians as Indians. Not as Kashmiris in isolation. Let them then go back to their families and homes and mosques and playgrounds and bazaars and question age old prejudices and lines of thought of their elders. Let them be the medium of change. And then let them grow into adults as fully integrated Indians.
> 
> That is what we need to do.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



lol so missed you doc, good to have you back

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

desiman said:


> lol so missed you doc, good to have you back



Thanks bro! I am really "feeling the love" today. 

Cheers, Doc


----------



## AbuSalam

vsdoc said:


> Thanks bro! I am really "feeling the love" today.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Welcome back DoctorJee


----------



## Raghu

vsdoc said:


> The most important thing in the process of rapproachment and integration is having people the Kashmiris can talk to, people the Kashmiris would listen to, people the Kashmiris would accept, people who would not threaten the Kashmiris. I honestly feel, secularity and all, today we need prominent Indian muslims to step to the plate and speak to the Kashmiris. Be the link through which both sides can reach out.
> 
> Salman Khan, Amir Khan, Shahrukh Khan, President Kalam, MJ Akbar, Javed Akhtar, Azim Premji. There must be so many more. Have guys like Faisal come back and serve his people and interact with them and speak to them. Any help is welcome here. At the end of the day the Kashmiris have been fed a lot of bullshit about India and Indians. Its time we speak out to them and clear the air. Use the media. Use radio. Something like a 24 hour Kashmir FM channel linked to the rest of India .... both ways.
> 
> Non-threatening involvement that is not seen as too pushy or politically motivated, but at a people to people grass root level is the key. You cannot continue to be hostile towards someone who is so obviously trying to be your friend!
> 
> Cheers, Doc




Kya doc, sending mix signals...

IMO , we should stop treating Kashmiris as what in call in Odiya "Galellha pua" any longer and better take off the kid gloves.

whie People of in parts of North East have may have a sense of alienation for India, where as Muslims of Kashmir think Kashmir problem is unfinished business of partition ,a division whose genesis lies in the so called two nation theory.

So Kashmiri separatism has everything to do with religion rather than less communal ideas like ethnicity or language .There is hardly any ethnic difference between Kashmiri Muslims with no sense belonging for for the Indian state always asking special this or that and Kashmir pundits ,a group who worked tirelessly putting the foundation of the country . 

* So No amount of conciliatory gonna effort can the change the mindset that India ,a Hindu nation has occupied their land(Kashmir valley) where Muslims are in 90&#37; majority especially under the current status quo prevailing there even the pro India party national conference demands more rights and less interference of India. *.

I don't know why Patel and Nehru kept that part of Kashmir valley under Indian control. It may be only due to water resources or Kashmir being ancestral home of Nehru or . Anyway since we have it now,we cant go just set Kashmir free ,the virus may spread to other parts of India.

*So the way out is,doing opposite what we have done in last sixty years.For having special status and little integration with the Indian state for so many years have made Kashmiris carry baggage of being out of mainstream India and consider themselves different from rest of the Indians*.

So remove article 370 and Stop giving special status to whole the J & K.Take out Jammu and laddak from the J & K state , make it part main stream India.I know people of Jammu and Laddak would support us whole heartedly in it. 

Stop giving so much Central assistance to the state,its going anyway in to the pockets of Abdullahs instead of common Kashmiri .Had these funds been used among the tribals of central India ,we wouldn't have the Maoist problem we are facing today.


Threaten the valley politicians with dire consequence like handing the valley to Pakistan where they can continue their independence struggle.

Change the demography of Kashmir and make it less Muslim and more Indian.

*Do whatever needed ,but we must break the box kept that Kashmir as a separate special entity called "J & K" and if gonna we keep it untouched ,someday day the box will fall off the Indian deck and all our investment made with money,lives of our men would go in vain.*

PS:welcome back doc .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

AbuSalam said:


> Welcome back DoctorJee



Thanks Abu. 

Cheers, Doc


----------



## vsdoc

Raghu said:


> Kya doc, sending mix signals...
> 
> IMO , we should stop treating Kashmiris as what in call in Odiya "Galellha pua" any longer and better take off the kid gloves.
> 
> whie People of in parts of North East have may have a sense of alienation for India, where as Muslims of Kashmir think Kashmir problem is unfinished business of partition ,a division whose genesis lies in the so called two nation theory.
> 
> So Kashmiri separatism has everything to do with religion rather than less communal ideas like ethnicity or language .There is hardly any ethnic difference between Kashmiri Muslims with no sense belonging for for the Indian state always asking special this or that and Kashmir pundits ,a group who worked tirelessly putting the foundation of the country .
> 
> * So No amount of conciliatory gonna effort can the change the mindset that India ,a Hindu nation has occupied their land(Kashmir valley) where Muslims are in 90&#37; majority especially under the current status quo prevailing there even the pro India party national conference demands more rights and less interference of India. *.
> 
> I don't know why Patel and Nehru kept that part of Kashmir valley under Indian control. It may be only due to water resources or Kashmir being ancestral home of Nehru or . Anyway since we have it now,we cant go just set Kashmir free ,the virus may spread to other parts of India.
> 
> *So the way out is,doing opposite what we have done in last sixty years.For having special status and little integration with the Indian state for so many years have made Kashmiris carry baggage of being out of mainstream India and consider themselves different from rest of the Indians*.
> 
> So remove article 370 and Stop giving special status to whole the J & K.Take out Jammu and laddak from the J & K state , make it part main stream India.I know people of Jammu and Laddak would support us whole heartedly in it.
> 
> Stop giving so much Central assistance to the state,its going anyway in to the pockets of Abdullahs instead of common Kashmiri .Had these funds been used among the tribals of central India ,we wouldn't have the Maoist problem we are facing today.
> 
> 
> Threaten the valley politicians with dire consequence like handing the valley to Pakistan where they can continue their independence struggle.
> 
> Change the demography of Kashmir and make it less Muslim and more Indian.
> 
> *Do whatever needed ,but we must break the box kept that Kashmir as a separate special entity called "J & K" and if gonna we keep it untouched ,someday day the box will fall off the Indian deck and all our investment made with money,lives of our men would go in vain.*
> 
> PS:welcome back doc .



Nahin Raghu mere bhai, if you read each of my posts chronologically as a set of steps as part of a complete strategy, instead of just picking up a single post which you may not agree with, you will realise that both of us are on absolutely the same page, though our methods may differ. How could we not? We are both Indians, and India is as united on Kashmir as we are on our cricket team, whichever way you want to read it!

Of course we can go into Kashmir with a heavy hand and say its our way or the highway. Who is going to stop us? But doing that leaves us with a lot of residual headaches and bad blood for our future generations. We need to use the stick on those that deserve it, I am 100% with you on that. But in doing so, let us not foster an us vs them feeling in the valley. That will only alienate the moderates who are fed up and are coming around. We need to sweeten the deal for them. We need to make them feel as if they are willing participants. 

We need to balance our stick with a carrot. Simple.

Of course I see that religion has a big part to play in this. Everyone does. But Raghu, India today and for centuries has had hindus and muslims living together. Why should Kashmiri muslims be treated any differently to muslims living elsewhere in India? You are right, they may believe or may have been led to believe that they are different. But it is up to us to change their beliefs. Break down the walls. And as a first step towards that, I believe it would be in our interests to first get them into the mainstream of the Indian muslim community. 

Once that happens, they automatically become part of the Indian community as a whole. When you buy a fish from the market, you do not come home and directly open the polythene bag and plop it into your fish tank. You first empty it into a small bowl to get it acclimatized to the salinity and the temperature change. The next transfer into the bigger tank then becomes much easier. Something like that. 

At the end of the day the integrity of the nation is not negotiable. Kashmir is not negotiable. What is negotiable is how we achieve that. Don't get me wrong. For someone who is against my country, I can be as militant as you if not more. But sometimes you need to put aside your justifiable anger and think with your head rather than your heart.

To repeat. Indianise Kashmiri kids of today into fully integrated Indian citizens of tomorrow. Marginalise and make irrelevant those adults who dream of Pakistan. Talk to those adults who dream of azadi. That done, either get them on our side or repeat the above. Provide hope and a higher standard of living and employment and security to the rest. 

Industrialise Kashmir and bring it into the Indian mainstream. Along with talent from the rest of India, hand in hand with the locals. Which includes a return of the pandits to their homeland. That is their birth right and is not negotiable. Remove the army to the periphery to guard against the external enemy and secure our borders. Maintain law and order increasingly with civilian law enforcement that is of the people and by the people.

*Invest in Kashmir.* Not just in Kashmiris.

Now some corrections. India does not fight for Kashmir because of strategic reasons or water or ego or the fear of snowballing communicable separatism. India fights for Kashmir because Kashmir is Indian. Simple. Any other reason is a figment of fertile imaginations who would like to ascribe motives where there are none and miss the forest for the trees.

Secondly, I do not agree that Jammu and Ladakh should be separated from our current J&K. For the following reasons. When an individual is ill with a communicable disease, you may quarantine him. But if an organ of the body is diseased, you do evertthing in your power to save it and bring it back to health and full function along with the rest of the body. You do not cut it off to treat it separately, in the hope that somewhere down the line you will join it back IF it recovers. That just does not happen.

I know there is a lot of rumbling within Jammu at being "unnecessarily" clubbed and burdened with Kashmir. But Jammu is predominantly hindu. And in clubbing it with Kashmir we tell the world that our states are not and never will be built along the lines of religion. Also it sends a strong and clear message across to those who claim to have an interest in this "disputed" region. That its a package deal, much as "they" may like to conveniently compartmentalize it as per their mindsets and ideologies and references from the hoary past to suit their "claims". So I am sorry I do not agree. Jammu and Ladakh remain married to Kashmir as far as I am concerned. What you are suggesting is actually weakens our position. 

Thirdly, it is fallacious to theorize that our maoist problem could somehow probably have been better or averted had we spent some of the central funds being spent on Kashmir on our heartland tribal areas. The maoists problem is there because for 60 years India has forgotten that those parts of India exist. Except for the politician-industry-mafia nexus which has bled and sucked those regions dry and exploited and marginalised the tribals as you do an irritating pest that inhabits an area of desired benefit and needs to be shunted out of sight and out of mind at the earliest, if not exterminated. You are from Orissa. I am from Bihar (now Jharkhand). We have both seen how the adivasis live. The santhalis, the sambalpuris. And we have both seen the "other" India as well. Do you really feel that the country is lacking in resources to bring up those people because of a Kashmir-centric resource crunch? 

Cheers, Doc

P.S. Thanks for the welcome back brother. Its good to be back with you guys again.


----------



## ejaz007

*Indian colonel killed in IHK gunfight: army*

SRINAGAR: An Indian army colonel has been killed in a gun battle with militants in Kupwara district of Indian-held Kashmir, Indian military spokesman Lt Colonel Vineet Sood said on Wednesday.

We have lost a colonel during a fierce overnight gun battle with militants in Kupwara, the spokesman told AFP. He said the fighting erupted when Indian troops launched an operation in the forested area of Lolab, a lush green valley dubbed as the fruit bowl of Jammu and Kashmir.

BBC reported that Colonel Neeraj Sood was leading troops when he was gunned down by the militants in Lolab. The military spokesman said that the operation against the militants was still continuing in the forested Lolab areas. He said that reinforcements had been rushed to the area. agencies

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

which Kashmiri seperatist group claimed responsibility?


----------



## aristocrat

Hard to find a solution that satisfies both nations.If india gives up kashmir ,then the entire nation will be consumed by riots and demands of similar kind.There will be huge outcry in Pakistan too, if it does the same.So honestly i dont see a solution for kashmir problem ,atleast in the coming decade


----------



## RollingStones

aristocrat said:


> Hard to find a solution that satisfies both nations.If india gives up kashmir ,then the entire nation will be consumed by riots and demands of similar kind.There will be huge outcry in Pakistan too, if it does the same.So honestly i dont see a solution for kashmir problem ,atleast in the coming decade



I see some solutions

1. I dont think there ever will be a redrawing of the boundaries. One thing India and pakistani governments could do is to allow people in the Kashmir valley who like Pakistan to go to Pakistan. Perhaps, their moving expenses and a down payment for a house in Pakistan can be borne by the Indian Government, reducing the burden on Pakistan. It appears that most of the people clamoring for freedom are poor, illiterate SriNagar downtown folks. So, it is not that the Indian Government has to compensate them with land. 
2. Allow people from Pakistani Kashmir and Indian Kashmir to live and work in both countries - free movement of people and trade.
3. Absorb the respective Kashmirs into the national fabric of each country. And remove any special status given to them. Trade and investment cannot be one way. It is always two sided. 
4. Demilitarize and reduce military expenditure.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aristocrat

RollingStones said:


> I see some solutions
> 
> 1. I dont think there ever will be a redrawing of the boundaries. One thing India and pakistani governments could do is to allow people in the Kashmir valley who like Pakistan to go to Pakistan. Perhaps, their moving expenses and a down payment for a house in Pakistan can be borne by the Indian Government, reducing the burden on Pakistan. It appears that most of the people clamoring for freedom are poor, illiterate SriNagar downtown folks. So, it is not that the Indian Government has to compensate them with land.



This would be seen as sign of weakness (read failure) by the indian gov.no politician is evn bold enough to implement that.


RollingStones said:


> 2. Allow people from Pakistani Kashmir and Indian Kashmir to live and work in both countries - free movement of people and trade.




improbable,any disturbance on indian side will be attributed to pakistan sponsored terrorism and vice versa.



RollingStones said:


> 3. Absorb the respective Kashmirs into the national fabric of each country. And remove any special status given to them. Trade and investment cannot be one way. It is always two sided.



agreed  

4. Demilitarize and reduce military expenditure.[/QUOTE]
 again


----------



## ejaz007

*Musharraf was at brink of Kashmir solution: India *
Updated at: 0850 PST, Wednesday, July 07, 2010

HOUSTON  Raja Zahid Akhter Khanzada: The president Indian Supreme Court Bar Association (ISCBA), the chairman Kashmir Committee and a member of Rajeya Sabha Ram Jethmalani disclosed Tuesday Kashmir issue could have been long resolved peacefully if General Musharrf, the then Pakistani President, would remain in power for a little longer, Geo news reported.

Judiciary has no power to meddle with constitution legislated by a parliament, he observed.

He was talking to Jang/Geo news here in Houston city of Texas after attending a convention hosted by Sindhi Association of North America (SANA) on Tuesday.

Pervez Musharraf was at brink of resolving Kashmir issue practically before being destabilized by political turmoil in Pakistan, sending automatically the matter in limbo again, he revealed. 

He said, It is no longer a secret now that president Musharraf sent us a document carrying acceptable recommendations and proposals for solution of Kashmir Issue for two sides. 

Subsequently, I myself, worked on those proposals being chairman of Kashmir Committee, made slight changes and produced them before mass representatives, he said adding, but time did not permit Musharraf.

He hoped Kashmir Row would be resolved soon. 

Musharraf was at brink of Kashmir solution: India


----------



## Rehan007

Scenario 6 would be good as it would give independence to the Kashmiris.


----------



## owcc

Enough bickering over .LOC for border anyday.


----------



## niaz

Every one in Pakistan must realize that we tried many times but failed to take Kashmir thru military means. India is not going to gift Kashmir to us. Only other solution which could be acceptable to the Kashmiris (Kashmir belongs to the Kashmiris, not to India or Pakistan) would be to make the border between Azad Kashmir and IOK immaterial for the Kashmiris; something like US/Canada.

This solution, though only one feasible, implies that Pakistan is in effect giving up on Kashmir and accepting Indias occupation. 

Had this come about, bigoted politicians would have had a field day in Pakistan as well as in India. It is good that Musharrafs plan remained unfulfilled else he would have been hounded out of Pakistan for selling out on Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brotherhood

*BBC News - Curfew enforced in Kashmir towns* 7 July 2010


*Indian police are struggling to control a wave of protests *

A curfew is being strictly enforced in parts of Indian-administered Kashmir after a wave of violence between protesters and police over the past month.

Police and paramilitaries have been deployed in the capital Srinagar where three civilians died in police firing on Tuesday.

Anantnag, Pulwana and Kakapora towns are also under curfew.

At least 14 civilians have died in clashes with forces since June.

Many of the deaths have been blamed on the paramilitary Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF).
Restricted

Life in Srinagar has come to a standstill, and movement of people has been restricted in other affected towns, says the BBC's Altaf Hussain in Srinagar.

Our correspondent says that the curfew in Anantnag has now been in place for eight consecutive days - since three people were killed by police there last week - and there is no sign of the tension diminishing.

A police spokesman said the authorities have decided to deploy the army in some sensitive areas, but no soldiers are out on the streets yet.

Most of the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley has either been under a curfew or shut down for the past few weeks because of protests over the killing of civilians by the police and paramilitary forces.

Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has defended the security forces, saying they could not be expected constantly to show restraint when they were so often pelted with stones.

The killings of civilian protesters, most of them teenagers, have angered many in the valley.

One newspaper headline described 2010 as the "year of teenage killings" in Kashmir.

Even the pro-India People's Democratic Party (PDP) has accused the government of declaring war on its own people, our correspondent reports.

Hundreds of thousands of troops are based in Kashmir to fight a two-decade insurgency against Indian rule.


----------



## vsdoc

niaz said:


> Every one in Pakistan must realize that we tried many times but failed to take Kashmir thru military means. India is not going to gift Kashmir to us. Only other solution which could be acceptable to the Kashmiris (Kashmir belongs to the Kashmiris, not to India or Pakistan) would be to make the border between Azad Kashmir and IOK immaterial for the Kashmiris; something like US/Canada.



Sir, without going into who Kashmir belongs to, something on which we will never see eye to eye, let me just say that a loosely porous LOC between J&K and Azad Kashmir with free ingress and egress of "Kashmiris" is never going to work, nor is it going to be acceptable to India for obvious security reasons. 

Today with a hard LOC and high troop density, we hear of encounters with terrorists crossing over from Pakistan (under convenient covering fire by the regular PA) every second day. What is it going to be like with a free for all namesake line on a map as per your suggestion?

Secondly, and most importantly, who are these "Kashmiris" going to be? Who is going to decide that? On what basis? And who is going to police them to ensure that they are really who they claim to be? Again in the current climate of suspicion and the residual bad blood of the past 6 decades, this is neither a viable nor an acceptable solution.

Once we do that, we will slowly have a creeping exodus of Pakistani "Kashmiris" come over this side, with or without malintention, and in all likelihood staying on. Who does the Governement of India provide for? And how does the Governemnt of India ensure that the "Kashmiris" from your side who are coming over, are actually returning, and not permanently staying back at the cost of the displacement of our local Kashmiris?

And more importantly from a security point of view, how does the Governemnt of India ensure that Pakistanis coming over as Kashmiris stay put within the Indian state boundaries of Kashmir, and not start drifting across to Jammu and then to Punjab and Himachal and Uttaranchal and so on and so forth? Are we going to then have a second army patrolled LOC to maintain J&K as a holding area within our own country? 

I am sorry sir, but you are talking about trying to make oil and water mix.

You have the lethal virus of the Taliban in your country talking about joining your Army to wage Jihad against India. You have various other malignant tumors like the LET and JUD and others of their ilk. Should India instead of shoring up its borders to protect its population from such disease, open the gates and let them in? 

Partition far from being neatly surgical, was the violent ripping apart of the body of our motherland. 60+ years have allowed the wounds to heal, and scar over. Except Kashmir, which like a diabetic sore keeps on and on and on oozing blood and pustulence. It is time to cauterize that one opening once and for all, and separate the child from the umblical cord joining it to its mother.

Its time for Pakistan to move on. On its own. 

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

vsdoc said:


> Once we do that, we will slowly have half of impoverished Pakistan suddenly becoming "Kashmiri" to come over to the more prosperous side, with or without malintention.



Lets stop flaming and trolling shall we, however much you might try to cloak it in your posts.

Indian per capita socio-economic indicators are largely close to those of Pakistan, and until the disparity in those indicators increases significantly, there is nothing that India, with its own hundreds of millions of impoverished living in slums and lacking basic sanitation facilities, offers to the impoverished Pakistani.


----------



## vsdoc

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Indian per capita socio-economic indicators are largely close to those of Pakistan, and until the disparity in those indicators increases significantly, there is nothing that India, with its own hundreds of millions of impoverished living in slums and lacking basic sanitation facilities, offers to the impoverished Pakistani.



Tell that to your cricket stars, starlets, poets, singers, writers, and journalists who inspite of not living in slums, having above average per capita household incomes, and managing to have a loo with running water at home, still find India an irresistible destination to come to professionally.

Also tell that to the parents of the Pakistani kids who come over by the planeload month after month to get congenital cardiac abnormalities operated on by Indian doctors.

Tell that to the hugely overwhelming percentage of educated rich (including toilet) Pakistani youth who leave the shores of their country (more often than not for good) for better prospects, as equally a huge overwhelming percentage of educated middle-class Indian youth choose to stay behind or come back to their own country. 

Its absolutely ok to be proudly nationalistic AM, but sometimes you need to bow to facts, unpalatable as they might be. Cloaked or not.

However, I've promised some close Pakistani friends of mine to be a good boy this time around. So if you feel I was trolling or that the language was dangerously close to the inappropriate line, please let me know and I will gladly edit my post buddy.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bang Galore

niaz said:


> Every one in Pakistan must realize that we tried many times but failed to take Kashmir thru military means. India is not going to gift Kashmir to us. Only other solution which could be acceptable to the Kashmiris (Kashmir belongs to the Kashmiris, not to India or Pakistan) would be to make the border between Azad Kashmir and IOK immaterial for the Kashmiris; something like US/Canada.
> 
> This solution, though only one feasible, implies that Pakistan is in effect giving up on Kashmir and accepting Indias occupation.
> 
> Had this come about, bigoted politicians would have had a field day in Pakistan as well as in India. It is good that Musharrafs plan remained unfulfilled else he would have been hounded out of Pakistan for selling out on Kashmir.





vsdoc said:


> Sir, without going into who Kashmir belongs to, something on which we will never see eye to eye, let me just say that a loosely porous LOC between J&K and Azad Kashmir with free ingress and egress of "Kashmiris" is never going to work, nor is it going to be acceptable to India for obvious security reasons.
> 
> Today with a hard LOC and high troop density, we hear of encounters with terrorists crossing over from Pakistan (under convenient covering fire by the regular PA) every second day. What is it going to be like with a free for all namesake line on a map as per your suggestion?
> 
> Secondly, and most importantly, who are these "Kashmiris" going to be? Who is going to decide that? On what basis? And who is going to police them to ensure that they are really who they claim to be? Again in the current climate of suspicion and the residual bad blood of the past 6 decades, this is neither a viable nor an acceptable solution.
> 
> Once we do that, we will slowly have half of impoverished Pakistan suddenly becoming "Kashmiri" to come over to the more prosperous side, with or without malintention. Who does the Governement of India provide for? And how does the Governemnt of India ensure that the "Kashmiris" from your side who are coming over, are actually returning, and not permanently staying back at the cost of the displacement of our local Kashmiris?
> 
> And more importantly from a security point of view, how does the Governemnt of India ensure that Pakistanis coming over as Kashmiris stay put within the Indian state boundaries of Kashmir, and not start drifting across to Jammu and then to Punjab and Himachal and Uttaranchal and so on and so forth? Are we going to then have a second army patrolled LOC to maintain J&K as a holding area within our own country?
> 
> I am sorry sir, but you are talking about trying to make oil and water mix.
> 
> You have the lethal virus of the Taliban in your country talking about joining your Army to wage Jihad against India. You have various other malignant tumors like the LET and JUD and others of their ilk. Should India instead of shoring up its borders to protect its population from such disease, open the gates and let them in?
> 
> Partition far from being neatly surgical, was the violent ripping apart of the body of our motherland. 60+ years have allowed the wounds to heal, and scar over. Except Kashmir, which like a diabetic sore keeps on and on and on oozing blood and pustulence. It is time to cauterize that one opening once and for all, and separate the child from the umblical cord joining it to its mother.
> 
> Its time for Pakistan to move on. On its own.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



I'm in the extremely odd position of agreeing with both the above seemingly contradictory posts. niaz's post clearly marks out the only possible resolution of the Kashmir dispute while vsdoc's post points out the practical problems with such a resolution. Which is why it's important to give any such resolution time. As long as Pakistan has armed militants roaming about with hatred against India in their hearts, there can be no open borders. The problem is that since the time of Musharraf; the security situation in Pakistan has worsened. While we can technically reach a solution calling for loose borders, it's highly unlikely that the borders will actually become such for a long time.


----------



## theboss

Well kashmiris attack Indian security apparatus every day in IOK however such does not happen in AJK. Speaks a lot about wishes of Kashmiri people.
It is important for Pakistan to secure Kashmir into its sphere of influence. Any power sharing aggrement with India over Kashmir means compromising our waters, agriculture and food security hence automatically scumming Pakistan into failure and disintegration.

Either Kashmir should be independent with considerable Pakistani influence or become a semi-govern area of Pakistan much like FATA. Pakistan annexing Kashmir is a far fetch dream and will bring the same Kashmiri reaction and attitude toward Indian security forces.


----------



## theboss

vsdoc said:


> Tell that to your cricket stars, starlets, poets, singers, writers, and journalists who inspite of not living in slums, having above average per capita household incomes, and managing to have a loo with running water at home, still find India an irresistible destination to come to professionally.
> 
> Also tell that to the parents of the Pakistani kids who come over by the planeload month after month to get congenital cardiac abnormalities operated on by Indian doctors.
> 
> Its absolutely ok to be proudly nationalistic AM, but sometimes you need to bow to facts, unpalatable as they might be. Cloaked or not.
> 
> However, I've promised some close Pakistani friends of mine to be a good boy this time around. So if you feel I was trolling or that the language was dangerously close to the inappropriate line, please let me know and I will gladly edit my post buddy.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



The adversiry between India and Pakistan will not help anybody but India should curb its own expansionist and dominant ambitions. India wishes to "pawn" south asia and an average indian in mired in mysterious "superiority" complex which has resulted in riots against them in sevral countries.


----------



## blueoval79

theboss said:


> The adversiry between India and Pakistan will not help anybody but India should curb its own expansionist and dominant ambitions. India wishes to "pawn" south asia and an average indian in mired in mysterious "superiority" complex which has resulted in riots against them in sevral countries.



 for a moment i thought its going to make sense...but then...as always...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## karan.1970

theboss said:


> Well kashmiris attack Indian security apparatus every day in IOK however such does not happen in AJK. Speaks a lot about wishes of Kashmiri people.



The only flaw (IMHO) in this is that its not Kashmiris but Pakistani terrorists who do most of the attacking. 




theboss said:


> It is important for Pakistan to secure Kashmir into its sphere of influence. Any power sharing aggrement with India over Kashmir means compromising our waters, agriculture and food security hence automatically scumming Pakistan into failure and disintegration.
> 
> Either Kashmir should be independent with considerable Pakistani influence or become a semi-govern area of Pakistan much like FATA. Pakistan annexing Kashmir is a far fetch dream and will bring the same Kashmiri reaction and attitude toward Indian security forces.



Pipedreams at best. Trying to exhert influence over Afghanistan is costing you guys so dearly at this time (remember Zia.. thats where it started). You should first get things in NWFP, SWAT etc under control before having territorial ambitions in Kashmir..


----------



## theboss

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Lets stop flaming and trolling shall we, however much you might try to cloak it in your posts.
> 
> Indian per capita socio-economic indicators are largely close to those of Pakistan, and until the disparity in those indicators increases significantly, there is nothing that India, with its own hundreds of millions of impoverished living in slums and lacking basic sanitation facilities, offers to the impoverished Pakistani.



Once in an Indian economic summit, the speaker talked about benefits of Indo-Pak peace that Pakistani professional wouldnt need to travel so far to GCC countries for work when they can find oppurtunities next door in neighbouring India?? 

This was an absolute WTF statement.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

vsdoc said:


> Tell that to your cricket stars, starlets, poets, singers, writers, and journalists who inspite of not living in slums, having above average per capita household incomes, and managing to have a loo with running water at home, still find India an irresistible destination to come to professionally.


Absolutely, on a professional and legal basis.

Your argument is different, implying we are going to see the sort of exodus of the Pakistani impoverished to India that one sees from South Asia to the West, and that just is not going to happen given India's own impoverished and slum dwelling millions.

Who wants to travels thousands of miles to get out of a slum only to get into a larger one?


> Also tell that to the parents of the Pakistani kids who come over by the planeload month after month to get congenital cardiac abnormalities operated on by Indian doctors.


Again an absolutely legal and paid journey to seek professional services, and not at all the 'half of impoverished Pakistan suddenly becoming "Kashmiri" to come over to the more prosperous side, with or without malintention' image that you painted without regard to your own hundreds of millions of impoverished dwelling in slums and lacking employment, opportunity and even basic sanitation.


> Its absolutely ok to be proudly nationalistic AM, but sometimes you need to bow to facts, unpalatable as they might be. Cloaked or not.


That is advice you need to take Doc sahib, not me, given that it was not me making pretentious posts and making the argument of 'Pakistan's impoverished moving to India'. My argument in fact is much more balanced, pointing out that India, with its own hundreds of millions of impoverished, and largely equivalent (to Pakistan) per-capita socio economic indicators, cannot logically be an attraction for 'Pakistan's impoverished'.


> However, I've promised some close Pakistani friends of mine to be a good boy this time around. So if you feel I was trolling or that the language was dangerously close to the inappropriate line, please let me know and I will gladly edit my post buddy.


For the reasons I mentioned above, I do think that it was trolling.

You might have made the point in a more refined manner than some, but it essentially boils down to the age old canard along the lines of 'Pakistan is full of poor people and undeveloped, while India is a superpower with no/few poor people and far ahead of Pakistan'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

theboss said:


> Once in an Indian economic summit, the speaker talked about benefits of Indo-Pak peace that Pakistani professional wouldnt need to travel so far to GCC countries for work when they can find oppurtunities next door in neighbouring India??
> 
> This was an absolute WTF statement.



In an environment of normalized India-Pakistan relations, the opportunity for Pakistani professionals to work in India will be similar to Indian professionals working in Pakistan. If the talent is available and there are no diplomatic hurdles, there is no reason why Indian and Pakistani companies would not shop around for the best HR talent anywhere they find it.


----------



## karan.1970

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> You might have made the point in a more refined manner than some, but it essentially boils down to the age old canard along the lines of 'Pakistan is full of poor people and undeveloped, while India is a superpower with no/few poor people and far ahead of Pakistan'.


I think to put it in a different way, because of the present economic and trade conditions, India (though not too different from Pakistan in average income etc) offers more opportunities for growth and enrichment. that will create a leveling effect if the borders are porous. It may not be an exodus per se, but definitely a sizable movement which will not be good for India but still will be uncontrollable.


----------



## vsdoc

AM mere bhai, change kar diya mera insensitive canard statement. Tu aaj administrator bana hai aur tu mera bhai bhi hai, isiliye.

Lekin thoda mujhe likhne de yaar. Yeh mera style hai. Koi malice nahin hai. Usko jyada control karega to Doc Doc nahin rahega .... AM ban jayega. 

Cheers, Doc


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

karan.1970 said:


> India (though not too different from Pakistan in average income etc) offers more opportunities for growth and enrichment. that will create a leveling effect if the borders are porous.



You are not going to see a leveling effect so long as those 'opportunities' elude hundreds of millions in India itself.

Ten to twenty years down the line, with Indian growth largely sustaining and Pakistani growth stagnating at current levels, yes, it'll be a better argument.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

vsdoc said:


> AM mere bhai, change kar diya mera insensitive canard statement. Tu aaj administrator bana hai aur tu mera bhai bhi hai, isiliye.
> 
> Lekin thoda mujhe likhne de yaar. Yeh mera style hai. Koi malice nahin hai. Usko jyada control karega to Doc Doc nahin rahega .... AM ban jayega.
> 
> Cheers, Doc


Believe me Doc sahib, we are making allowances for your 'writing style'. Don't think we were not aware of it and how it was the motivation for the, ahem, massive lobbying effort on your behalf by the Indian posters on defence.pk. 

We knew what was in store when we unbanned you, though there was some hope that with time, err, some 'moderating effects' might have settled in ..


----------



## vsdoc

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Believe me Doc sahib, we are making allowances for your 'writing style'. Don't think we were not aware of it and how it was the motivation for the, ahem, massive lobbying effort on your behalf by the Indian posters on defence.pk.
> 
> We knew what was in store when we unbanned you, though there was some hope that with time, err, some 'moderating effects' might have settled in ..



You are saying "was some hope" yaar as in beyond redemption hopeless past tense mere bhai.

Yaar thoda to fark aya hai. Only yesterday I had a full mostly civil conversation with Developereo without him suggesting it was time for my medication again. 

Chalo, lets not spoil this great thread. I appreciate your allowances, and will try my best not to take liberties beyond those allowed.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## karan.1970

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> You are not going to see a leveling effect so long as those 'opportunities' elude hundreds of millions in India itself.
> 
> Ten to twenty years down the line, with Indian growth largely sustaining and Pakistani growth stagnating at current levels, yes, it'll be a better argument.



Sure they elude millions in India but its all about relativity. The opportunities may be less considering the size of India, but on average, are more than what exists in Pakistan today in terms of head room for growth. The contrast is more stark in the Jammu and Kashmir area vis a vis G&B and Azad Kashmir. 

Anyway, the idea is not to compare the economic conditions in India vs Pakistan but to highlight that a porous border, while looking good on paper, may not be a practical solution while such concerns remain or a control mechanism is identified.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

karan.1970 said:


> Sure they elude millions in India but its all about relativity. The opportunities may be less considering the size of India, but on average, are more than what exists in Pakistan today in terms of head room for growth. The contrast is more stark in the Jammu and Kashmir area vis a vis G&B and Azad Kashmir.


Head room for growth? Both Pakistan and India are developing countries with a large middle class and its only been about three years since Pakistan's growth dipped, but private enterprise continues to thrive and economic opportunities remain, albeit dampened by terrorism and the power crises. That is why I said that this argument of 'Pakistan's impoverished moving to India' will become a legitimate one if the current situation continues for another decade or so.

On the contrast between G&B+AK vs J&K, I am not sure I agree, and perceptions of 'greener pastures' in IAK are certainly not there given the continued reports of militant and State violence and mass protests.


> Anyway, the idea is not to compare the economic conditions in India vs Pakistan but to highlight that a porous border, while looking good on paper, may not be a practical solution while such concerns remain or a control mechanism is identified.


The comparison was only to point out the fallacy of a comment made by Doc sahib - the argument of 'concerns about security', in terms of militant movement across a porous border, is a much more feasible one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*Army deployed in Srinagar as violence spirals*

NEW DELHI: Indian Army contingents moved into the streets of Srinagar on Wednesday, as New Delhi insisted they had been called for deterrent purposes and only to reduce tensions. Authorities in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) also launched a major crackdown on pro-freedom leaders and activists across the state. Reports from Srinagar said 17 columns of the Srinagar-based 15 Corps had been deployed in the city alone. Soldiers in armoured and machine gun-mounted vehicles drove through various localities in Srinagar. Union Home Secretary GK Pillai and the director general of Military Operations (DGMO) rushed to Srinagar on Wednesday morning to conduct meetings with officials and army commanders. After the troubled incidents of Tuesday, the state government had requisitioned the army to help police and paramilitary Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) troops in enforcing curfew in the city. However, official sources assured that the army would not be used for crowd control in Srinagar, where the situation was described as tense but under control. Despite the armys presence, curfew was defied at several places, including Baramulla, Sopore, Pattan, Chadoora, Machua and Anantnag. iftikhar gilani

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*Pak TV channels banned in IHK*

ISLAMABAD: In Indian-held Kashmir, authorities have banned the beaming of Pakistani channels in north Kashmir and directed the cable operators in Baramulla and Sopore to block five Pakistani news channels and a religious channel with immediate effect. According to a report by the Kashmir Media Service, Bobby Singh who runs the cable operation in north Kashmir said that the Baramulla district magistrate directed cable operators on Friday evening to stop beaming the Pakistani state-run TV channel, and four private TV channels. The authorities have also directed us to block a Pakistani religious channel, he added. The authorities have given no reason for banning the Pakistani channels, he added. Baramulla Deputy Commissioner Bashir Ahmed Butt confirmed imposition of the ban. app

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Ammyy

ejaz007 said:


> *Pak TV channels banned in IHK*
> 
> ISLAMABAD: In Indian-held Kashmir, authorities have banned the beaming of Pakistani channels in north Kashmir and directed the cable operators in Baramulla and Sopore to block five Pakistani news channels and a religious channel with immediate effect. According to a report by the Kashmir Media Service, Bobby Singh who runs the cable operation in north Kashmir said that the Baramulla district magistrate directed cable operators on Friday evening to stop beaming the Pakistani state-run TV channel, and four private TV channels. The authorities have also directed us to block a Pakistani religious channel, he added. The authorities have given no reason for banning the Pakistani channels, he added. Baramulla Deputy Commissioner Bashir Ahmed Butt confirmed imposition of the ban. app
> 
> Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan



*So what .......... India channels allowed in Pak occupied Kashmir ?????*


----------



## Hulk

ejaz007 said:


> *Pak TV channels banned in IHK*
> 
> ISLAMABAD: In Indian-held Kashmir, authorities have banned the beaming of Pakistani channels in north Kashmir and directed the cable operators in Baramulla and Sopore to block five Pakistani news channels and a religious channel with immediate effect. According to a report by the Kashmir Media Service, Bobby Singh who runs the cable operation in north Kashmir said that the Baramulla district magistrate directed cable operators on Friday evening to stop beaming the Pakistani state-run TV channel, and four private TV channels. The authorities have also directed us to block a Pakistani religious channel, he added. The authorities have given no reason for banning the Pakistani channels, he added. Baramulla Deputy Commissioner Bashir Ahmed Butt confirmed imposition of the ban. app
> 
> Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan



100% right decision, we know the Pak channels try to flare up incidences in Kashmir and give wrong info.


----------



## Old School

ejaz007 said:


> *Pak TV channels banned in IHK*



What is banned ? Watching or broadcasting ? Of course it is more difficult to ban watching a channel in India because the law does not permit it.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

good, they are showing their massive insecurity. Glad they did it, wont change any realities on the ground...


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

*Azad Pakistan's Solution *

United Nation Takes charge in Indian Administered Kashmir for 10 years , and after 50 years , they will hold elections in region. 

a) United Nation Commision will Release yearly reports
b) Both Pakistan & India will donate $$ for Welfare of Kashmiri people

The 50 year will ensure that it will not hurt sentiments of Indian or Paksitani if Indian Administered region decides to go with India or Pakistan.

Mean while - Both Pakistani & Indian Tourists can visit and enjoy beauti of Kashmir 

I am thinking some where along the lines of Hong Kong Hand over. 

British peacefully returned it to China it should be ideal model.

Kashmiri poeple choosing Pakistan , is that sense of Betrayal ? 
No its something that should have been done 60 years ago , now its understandable Indians have sentimental attachment to Kashmir.

The ...answer lies in them - what that would have done not what the current leaders tall you over load speakers and incite public for getting votes

Why ? 

a) Because our leaders died so quickly the ones that gave 
independence to Pakistan/India


I personally blame the , extreme political leaders in India to not listen to Ghandi's direction toward normalizing ties with Pakistan instead they opted to kill him so that will be a what could have been moment

Whats in it for India : 
Lower defence budgets more focus on its people , and economy and normal ties with China 

What in it for Pakistan: 
Territorial dispute solved , no need for confusion more trade with India etc , Gas pipe line , Food trade sports trade etc 


Other side of not doing anything ...
Nuclear weapons on Himalayas , and all the rivers will get radioactive
and pollute all regions of what we call as our homes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## owcc

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> *Azad Pakistan's Solution *
> 
> United Nation Takes charge in Indian Administered Kashmir for 10 years , and after 50 years , they will hold elections in region.
> 
> a) United Nation Commision will Release yearly reports
> b) Both Pakistan & India will donate $$ for Welfare of Kashmiri people
> 
> The 50 year will ensure that it will not hurt sentiments of Indian or Paksitani if Indian Administered region decides to go with India or Pakistan.
> 
> 
> 
> Mean while - Both Pakistani & Indian Tourists can visit and enjoy beauti of Kashmir
> 
> I am thinking some where along the lines of Hong Kong Hand over.
> 
> British peacefully returned it to China it should be ideal model.
> 
> Kashmiri poeple choosing Pakistan , is that sense of Betrayal ?
> No its something that should have been done 60 years ago , now its understandable Indians have sentimental attachment to Kashmir.
> 
> The ...answer lies in them - what that would have done not what the current leaders tall you over load speakers and incite public for getting votes
> 
> Why ?
> 
> a) Because our leaders died so quickly the ones that gave
> independence to Pakistan/India
> 
> 
> I personally blame the , extreme political leaders in India to not listen to Ghandi's direction toward normalizing ties with Pakistan instead they opted to kill him so that will be a what could have been moment
> 
> Whats in it for India :
> Lower defence budgets more focus on its people , and economy and normal ties with China
> 
> What in it for Pakistan:
> Territorial dispute solved , no need for confusion more trade with India etc , Gas pipe line , Food trade sports trade etc
> 
> 
> Other side of not doing anything ...
> Nuclear weapons on Himalayas , and all the rivers will get radioactive
> and pollute all regions of what we call as our homes



Lets just be clear,I may sound very colonial but its the truth so no point fighting over it,even if the majority of Kashmir decides to be with pakistan India wont leave it no matter what.This statement which I have made is not based on my EMOTIONS rather its purely made from the ground reality which we all know


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Azad-Pakistan --


very interesting post, in fact one of the more intelligent ones I have read in a while, amidst all the dust and smoke


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Here is mind set of on of the Pro Hindu Ideologies during Ghandhi's time , if him/ his mindset people could kill their own leader what chance we have to convince that mentality to change? 

The problem has always been that people never took Gandhi's view on Pakistan and view of mutal Peace with that of M.Ali Jinah 

"At the Gandhi murder trial; Savarkar seated in the back.Savarkar had become one of the fiercest critics of Gandhi, and attacked him and the Congress leadership for acquiescing to the partition of India. During the intense communal violence, Hindu Mahasabha activists were allegedly responsible for carrying out attacks on Muslim civilians. Savarkar blamed Gandhi for weakening Hindu society in face of Muslim separatism, and for agreeing to divide the Hindu homeland. The anger of some Hindu refugees from Pakistan provoked fears of assassination attempts on Gandhi's life. Gandhi's fast unto death in January 1948, demanding immediate communal peace and allegedly the payment of outstanding shares of the treasury to Pakistan"

The problem has always been senitimental attachment to something ...which was clearly belonging to another nation.

And if Ghandi was even killed by fundamentalist (who believed that it was fundamental right of hindus to own both Pakistan/India) is the main issue here ...


I think the solution has to be ... humane , we know India has great love for Kashmir and so does pakistan and a UN regulated Kashmir and then handover in 50 years is only solution the *50 years will help bring in a new generation that would have lived togther in peace and they might not have the negative feeling due to media *

Britain's hand over of Hong Kong is ideal example of how it shoudl be done

I think we need to have open borders - after UN takes charge in Kashmir provided no none sense like Mumbai attack happens


Do these two leaders look like they wanted eternal war ??? I don't think so look how happy they both were


















Its shameful , that the uneducated thugs that ran the gov afterwords ruined it for both countries over past 60 years ....and they use the words India / Pakistan to rack in votes and incite hate to win elections - this was not suppose to be like that ... sadly but we stand in tough spot

Becasue we sorta understand the family system and core values which are somewhat similar when it comes to families the issue is simple...

Two brothers , and 1 scooter in home and both brothers are not eager to share it 
The father left the scooter for younger brother thinking that he had a licence and the older brother would be understanding. But the older brother took it as a rejection and instead kept the scooter in his personal garage. And they even fought over it several times.

But the problem has escalated becasue , someone in their village armed them both with poisonous arrows, and they are constantly told by ppl their security and life is in danger.

They somtimes wonder , the good times when they were young and ate together or played in yard but they don't know how to fix this problem. They ocassionally cross paths but ... feeling awkward they quietly keep moving.

Becasue they are both alwas fighting , someone from outside (Politicians) comes and makes profit on their farm lands .... so they keep spreading more rumors of hate and lies - politicians now tell them if they back off they will be laughing stock of whole world and every one will make fun of them and laugh ...so they are both confused

Sometimes when their children now intermingle they privately inquire or ask about the other brother indirect way to know they are doing well... but they don't have the courage to face each other ... instead they find it hard to face each other and realize how much time they both wasted over the issue....


----------



## owcc

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> Here is mind set of on of the Pro Hindu Ideologies during Ghandhi's time , if him/ his mindset people could kill their own leader what chance we have to convince that mentality to change?
> 
> "At the Gandhi murder trial; Savarkar seated in the back.Savarkar had become one of the fiercest critics of Gandhi, and attacked him and the Congress leadership for acquiescing to the partition of India. During the intense communal violence, Hindu Mahasabha activists were allegedly responsible for carrying out attacks on Muslim civilians. Savarkar blamed Gandhi for weakening Hindu society in face of Muslim separatism, and for agreeing to divide the Hindu homeland. The anger of some Hindu refugees from Pakistan provoked fears of assassination attempts on Gandhi's life. Gandhi's fast unto death in January 1948, demanding immediate communal peace and allegedly the payment of outstanding shares of the treasury to Pakistan"
> 
> The problem has always been senitimental attachment to something ...which was clearly belonging to another nation.
> 
> And if Ghandi was even killed by fundamentalist (who believed that it was fundamental right of hindus to own both Pakistan/India) is the main issue here ...
> 
> 
> I think the solution has to be ... humane , we know India has great love for Kashmir and so does pakistan and a UN regulated Kashmir and then handover in 50 years is only solution the *50 years will help bring in a new generation that would have lived togther in peace and they might not have the negative feeling due to media *
> 
> Britain's hand over of Hong Kong is ideal example of how it shoudl be done



One thing which i fail to understand about Pakistan in general is the amount of national fever generated in the name of Kashmir.Here in India it is considered by people just as another state and probably as a place where a war might occur.In the last 60 years if you could concentrate on your internal issues and strengthen your countrys civil fabric today you would have probably been an important part of the Asian uprising in the world


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

owcc said:


> One thing which i fail to understand about Pakistan in general is the amount of national fever generated in the name of Kashmir



because, we love Pakistan and Kashmir is rightfully ours.

but looking beyond plain powder-form nationalism --- look beyond it and realize that most Pakistanis would most likely be in favour of a UN-mandated plebicite whereby Kashmiris would exercise their inalienable right to self-determination

it is so much to ask for? Why is hindustan so scared of it? 



> Here in India it is considered by people just as another state and probably as a place where a war might occur.



its a disputed territory, but let the people think that if that's what they want....

if it really is an ''integral part of india'' then, BOY!!!! You really don't know how to treat ''your'' civilians exercising their right to protest

save the heavy-handedness for the naxalites, that's where your forces should be 100% focusing




> In the last 60 years if you could concentrate on your internal issues and strengthen your countrys civil fabric today you would have probably been an important part of the Asian uprising in the world



we were one of the fastest growing WORLD economies just a few years back, and our position on Kashmir was the exact same; therefore I see little merit in what you said

civil fabric is fine, and a lot of people (myself included) are optimistic that there is something good that will come out of this difficult period we are undergoing. At such young age, Pakistan is already learning lessons that other nations took decades, centuries to learn. 

It all goes down to leadership and connection with the masses. Current administration is not doing that for whatever reason. 


as for our position on Kashmir, we havent moved in inch. And dont expect us ever to. Kashmir issue is indeed ingrained in the hearts and minds of every single Pakistani man, woman, child, and even the wildlife and insects.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toxic_pus

AZADPAKISTAN2009 said:


> *Azad Pakistan's Solution *
> 
> United Nation Takes charge in Indian Administered Kashmir for 10 years , and after 50 years , they will hold elections in region.
> 
> a) United Nation Commision will Release yearly reports
> b) Both Pakistan & India will donate $$ for Welfare of Kashmiri people
> 
> The 50 year will ensure that it will not hurt sentiments of Indian or Paksitani if Indian Administered region decides to go with India or Pakistan.
> 
> Mean while - Both Pakistani & Indian Tourists can visit and enjoy beauti of Kashmir
> 
> I am thinking some where along the lines of Hong Kong Hand over.
> 
> British peacefully returned it to China it should be ideal model.
> 
> Kashmiri poeple choosing Pakistan , is that sense of Betrayal ?
> No its something that should have been done 60 years ago , now its understandable Indians have sentimental attachment to Kashmir.
> 
> The ...answer lies in them - what that would have done not what the current leaders tall you over load speakers and incite public for getting votes
> 
> Why ?
> 
> a) Because our leaders died so quickly the ones that gave
> independence to Pakistan/India
> 
> 
> I personally blame the , extreme political leaders in India to not listen to Ghandi's direction toward normalizing ties with Pakistan instead they opted to kill him so that will be a what could have been moment
> 
> Whats in it for India :
> Lower defence budgets more focus on its people , and economy and normal ties with China
> 
> What in it for Pakistan:
> Territorial dispute solved , no need for confusion more trade with India etc , Gas pipe line , Food trade sports trade etc
> 
> 
> Other side of not doing anything ...
> Nuclear weapons on Himalayas , and all the rivers will get radioactive
> and pollute all regions of what we call as our homes








Is there any chance that you are going to explain why, in your grand scheme of things, the UN shouldn't 'take charge' in the P0K ?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AZADPAKISTAN2009

Cuz there are no riots and curfiews in pakistan side seem like ppl are satisfied on that side


----------



## ejaz007

*Held Kashmir shuts down as Martyrs Day marked*

SRINAGAR: Shops and businesses in Indian-held Kashmir closed on Tuesday as the All-Parties Hurriyat Conference continued a strike and organised protests on an annual holiday marking the execution of 21 Kashmiris to quell an uprising in 1931. Thousands of Indian armed forces erected more checkpoints and laid razor wire on roads in Srinagar and were enforcing curfew-like restrictions to prevent rallies. Restrictions were also enforced in other areas as shops, businesses and public transportation shut down for the third day of a strike. Kashmiris observe July 13 as the Martyrs Day and all political parties, including the Hurriyat Conference, commemorate the day when the former monarch of the state ordered execution of 21 Kashmiris to put down an uprising. The state government usually observes a holiday. Hurriyat Chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said this was the day to reiterate commitment to the cause of freedom and independence. ap

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## karan.1970

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> because, we love Pakistan and Kashmir is rightfully ours.
> 
> but looking beyond plain powder-form nationalism --- look beyond it and realize that most Pakistanis would most likely be in favour of a UN-mandated plebicite whereby Kashmiris would exercise their inalienable right to self-determination
> 
> it is so much to ask for? Why is hindustan so scared of it?
> 
> 
> 
> its a disputed territory, but let the people think that if that's what they want....
> 
> if it really is an ''integral part of india'' then, BOY!!!! You really don't know how to treat ''your'' civilians exercising their right to protest
> 
> save the heavy-handedness for the naxalites, that's where your forces should be 100% focusing



In Indian system of democracy, residents of one state can not vote on whether they want to stay in the country or not. If a vote needs to happen on future of Kashmir, it will be from all of INdia and not just the residents of one state. And that vote happens every 5 years



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> we were one of the fastest growing WORLD economies just a few years back, and our position on Kashmir was the exact same; therefore I see little merit in what you said
> 
> civil fabric is fine, and a lot of people (myself included) are optimistic that there is something good that will come out of this difficult period we are undergoing. At such young age, Pakistan is already learning lessons that other nations took decades, centuries to learn.
> 
> It all goes down to leadership and connection with the masses. Current administration is not doing that for whatever reason.
> 
> 
> as for our position on Kashmir, we havent moved in inch. And dont expect us ever to. Kashmir issue is indeed ingrained in the hearts and minds of every single Pakistani man, woman, child, and even the wildlife and insects.



You were fastest growing for a brief span under Musharraf and please understand that the negative impact of policies like the one Zia created takes time to manifest. Last 25 years of supporting insurgencies is resulting in the spiral that Pakistan's economy is seeing now. Hopefully I will be proven wrong, but I dont see Pakistan's economy getting back to its winning ways for next 5-10 years. 

And stand on Kashmir is not detrimental to Pakistan, but the way Pakistan has been taking that stand thru use of militancy is..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*Former CIA official urges early solution of Kashmir dispute*
*
* Calls on US to intervene for solving the longstanding issue*

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: Former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) official Robert Grenier on Wednesday called for an early solution to the Kashmir dispute for promoting greater regional stability. 

"Without a settlement of the Kashmir dispute, the Indo-Pak proxy battle which greatly complicates the prospects for a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan is unlikely to abate," the former CIA chief of station in Islamabad said. Grenier, writing for the al Jazeerah news network, believed that without solving the Kashmir dispute, it would be difficult to isolate the terrorists who pose an existential threat to Pakistan. He was of the view that such terrorists could effectively undermine a nuclear-armed state and provoke a nuclear face-off between Islamabad and New Delhi. The former CIA official urged the US to use India's desire for attaining 'greater power' in the South Asian region, as a diplomatic toll to encourage the settlement of the Kashmir dispute. 

He said the recent violence in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), which killed 15 civilians, had highlighted the "centrality of Kashmir and the Kashmiris" in the longstanding dispute. Urging the US to intervene for the resolution of the Kashmir dispute, Grenier observed that both India and Pakistan were not capable of solving the issue on their own. "Rather than using the Indians' desire for greater power status as an effective diplomatic tool to encourage steps leading to a settlement of Kashmir, the US policy is working assiduously to sabotage the process," he complained. 

The former CIA official said that the US was undermining its own interests by encouraging India to follow the American model of dealing with terrorism solely as an illegitimate political tool without addressing the root causes of the menace.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*Protesters, police face off on streets of Kashmir*

** Kashmiris say they have run out of patience waiting for Pakistan, India to get peace efforts back on track 
* Say Kashmiris are forced to resort to stone-pelting*


SRINAGAR: The capital of Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) is seething with rage.

Over the past month, crowds of young men demanding independence from India have held mass protests and pounded police with stones.

Authorities hit back with rolling curfews, large-scale arrests and a rare deployment by the army into the streets of Srinagar.

The violence, which has killed 15 protesters and bystanders, set a tense backdrop for a meeting on Thursday between the foreign ministers of India and Pakistan, nuclear-armed neighbours that fought two wars over the divided Himalayan region and have been unable to reach agreement over its future.

Hopes for the talks were further clouded after the top official in Azad Jammu and Kashmir called on thousands of members of banned militant groups on Tuesday to drive India out of all of Kashmir. 

Those inside Kashmir say they have run out of patience waiting for the two countries  who each claim the entire region as its own  to get their peace efforts back on track after the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Now, they are taking matters into their own hands.

People have lost faith, separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq said from his home in Srinagar, where authorities are keeping him under house arrest after he led several street marches. The constituency of peace is shrinking day by day.

In the nearly empty alleys and warrens of Srinagar, Go Back India is carved into wooden doors, painted on the streets and written in careful block letters on the walls. Razor wire is uncoiled across roads as paramilitary forces in helmets and padded vests enforce curfew restrictions that have been in place on-and-off since last month.

A war between armed insurgents and government forces that began in 1989 and left 68,000 dead has ebbed, with militant violence dropping every year. The new protesters favour marches, sit-ins and rock barrages to challenge the security forces ubiquitous throughout the cities, towns and villages of IHK.

We dont want the world to see us as hooligans carrying guns. We want a peaceful movement, but we are forced to resort to stones, said Ahmed, a 27-year-old coppersmith, as he drank milky tea in a bare concrete room off an alley. 

Like all the protesters interviewed, Ahmed declined to give his last name for fear he would be picked up by security forces who have arrested hundreds of people in recent weeks, including the head of Kashmirs Bar Association.

Life in the Nowshera now follows a daily rhythm. The security forces keep the area locked down during the day and when they withdraw in the evening, the residents come out of their homes and bombard them with stones, said Ahmed. Troops retaliate by smashing windows on their way out, he said.

The harder they push, the harder we become, said Shafat, 25, whose brother was disappeared, and presumably killed, in 1991.

Outside, a group of men sitting in front of a shop jump up and instinctively run when they hear a car turn the corner, presuming it to be paramilitary troops.

Many protest leaders have gone underground, and students Naweed, 21, and Ubaid, 20, were so concerned about being nabbed they sent Associated Press journalists to a series of destinations, where they would call with new directions, to ensure they were not being followed.

The men demanded India immediately withdraw the security forces from the cities and towns, rescind laws giving troops special powers here and release those arrested. ap

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## karan.1970

What else to expect from Pakistani media on Kashmir...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*Thousands protest in IHK as curfew lifted*

SRINAGAR: Thousands of protesters poured into the centre of the summer capital of Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) on Thursday after authorities lifted restrictions for the first time in five days. The region has been wracked by demonstrations since June 11 when security forces were accused of killing a 17-year-old. Since then, another 14 protesters and bystanders have been killed. As violence spread, local authorities slapped rigid curfews on most of the region, arrested activists and ordered the army onto the streets to stage flag marches in Srinagar. Kashmiris, mostly young men chanting We Want Freedom! and Allah Is Great! staged sit-in protests at several places in Srinagar on Thursday, heeding a call by separatists opposed to Indian rule in the region. We are watching the situation closely. If need arises we may re-impose restrictions on the movement of the people, a police officer, who asked not to be named, told AFP. Shops, schools and offices also remained closed for the fifth day running on Thursday on the call of separatists opposed to the Indian rule. Kashmir is divided between India and Pakistan, which administer it jointly but claim it in full. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

karan.1970 said:


> What else to expect from Pakistani media on Kashmir...



Why doesn't India counter that. Your media should go to Kashmir and show the truth.

Banning Pakistani media only strenthen the view that some thing was wrong in Kashmir that was being reported by the Pakistani media and ignored by the Indian media.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Silver-Scorpion

Already on page 89 and still growing. I don't know how humans ever agreed on issues and formed civilizations...quite an achievement for such stubborn species.

Pakistanis want Kashmir and so do the Indians. How about we stop thinking about what we want and let the Kashmiris decide for themselves. That's right a plebiscite. This was supposed to be done years ago but never happened.

In lots of posts that I read Indians rejected this and proposed that Pakistan should first stop insurgency because according to some geniuses on this forum a lot of Kashmiris are convinced by Pak sponsored insurgents to rebel against India and support the "Kashmir joining Pakistan scenario". If you think it's so easy to convince large groups of people like that then India should make use of the thousands of soldiers it has in Kashmir and hold a plebiscite, which will surely result in Kashmir joining India, right?

Here is a news flash...No body has the power to enforce its will on thousands of Kashmiris. So why don't we hold a plebiscite on both sides of Kashmir under UN's supervision and let the Kashmiris figure out their own future.

If there are any other geniuses out there who still disagree on a plebiscite under UN's supervision (Note: Under UN's supervision is the most important part here) here is a tip, don't post what you have to say. The most basic reason is that any solution to Kashmir would require a plebiscite...and most importantly if you are going to mention "peace first and then a plebiscite", that would never happen. Even if Pakistan stopped supporting insurgency, Kashmiri people would arm themselves or at least rebel still even if unarmed, as it can be seen on daily basis in Indian controlled Kashmir.


----------



## karan.1970

ejaz007 said:


> Why doesn't India counter that. Your media should go to Kashmir and show the truth.
> 
> Banning Pakistani media only strenthen the view that some thing was wrong in Kashmir that was being reported by the Pakistani media and ignored by the Indian media.



no point.. you can cure blind, but cant do much with the one who wants to keep his eyes shut...

The hate is so intense that both India and Pakistan have shut their eyes towards the positive aspects of each other..


----------



## rehmani7

Ever since the Autumn of 1947, when under the pretext of a controversial letter of accession by the last Dogra ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, to the last British Governor General of India Lord Mont Batten, followed by India's invasion on the former princely state, the history has been recording frequent street skirmishes, and bloody episodes between India and the Kashmiris.

Although every time India trumpeted her victory on the ''separatists'' in the name of fake and farce elections, but it could never think of pulling out her military and paramilitary forces from Jammu and Kashmir. Each post- 1947 decade, has its own history of turbulence very different from the law and order problem of a country.

The failure of the Indian leadership to respect the free will of the people disturbed and complicated the whole affair and led to a repressive and bloody state policy, resulting in the current quit Kashmir agitation against the armed forces of India by unarmed youth who are the product of post 1990 Indian policies, ordinances and laws in Jammu and Kashmir.
The rage of the Kashmiris is like flying sparks and fire- balls, which can't be measured in terms of simple local grievances, and hence this fire can't be easily extinguished or simmered down.

It is after every innocent killing and atrocity that people find a genuine cause to come out on the streets in huge numbers; highlight their basic demand of the right of self determination and pour scorn on the Indian army and police which enjoy immunity under some draconian laws since 1990.Nodoubt every state in the world has some internal trouble, but the turmoil in Kashmir can't be attributed to some economic or social problems; it is more than that.
We must go back to the genesis of the Kashmir dispute and the history of Indian rule in Kashmir. India broke her promises with the people not once but many times during the last several decades. Therefore, there is hate against Indian occupation of Kashmirrooted deep in their ethos and blood.

India should not pretend to be ignorant, she should not say why. India must ask her military men in the field as to how humiliatingly they have been treating the Kashmiris, men, women and children; they have been plundering their green gold and meadows in the forests for the last two decades. India is reaping its harvest in Kashmir.
Again India's total refusal to grant the right of self determination to the Kashmiris fanned unrest and discontent in Kashmir. A young generation in every decade spearheads the movement of freedom and a retiring generation leaves space for the fresh blood. Nowadays our youth is the torch bearer of freedom. It has been experienced in every decade before and after the death of Sheikh Abdullah. 
Unfortunately India always maligned Kashmiris, and spread malice against them across the country. In her malicious propaganda, India was encouraged by the lusty politicians and rulers of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. They still enjoy reveries and wishfully think that Kashmiris patience would exhaust, to finally give in before India. But the idiom'' water off a duck's back'' is not applicable here. 
Having said all this, I would caution the people on two vital points. First is the peaceful and popular character of the current political struggle. It must be maintained at all costs and further strengthened by isolating the elements of duplicity, destruction and sabotage. This will ensure support of an overwhelming majority to it.

Peaceful public struggle is more lasting than any mode of armed disturbance, which cripples a poor nation and ruins its socio-economic fabric more easily. Moreover, in the present scenario an armed struggle for a just and noble cause has to face the opposition of a global nature. Here India is the sole benefactor. Pakistan is our moral and diplomatic supporter. It is also an active member of the war on terror.'' Yet the country is dubbed as ''the current Al Qaeda epicenter.

'' Kashmiris must understand well that the Muslim rulers in spite of their land, population and energy potentials tremble by one statement of the US or West. In a high level meeting with the leadership of the AJK, I had suggested only one day shutter down call before the base camp Govt. to show solidarity with the people of Kashmir. But they didn't go beyond condolence messages.
My second point and I would suggest humbly that the current agitation must not deviate from its national agenda of the right of self determination. We had no global agenda, never, ever. We have no extra-territorial political and strategic ambitions. Our right to self determination has been recognized by the United Nations and this is now our national slogan. It is the duty of the torchbearers of the current awakening to plead and protect these objectives of the nation, and try to win over the world opinion.

The real leadershipvanguard of the present uprising must take all possible measures to project the voice of the people in a manner that would accord it world vide sympathy, and acceptance. It is the duty of this leading generation to protect the movement against all types of mischief by saboteurs, exploiters, and hypocritespolitically ambitious elements of the society. The goal of the freedom fighting Kashmiri must be unambiguously noble and humbleto promote the cause of the tortured humanity of Kashmir, and gain maximum support for it from the international community. 
It is sad that the issue of Kashmirthe right of self determination is in the eyes of many a foredoomed and forgotten question, and the glorious sacrifices of our people are being ignored by the world. Surprisingly our own Ummah is silent over the bloodshed of the Kashmiris. The slogans of freedom, wailing cries of suffering people; the army and police operations against civilians don't find any space in the newspapers. No television channel has the time to show the tragic episodes of Kashmir to their listeners.

Yet they say that Kashmir is an international question; for Pakistan it is a national issue. As per the coverage of the national issue is concerned, we should ask our well wishers to watch the screen, judge the coverage of Kashmir and put the news stories under microscope. In this gloom how can we tell others to focus upon the current situation in Kashmir? We are in a deep slumber, not that we don't watch or read anything; but in the sense that we have developed vested interests here and there, in and out.

The time calls on us to weed out the dead wood from the forest. The freedom in the box or prison is no freedom at all. Rage in the present day Kashmir reflects a lasting message for the world.
Note: The write is Chairman Jammu and Kashmir People's Freedom League and Senior Executive member of APHC AJK/Pak


----------



## welcome

no possible solution without war....because india and pakistan both will never accept independent Kashmir...and both will never accept current border...


----------



## vsdoc

The point is, we have had wars in the past. But we have not consolidated on our gains then.

Every inch of enemy territory won in war is won at a high cost, paid for by the blood of your fallen soldiers who made the supreme sacrifice.

I believe that returning such land after cessation of hostilities is an act of treason against the nation.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Swift

vsdoc said:


> The point is, we have had wars in the past. But we have not consolidated on our gains then.
> *
> Every inch of enemy territory won in war is won at a high cost, paid for by the blood of your fallen soldiers who made the supreme sacrifice.*
> 
> I believe that returning such land after cessation of hostilities is an act of treason against the nation.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Your quote or sourced one?


----------



## somebozo

The very survival of pakistan and millions of its farmers working in agriculture sector depends on Kashmir. Only two solutions are accecptable to Pakistan.

Scenerio 7 of dividing Kashmir across the lines of river chenab
Acceding entire Kashmir to Pakistan.


----------



## EjazR

^^^^But thatmeans you don't want to do what the valley Kashmiris want which is independance. Plus that would require Rajouri andPoonch districts as well as Leh and Kargil to go to Pakistan which are completely hostile to even independance.

Do you want what Kashmiris want or what GoP wants?


----------



## karan.1970

^ I hope your question is rhetorical only. The whole world knows that this Pakistani stand of "What Kashmiris want" is a lie at best. Thats why there are no takers in the world body for this stand (apart from a few inconsequential voices)


----------



## EjazR

^^^I know that but many Pakistanis areblisfully unaware that first of all only the sepratists valley Kashmiris want Independance. And hardly anyone wants to join Pakistan. 
And GoP has never stated that they are ok with J&K being given independance.


----------



## Silver-Scorpion

GoP may have never stated independence of Kashmir openly but I am sure that is a much better option than Kashmir being under Indian control, mainly because of water issues.

Another thing is that Pakistanis are not unaware of Kashmiris wanting independence. Most ideally they would want Kashmir to be part of Pakistan but independence is not frowned upon too much either. This is why Pakistan is not against a plebiscite.


----------



## EjazR

^^^^You are contradicting yourself. GoP has always stated that it wants UN referendum. That means choosing India or Pakistan, not independance.

Do you think GoP will give up Gilgit Baltistan and Kashmir and lose the only lan link to China?


----------



## ejaz007

*No external involvement in IHK unrest: poll*

NEW DELHI: An opinion poll conducted by an Indian weekly has deflated claims that the current unrest in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) was being engineered by Pakistan and terrorist groups. The poll, conducted by the Outlook magazine in association with Marketing and Development Research Associates (MDRA), found that 75 percent respondents believed that the current unrest in IHK was indigenous, with no involvemnt from any external element. Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram had recently blamed Lashkar-e-Tayyaba for the violence. IHK Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and some Indian news channels put the onus on the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Indias main opposition, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), claimed that Rs 500 million had changed hands to keep IHK boiling. But the opinion poll negated all these claims. The poll, conducted in Srinagar recently, revealed that 75 percent of those polled did not see Pakistans hand behind the stone pelting, while 38 percent were dissatisfied with Omars government. A majority of respondents, 45.4 percent, recorded their angst against New Delhi, blaming it for the current mess in IHK. Interestingly, only 11.7 percent blamed Indian security forces. Of those polled, 30.8 percent described yearning for freedom the reason for the provocation. iftikhar gilani

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*Tense IHK towns under curfew again*

SRINAGAR: Tens of thousands of armed police and paramilitary soldiers patrolled deserted streets of Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) on Sunday, warning residents to stay indoors in Srinagar and other major towns to thwart any protests. The curfew comes amid a call by separatists for renewed rallies against the Indian rule, following three weeks of civil unrest that left 15 people dead. On Sunday, troops laid razor wire and erected steel barricades in Srinagar as shops and businesses remained closed and vehicles stayed off the roads. There were no reports of protests. Authorities postponed all scheduled college examinations until July 24. The All-Parties Hurriyat Conference, the regions main grouping of separatist parties, called for week-long public protests in the region to begin on Saturday. It also called on shops and businesses to stay open for a half-day to allow residents to stock up on supplies. The government kept offices open for a few hours as well. By late Saturday, protests and clashes erupted in many parts of the region. Demonstrators chanting go India, go back, we want freedom, hurled stones at police and paramilitary soldiers who responded by firing tear gas, said a police officer on condition of anonymity. In Baramulla, locals said a teenaged boy drowned in a river after being chased by policemen during Saturdays clashes. ap

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## EjazR

*"Interestingly, only 11.7 percent blamed Indian security forces."*

That is strange, then why are the pelting stones on the local police and other security forces? Unless the sample size did not contain stone pelters or the proportion of Srinagar residents who support stone pelting are less.

By the way the poll was conducted only in Srinagar. So rural areas or the rest of J&K state or even the valley is not represented.

*www.outlookindia.com | Outlook-MDRA Telephone Poll*

Who do you blame for the current mess in Kashmir?
Centre 45.4
State 32.1
Security forces 11.7
PDP 4.6
Hurriyat 1.7
Don&#8217;t know 4.6

What is the provocation for the current situation?
High-handedness of security forces 23.3
Neglect of state 18.3
General frustration 18.8
Cry for azadi 30.8
Don&#8217;t know 8.8

Do you see an external hand in the current round of stone- pelting?
Yes 15.4
No 75.0
Don't Know 9.6

How long do you think the current strife will continue?
One month 11.3
Three months 4.6
Six months 2.5
One year 5.8
More than a year 46.3
DK/CS 29.6

Do you think an Azad Kashmir will be able to survive on its own?
Yes 45.4
No 42.9
Don't Know 11.7

How do you rate Omar Abdullah&#8217;s performance as a chief minister?
Good 22.1
Average 36.7
Poor 37.5
Don't Know 3.8

*Methodology Outlook opinion poll conducted in Srinagar on the telephone by Marketing & Development Research Associates (MDRA) on July 14. Sample size: 240 (male 127, female 113); 80&#37; of the respondents were between 16 and 40 years of age. Confidence level 95% with +/-6.32% error of margin.*


----------



## Join

*@EjazR*, these census reports are Mosad, RAW and CIA propaganda dude .... u cant change there mind, leave it


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

EjazR said:


> *"Interestingly, only 11.7 percent blamed Indian security forces."*
> 
> That is strange, then why are the pelting stones on the local police and other security forces? Unless the sample size did not contain stone pelters or the proportion of Srinagar residents who support stone pelting are less.



nothing personal.... 



they just want freedom and right to self-determination --free of intimidation and constant siege by indian forces.


----------



## Xeric

^^^ And the polls, again.


----------



## xyz

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> nothing personal....
> 
> 
> 
> they just want freedom and right to self-determination --free of intimidation and constant siege by indian forces.



why are you worried about their freedom???


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

xyz said:


> why are you worried about their freedom???



for the same reason that my elders and ancestors were/are

they are our brothers/sisters


----------



## amit27

kashmiri pandits want their own homeland so any deal on kashmir will have be inclusive of all parties involved.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

most of them moved to india and then india has nerve to blame ISI/Pakistan for so-called demographic change


----------



## xyz

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> for the same reason that my elders and ancestors were/are
> 
> they are our brothers/sisters



in other words 'terrorism.'


----------



## welcome

*Scenerio 8 : WAR *


----------



## desiman

lol we are still at it in this thread, this argument is endless folks.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

xyz said:


> in other words 'terrorism.'



if that's how you interpret it, then fine


----------



## amit27

Panun Kashmir: A Homeland for Kashmiri Pandits


Besides being a struggle for survival as a cultural entity and an ancient race, PANUN KASHMIR is a movement for the political survival of over 700,000 Kashmiri Pandits in their birthland.


----------



## Reaper What You Sow

Don't worry, the UN is waiting to Balkanize the **** out of this region once the time frame and geo-political climate and participation is right. The world isn't going to disregard how absurdly inept, uncivilized and destructive both countries have been over Kashmir. Mark my words my brown people, the world's gaze will shift to Kashmir sooner or later. It is a colossal weakness that can be used to initiate a chain reaction of events for the clever and patient.


----------



## amit27

Reaper What You Sow said:


> Don't worry, the UN is waiting to Balkanize the **** out of this region once the time frame and geo-political climate and participation is right. The world isn't going to disregard how absurdly inept, uncivilized and destructive both countries have been over Kashmir. Mark my words my brown people, the world's gaze will shift to Kashmir sooner or later. It is a colossal weakness that can be used to initiate a chain reaction of events for the clever and patient.



Says who you? do u know the power of the Indian community in UK, USA, Canada we even stopped Germany banning the Swastika in the EU. Go google the Indian lobby in USA first b4 making retarded comments the US has said Kashmir is internal matter of India and Pakistan end of matter.


----------



## Reaper What You Sow

amit27 said:


> Says who you? do u know the power of the Indian community in UK, USA, Canada we even stopped Germany banning the Swastika in the EU. Go google the Indian lobby in USA first b4 making retarded comments the US has said Kashmir is internal matter of India and Pakistan end of matter.



The power of the Indian community, however newly acquired, means little when big moves go down. All I am saying is, give war a chance. The world will never let Pakistan and India settle this amongst themselves, that's quite archaic of a notion.


----------



## amit27

Reaper What You Sow said:


> The power of the Indian community, however newly acquired, means little when big moves go down. All I am saying is, give war a chance. The world will never let Pakistan and India settle this amongst themselves, that's quite archaic of a notion.




Are u a total walley? when the conservative party came to power in UK their manifesto stated that they wanted a new special relationship with India. 

David Cameron will lead a senior cabinet delegation to New Delhi later this month to build a new "special relationship" with India in an attempt to boost trade.

Ministers to build a new 'special relationship' with India - Telegraph

Now why did US State Departments deputy spokesman Mark Tone also told journalists that the current situation in Indian occupied Kashmir was Indias internal issue and asked protesters to conduct agitations in a peaceful manner. 

We always support dialogue between India and Pakistan, Mr Toner said when asked if Kashmir should be discussed between the two countries. 

We regret the loss of life in this incident. It is an internal Indian matter. We respect the efforts of the government of India to investigate and resolve the current situation in Kashmir, he said, adding that the United States had always encouraged India and Pakistan to resolve all its differences through dialogue. 

USA and Uk care more about trade and not hurting Indian feelings when it comes to Kashmir, USA wants to win the MRCA deal and this will be on the agenda when Obama visits in November.


----------



## EjazR

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> nothing personal....
> 
> they just want freedom and right to self-determination --free of intimidation and constant siege by indian forces.



Well who decides how mcuh freedom they have? How do we quantify? If you look at independant organisations like UNHCR, it declare Indian J&K as partly free while Pakistani side as not free with reasons stated among others that there is no politcal freedom.

Similarly if you look at the freedomhouse compilations since 2002. Indian J&K was having more freedom according to them than Pakistan atleast till 2008. Post 2008, Indian &K is still considered according to them to have more freedom than the Pakistani side including gilgit Baltistan.

You can check that out here.
freedomhouse.org: Map of Freedom in the World

Not understanding that the valley is a part of the entire J&K state not the whole. They also are not representative of all the Muslims even.


I wouldn't take the poll as accurate as the sample size is too small and consists of Srinagar only. You have to take the entire valley and you need atleast a 1000 people carefully selected to get some sort of accurate sample for a 3-4 million population in the valley. And more still if you want to representation from Jammu and Ladakh as well

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*One killed as security forces open fire at IHK protesters*

SRINAGAR: A man was killed on Monday when security forces opened fire at protesters in Indian-held Kashmir, said the police. This is yet another in a string of deaths that have sparked huge anti-India demonstrations.

The killing took place in Baramulla, a town north of Srinagar, the summer capital of Muslim-majority Indian Kashmir where separatists have been fighting for the past two decades.

Police had to open fire after baton charges and teargas shelling failed to disperse the protesters, a police officer told AFP. Police said 13 others were injured in the firing and in the stampede that followed as demonstrators scrambled to get away.

Indian officials described the demonstration as violent but residents insisted it was peaceful. The slogans were for freedom. The police have been unable to identify the victim but said he was a young man.

Anti-India demonstrations have escalated sharply in Indian-held Kashmir since June 11 when police killed a 17-year-old boy, a bystander at a protest held against New Delhis rule.

Each death since June 11 has triggered a fresh wave of protests that has brought thousands into the streets, and general strikes. Indian authorities have normally responded with strict curfews although none had been declared late on Monday.

Separatists have been campaigning since 1989 for Kashmir to either obtain independence or join Pakistan. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

xyz said:


> in other words 'terrorism.'



In other words freedom fighters waging a war against Indian state terrorism.


----------



## ejaz007

*Indian police threatening Facebook users in IHK*

SRINAGAR: Coalition of Civil Society, a leading human rights group working in Indian-held Kashmir, has said that users of popular social networking website Facebook are being intimidated by police for uploading images of ongoing deadly protests in the state. Young Kashmiris have been uploading photos and videos on social networking site Facebook and video-sharing sites like YouTube. Coalition of Civil Society coordinator Khurram Parvez said some Facebook users had been asked to report to police stations as a consequence. It is intimidation, nothing else, he said. The protests even on virtual spaces are not being tolerated, he said. The police denied summoning anyone. A young Kashmiri said he had deactivated his account under police pressure. He did not give his name out of fear of reprisals. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Dance

ejaz007 said:


> *Indian police threatening Facebook users in IHK*
> 
> SRINAGAR: Coalition of Civil Society, a leading human rights group working in Indian-held Kashmir, has said that users of popular social networking website Facebook are being intimidated by police for uploading images of ongoing deadly protests in the state. Young Kashmiris have been uploading photos and videos on social networking site Facebook and video-sharing sites like YouTube. Coalition of Civil Society coordinator Khurram Parvez said some Facebook users had been asked to report to police stations as a consequence. It is intimidation, nothing else, he said. The protests even on virtual spaces are not being tolerated, he said. The police denied summoning anyone. A young Kashmiri said he had deactivated his account under police pressure. He did not give his name out of fear of reprisals. afp
> 
> Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan



This is the so called "worlds biggest democracy"


----------



## ejaz007

*India clamps curfew in occupied Kashmir *
Updated at: 1245 PST, Wednesday, July 21, 2010

SRINAGAR: In occupied Kashmir, curfew and restrictions were imposed at many places across the Kashmir Valley, today, to prevent protests against Indian state terrorism and continued killing of civilians by Indian paramilitary troopers in the territory.

Curfew has been imposed in Srinagar, Sopore and Baramulla, while restrictions and shutdown in other cities and town of the occupied territory. The restrictions are also being strictly enforced in Batmallo and Shaheedgunj areas of Srinagar city, said a police officer.

The forum patronised by senior Kashmiri Hurriyet leader, Syed Ali Gilani called for sit-ins and protests across the Kashmir Valley demanding the release of hundreds of illegally detained Hurriyet leaders and activists, including ailing leader, Syed Ali Gilani. The protests are part of the  Go India go and Quit Kashmir programme.

Educational institutions, shops, post offices, banks, public transport and other business establishments were closed in areas under restrictions and curfew.

Police and Central Reserve Police Force troopers have been deployed in the areas under curfew and official restrictions to disallow any pedestrian and traffic movement there.

The valley has been under curfew and restrictions for more than a month due to killing of civilians including young boys and a girl by police and paramilitary forces indiscriminate firings since June 11. 

India clamps curfew in occupied Kashmir


----------



## RollingStones

Not sure if this is relevant here, but here's an article of interest:

India state-run banks 'turn away Muslims'
By Sanjoy Majumder
BBC News, Delhi

Muslims make up India's largest minority community
State-owned banks in India have been accused of discriminating against the country's Muslim minority.

India's minorities watchdog has received a record number of complaints from Muslims who say they have been prevented from opening bank accounts.

India's Muslim community is among the poorest in the country.

Some bankers say it is not so much their religious background, but their economic status that makes it hard for Muslims to get banking facilities.

The National Commission of Minorities says that there has been a 100% increase in the number of complaints it has received over the past year from Muslims who say they are being prevented from opening accounts in state-run banks.

Reports say the worst case took place in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh, where some 90,000 Muslim students were unable to open accounts to deposit scholarship cheques given to them by the government.

Official reports frequently put Muslims at the bottom of India's social and economic ladder - even beneath than low-caste Hindus.

Their economic status means they are often excluded by private banks, which prefer more well-to-do clients.

Already a number of reports have suggested that India's Muslims fare poorly when it comes to getting access to quality education or employment opportunities.

This latest finding will add more pressure on a government which is seen as doing very little for the country's largest minority group.

BBC News - India state-run banks &#039;turn away Muslims&#039;


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

*Options Available on Kashmir​*


> The Kashmiris as stakeholder must be the principal beneficiaries of any eventful outcome. Indo-Pakistan relations are a testimony to the fact that without resolving the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir, confidence building measures and improvement of relations would prove to be fragile and short-lived.
> 
> The Indian Army Chief on his visit to India-held Kashmir said that the Indian army failed to administer a good rule and build confidence among the people, forces and the government of the occupied valley, for which a political solution would be initiated to restore normalcy and stabilise the situation.
> 
> This statement clearly shows the failure of the Indian army and their policies in Kashmir. The Indian Army Chief was criticised in many circles of Indian government. On the very next day the Indian Chief tried to balance his earlier statement by terming the on-going protest in Kashmir by anti-government factions as being fuelled by Pakistan.
> 
> It is the Indian policies in Kashmir that are a cause of concern for Pakistan. India-held Kashmir is of strategic importance in the region. The US is concerned about a quick and effective resolution of the Kashmir issue to overcome tensions in the region. The Kashmir dispute cannot be resolved unless India changes its attitude and policies. Undoubtedly, the key to the dispute lies with the Indian authorities.
> 
> If the US is sincere in resolving the India-Pakistan dispute, then it should be prepared to put concerted pressure on India as well as on other parties involved.
> 
> To change Indias attitude towards accepting any reasonable proposal with regard to the future status of Kashmir would indeed be a major challenge for the American mediators and for Pakistan.
> 
> Conclusively Pakistan and India, on their own, cannot decide the future of Kashmiris, by excluding them from any such process. It is now evident that for solving the Kashmir dispute in any durable manner, a viable solution would have to include, as a sine qua non, the full support of the Kashmiri people.




DAWN.COM | Letters to the Editor | Options available on Kashmir


----------



## kak1978

FUTURE: Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of the Indian union, period. Eventually LOC will become international border. Whoever tries to create a disturbance in Kashmir or in any other part of India are enemies of the state and will be dealt with accordingly. Whatever pakistan or pakistani media is writing about the aspirations of kashmiris are pure "crocodile tears".


----------



## Dance

kak1978 said:


> FUTURE: Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of the Indian union, period. Eventually LOC will become international border. Whoever tries to create a disturbance in Kashmir or in any other part of India are enemies of the state and will be dealt with accordingly.



Yeah only integral according to you, not to the world. It's a disputed territory.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

kak1978 said:


> FUTURE: Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of the Indian union, period. Eventually LOC will become international border. Whoever tries to create a disturbance in Kashmir or in any other part of India are enemies of the state and will be dealt with accordingly.



yes Kashmiri civilians are being beaten, shot and arrested...

thanks for your input


----------



## amit27

Pakistan who created the jihadis to cause havoc in the valley and the actions of some Indian soldiers who commited war crimes on the Kashmiri people has not helped settle this ongoing dispute. The only solution is for pakistan to close the terror camps in *** and India to make Kashmir demilitarized this will pave the way to open up the LOC so borders become irrelevent.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

*YouTube generation defines new struggle in IHK*

**Facebook, YouTube have provided Kashmiri youth with a platform to convey their aspirations, frustrations to the world
* Former militant commander Mir warns that New Delhis hardline response could turn todays frustrated stone-throwers into new recruits for severely weakened insurgency *

SRINAGAR: For six weeks, hundreds of young Kashmiris like 17-year-old Amjad Khan have taken to the streets to pelt stones at Indian security forces. 

I have taken to stone-throwing to show my anger, my hatred at the present state of affairs, says the softly spoken Khan (name changed), as he stands in one of Srinagars narrow back streets. 

The son of a government employee father, who disapproves of his behaviour, Khan is dressed casually in jeans and a t-shirt and has his hair gelled in a style familiar from Bollywood films. 

He says he is not a particularly devout Muslim and attends Friday prayers only to be able to join the regular protests that take place afterwards, denouncing Indian rule in the territory. 

Born during the insurgency like most of the under-20 protestors  tech-savvy Internet users who are harnessing Facebook and YouTube to highlight their struggle  he has known nothing but violence and turmoil in Kashmir. 

Why should this problem linger on if so many other problems have been resolved? he asks. 

Platform: So far, the young men on the streets are gun-less. Their weapons of choice are stones and the Internet, with Facebook and YouTube key parts of their struggle. 

Facebook and YouTube have provided us a platform to convey our aspirations and frustrations to the world, says Showket Ahmed, 24, who captures events on his mobile phone camera and later uploads them on Facebook. 

Warns: But former militant commander Javed Mir warns that New Delhis hardline response could turn todays frustrated stone-throwers into new recruits for the severely weakened insurgency. 

Before the launch of the insurgency, I and my friends used to indulge in stone-pelting with the aim of highlighting the Kashmir issue, but we failed, said Mir, now a separatist campaigner. 

Finally we took to guns and succeeded in bringing Kashmir out of the cold storage. If present protests are ignored, these young men may be forced to follow our path,  he added.

The government in New Delhi has tried to paint the protests as the work of shadowy Pakistani extremists, but many local leaders believe the underlying reason is despair among the young generation about their prospects. 

There are over 400,000 unemployed young people across the state and decades of on-off political dialogue about the status of the disputed territory have yielded few rewards and no end to the deadlock. 

The single largest factor today is that people dont see the light at the end of the dark tunnel they were hoping to see, Indian-held Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, admitted on Indian news channel NDTV earlier this month. 

Until we resolve it politically, we will always have problems, he said. 

Indian Army chief General VK Singh said last month that the battle against anti-India insurgents had been more or less won, but people needed to feel that progress was being made to improve their lives. 

In New Delhi, Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram has pushed the notion that the protests are being orchestrated by militant groups and Pakistan. 

Others have suggested the protesters are being paid by hardline separatists, a theory that has been widely challenged, even among pro-India politicians in Kashmir. 

Linking the genuine anger and anguish among people with terrorism is nothing short of an assault on their self respect and dignity, said former chief minister Mufti Sayeed of the pro-India Peoples Democratic Party. 

Mehboob Beigh, who is close to chief minister Abdullah and advocates autonomy in the region, agrees. 

Political alienation of Kashmiris is the larger issue, he said. Our youth want to be heard. New Delhi should listen to them with compassion and sincerity or we may soon see another cycle of violence. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

amit27 said:


> Pakistan who created the jihadis to cause havoc in the valley and the actions of some Indian soldiers who commited war crimes on the Kashmiri people has not helped settle this ongoing dispute. The only solution is for pakistan to close the terror camps in *** and India to make Kashmir demilitarized this will pave the way to open up the LOC so borders become irrelevent.



indians must get out of their denial and realize that Kashmiri seperatism is a Kashmiri phenomenon


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

Only practical solution is making loc the IB. Or else for a plebiscite pakistan needs to recall all illegal settlers form ***,take back the land gifted to china and start withdrawing army then there is chance but it is highly impossible.


----------



## somebozo

bhagathsingh said:


> Only practical solution is making loc the IB. Or else for a plebiscite pakistan needs to recall all illegal settlers form ***,take back the land gifted to china and start withdrawing army then there is chance but it is highly impossible.



Give it some time and kashmris will eventually win. The Bosnian did, Kosovars did it and Bengalis did it and Pakistanis did it.


----------



## RollingStones

somebozo said:


> Give it some time and kashmris will eventually win. The Bosnian did, Kosovars did it and Bengalis did it and Pakistanis did it.



To me, dividing people on outdated religious concepts is a ridiculous thing. If Kashmiris want freedom because they are Muslims, I cant see myself supporting that cause. Unlike Tibet, where religion is not the reason they are seeking autonomy, Kashmir wants freedom for religious purposes. I doubt if Kashmiris will get any support from the world for that kind of division. I am dead against dividing people based on religion. What I do support, however is doing the following:

- merging the countries of India, pakistan, bangladesh, nepal, bhutan into one Union called the South Asian Union
- have a federal structure to govern the various States in this Union
- adopt a US style parliamentary structure - 2 senators per State regardless of the size and population of the State. And then a House of Representatives that does represent the size of States. Adopt legislative processes just like in the US to pass laws.
- adopt voting processes where the Chief Executive of the country is directly elected by people. 
- encourage true movement of labor between States
- completely separate religion from affairs of the State and enforce the law like there's no tomorrow

Kashmir can probably be a separate State in this geographical entity and enjoy whatever freedom they want subject only to federal control for certain matters. 

I cannot understand any other type of Freedom that Kashmiris would want. I dont understand what is that Kashmiris exactly want? What is freedom - freedom to do what? You cannot keep on shouting freedom - you have to say freedom to do what?


----------



## ejaz007

RollingStones said:


> To me, dividing people on outdated religious concepts is a ridiculous thing. If Kashmiris want freedom because they are Muslims, I cant see myself supporting that cause. Unlike Tibet, where religion is not the reason they are seeking autonomy, Kashmir wants freedom for religious purposes. I doubt if Kashmiris will get any support from the world for that kind of division. I am dead against dividing people based on religion. What I do support, however is doing the following:
> 
> - merging the countries of India, pakistan, bangladesh, nepal, bhutan into one Union called the South Asian Union
> - have a federal structure to govern the various States in this Union
> - adopt a US style parliamentary structure - 2 senators per State regardless of the size and population of the State. And then a House of Representatives that does represent the size of States. Adopt legislative processes just like in the US to pass laws.
> - adopt voting processes where the Chief Executive of the country is directly elected by people.
> - encourage true movement of labor between States
> - completely separate religion from affairs of the State and enforce the law like there's no tomorrow
> 
> Kashmir can probably be a separate State in this geographical entity and enjoy whatever freedom they want subject only to federal control for certain matters.
> 
> I cannot understand any other type of Freedom that Kashmiris would want. I dont understand what is that Kashmiris exactly want? What is freedom - freedom to do what? You cannot keep on shouting freedom - you have to say freedom to do what?



You do not know the value of freedom because you never lived under a foreign occupation. I suggest you go to Indian occupied Kashmir live there for six months and then you shall understand what Kashmiris want.

I bet you shall be one of the protester hurling stones at Indian army or one with an AK on his shoulder.

Do not try to divide Kashmir on the basis of religion. No one on this forum or elsewhere wants freedom just for muslim Kashmir. We want freedom for Kashmir regardless of religion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

*Held Kashmir officers refusing challenging assignments*

** Civil and police officers have opted for modest postings that do not involve any public dealing*
By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), already rocked by violence and unrest, is now facing the threat of a civil disobedience, as seven senior civil and police officers have refused to take up their duties. 

A large number of officers have refused to accept challenging assignments in different districts including Srinagar, Baramulla and Kupwara and preferred being posted in relatively peaceful areas of the state. Following the killing of a youth in IHKs Baramulla district on Monday, the state government had ordered a reshuffle in the police administration. Railways Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Mansoor Ahmed Untoo had been appointed the new Baramulla SSP replacing Sheikh Mehmood. 

According to the sources of a Srinagar daily newspaper, Untoo was appointed the Special Branch SSP only after Ghulam Bhat refused to accept the post. Bhats refusal annoyed IHK Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, as Bhat was posted in the police headquarters, Srinagar. The posting of the new SSP was made after the incumbent Baramulla SSP Mehmood cited heart problems after killing of a youth by police firing, and resigned from the post. He left for Chandigarh stating that he needed immediate specialised heart treatment. Similarly, a senior officer posted in the State Public Service Commission was transferred as deputy commissioner (DC) of Kupwara district after orders of the state cabinet but he also refused to accept his new responsibility. The incumbent Kupwara DC who had proceeded on a sick-leave, had to be airlifted to resume his duty.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

If Pakistan were so much concerned about Kashmir&#8217;s will and freedom they would have waited for a decision from Kashmir&#8217;s then raja harisingh or for a plebiscite which was common when disputes were aroused. According to my sources raja was compelled by both India and Pakistan to join their respected unions but he preferred independence which is more likely to be the choice of kashmiries. But Pakistan broke the standstill agreement with Kashmir and attacked to forcefully occupy it. This lead the raja to decide in favor of India.
And again if my sources are right its Pakistan who insisted to remove the third option of &#8216;independent Kashmir&#8217; from the UN plebiscite agreement.


----------



## RollingStones

ejaz007 said:


> You do not know the value of freedom because you never lived under a foreign occupation. I suggest you go to Indian occupied Kashmir live there for six months and then you shall understand what Kashmiris want.
> 
> I bet you shall be one of the protester hurling stones at Indian army or one with an AK on his shoulder.
> 
> Do not try to divide Kashmir on the basis of religion. No one on this forum or elsewhere wants freedom just for muslim Kashmir. We want freedom for Kashmir regardless of religion.



If this is the case and I am not sure if Indian members agree to this, then why not have every State within India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Maldives etc. have the same set of "freedom". I still dont know what exactly this freedom is - what would Kashmiris DO freely? How is that other States of India are not clamoring for freedom if the Indian federal structure is so bad? Or, why would India single out just the region of Kashmir valley and inflict upon them untold suffering? What would they stand to gain, especially when they know that they have a huge muslim population that would want to secede from India if India treated them badly? To me, there is something unclear about what Kashmiris exactly want. What do they want to do to prosper? Are they not getting that now? 

Are the solutions to problems faced by various peoples in South Asia better governance, better allocation of resources, more education, more investment, a fairer relationship between the federation and states and things like that or is it like every state wants to be "free"? Unlike China and the US, Indic peoples are not a uniform race and culture. But the question to ask broadly is: do these Indic people want to be under a federated structure or do they all want to be independent countries? If the overwhelming majority feel that the federation structure has caused more harm than benefits (like in the case of soviet union), then it stands to reason that entire South Asia be defederated into countries at the State level (what a nightmare). What I dont understand is that how can Kashmir alone be separated from the rest of South Asia and can be given "freedom", given that we are still not clear about what they want to be "free" from or what they want to be "free" to do?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## American Eagle

I think folks need to slow down and understand that the so called occupation is being done by Pakistan, India, and China, who control the three parts of Kashmir.

Secondly, the Andorran Model which I have postings about on this site several times now, allows for a gradual, over many years, evolution starting with a single Kashmir Parliament.

Pragmatically over time the foreign affairs and national security controls remain with these three nations using the LOC BUT with open borders to improve commerce, trade, and travel freely for one and all.

Problems remain over hateful religious zealotry among some Paksitanis and some Indians, but the Chinese have specialized in suppressing all religions, a different stance vs. both Pakitan and India.

There will be no quick fix and those who think otherwise are living a dilusion.


----------



## ejaz007

American Eagle said:


> I think folks need to slow down and understand that the so called occupation is being done by Pakistan, India, and China, who control the three parts of Kashmir.
> 
> Secondly, the Andorran Model which I have postings about on this site several times now, allows for a gradual, over many years, evolution starting with a single Kashmir Parliament.
> 
> Pragmatically over time the foreign affairs and national security controls remain with these three nations using the LOC BUT with open borders to improve commerce, trade, and travel freely for one and all.
> 
> Problems remain over hateful religious zealotry among some Paksitanis and some Indians, but the Chinese have specialized in suppressing all religions, a different stance vs. both Pakitan and India.
> 
> There will be no quick fix and those who think otherwise are living a dilusion.



What you have stated is technically not correct.

The part of Kashmir on Pakistani side is not administered or controlled by Pakistan. Azad Kashmir as it called here has its own constitution, president, prime minister and a parliament. None of the institutions of Pakistan have any say or control in Azad Kashmir except prime minister of Pakistan. Azad Kashmir has its own police and legal system. There are no protests on this side about freedom or any other issue.

The part of Kashmir leased to China is with a condition that the final settlement shall be agreed by the government that represents Kashmiris once the issue has been settled. They can if desired cancel the deal and reclaim the part.

The part of Kashmir on the Indian side is the one that has its issues with India. The people their daily risk their lifes protesting against India and getting killed by the Indian security forces.

The matter is before UN and should be settled according to the UN resolution.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

the problem is, hindustan treats freedom chanting protestors as terrorists....look at the language being used by hindustanys against them

they arent using bombs or engaging in sabotage....yet hindustany forces are subduing them using lathi charge and other heavy handedness which is resulting in loss of lives, injuries and damage to property

it is no wonder that the Kashmiris are again on uprising and civil disobedience


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the problem is, hindustan treats freedom chanting protestors as terrorists....look at the language being used by hindustanys against them
> 
> they arent using bombs or engaging in sabotage....yet hindustany forces are subduing them using lathi charge and other heavy handedness which is resulting in loss of lives, injuries and damage to property
> 
> it is no wonder that the Kashmiris are again on uprising and civil disobedience



India doesnt treat protesters as terroriststhe biggest proof for that is the protesters themself,they are still alive and continuing their protest. It is true that whenever peaceful protests turn into violent mode we use police and army to control them. A mob violence and use of police force will result injuries, lathicharge, and sometimes even loss of life (it is not intentional), it happens not only in India but everywhere in the world including Pakistan.


For terrorists from inside and outside we have another treatment which will fix their meeting with god.and they are punished there. Lot of them got visa on the spot in Mumbai and one is still waiting in jail.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

bhagathsingh said:


> India doesnt treat protesters as terroriststhe biggest proof for that is the protesters themself,they are still alive and continuing their protest. It is true that whenever peaceful protests turn into violent mode we use police and army to control them. A mob violence and use of police force will result injuries, lathicharge, and sometimes even loss of life (it is not intentional), it happens not only in India but everywhere in the world including Pakistan.



singh saab, glad you stated your position on this matter; if only some of your fellow countrymen knew how to differentiate between terrorist and freedom fighter


----------



## Nihat

India hold on to Kashmir because of strategic and tactical importance, it seperates China and Pak and an independent Kashmir would provide easier access to india's main advesaries , surely this is not acceptable to India.

Secondly, if Kashmir is divided then the concept of inter-faith integration in india would take a big hit as all manner of faiths and caste would start to state the Kashmir precedence and demand sovereignity.

Thirdly, India stands to loose control of 6 major rivers passing through or originating in the mountains of Kashmir.

No ammount of insurgency can alter these facts, so it'll be much easier for Pakistan to stop hyper-ventilating over Kashmir and settle for LoC as genrally accepted border which would pave the way for more autnomy for Kashmir but not independence.

If Pak wants to continue this futile battle for Kashmir then so be it, I don't think people of India are too bothered about that as India has many good things to look forward to in the future, simply by ignoring Pakistans cries and appeals for talks on Kashmir.

If the heavy presence of military is required to keep Kashmir with India then so be it. I don't think that flutters India or the world community that much.

Another point worthy of a mention is that an Independent state of Kashmir would be nothing more than a pseudo-Pakistan. It would emerge as the new hotbed for global terrorism, especially given the increasing number of people believeing in Rabid religious agenda of Ghazwa-e-Hind or whatever which states that Pakistan would take over India and Israel or whatever that BS is.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EjazR

ejaz007 said:


> The matter is before UN and should be settled according to the UN resolution.



The 1948 resolution can't be implemented until the assurance that was provided to India for implementing that resolution is fulfilled. Let me quote the assurance that was passed as a resolution by the UNSC council


Resolution on Assurances adopted by U.N. Commission for India and Pakistan(UNCIP) 1948

*Resolution adopted by UNCIP*


> This resolution was in the form of an assurance provided to India before the main U.N. Resolution of August 13, 1948, was to be implemented. The Resolution on Assurance said:-
> 
> *1. Responsibility for the security of J&K rests with Government of India.
> 
> 2. The sovereignty of the J&K Government over the entire territory of the State shall not be brought under question.*
> 
> 3. There shall be no recognition of the so-called Azad (Free) Kashmir Government.
> 
> 4. The territory occupied by Pakistan shall not be consolidated to the disadvantage of the State of J&K.
> 
> 5. The administration of the evacuated areas in the North shall revert to the Government of J&K and its defence to the Government of India, who will, if necessary, maintain garrison for preventing the incursion oftribesmen and for guarding main trade routes.
> 
> 6. Pakistan shall be excluded from all affairs of J&K in particular in the plebiscite, of one should be held.
> 
> 7. If a plebiscite is found to be impossible for technical or practical reasons, the Commission will consider other methods of determining fair and equitable conditions for ensuring a free expression of people&#8217;s will.
> 
> *8. Plebescite proposal shall not be binding upon India if Pakistan does not implement Part I and II of the resolution of 13th August, 1948. *
> 
> (The resolution had called upon Pakistan to withdraw troops from occupied Kashmir)



This is in UNSC records. Legally from the UN point of view there was no question on doubting India's claim on the entire state of J&K until the plebiscite is conducted. But the emerging cold war led to the US and UK siding with India and Pakistan was not pressured to vacate the state of J&K. As part 8 of the resolution states, the plebiscite proposal is not binding in the current scenario. AT that time right after the brutal invasion of the tribals, the Pakistani leaders were afraid that if a Plebescite is conducted under the popular leadership of Sheikh Abdulla, India might win and hence the part 1 and 2 of the requirements were not fulfilled.

Those who harp on the UNSC resolution also should know that the plebiscite was restricted to only India or Pakistan and the separatists want independence, there is hardly any support for joining Pakistan in the vale.

The only possible solution IMO is something along the lines of the 4-point Musharraf formula. The sooner all sides accept it, the sooner we will see peace.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*UN secretary general voices concern over IHKs situation*

UNITED NATIONS: The UN secretary general on Wednesday voiced concern about the current situation in Indian-held Kashmir, and called for resumption of the Indo-Pak composite dialogue to resolve the dispute. 

In relation to recent developments in IHK, the secretary general is concerned over the prevailing security situation... over the past month, associate spokesman Farhan Haq said. 

He calls on all concerned to exercise utmost restraint and address problems peacefully, Haq said, while responding to questions about recent deployment of Indian troops in IHK. app


Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

EjazR said:


> The 1948 resolution can't be implemented until the assurance that was provided to India for implementing that resolution is fulfilled. Let me quote the assurance that was passed as a resolution by the UNSC council
> 
> 
> Resolution on Assurances adopted by U.N. Commission for India and Pakistan(UNCIP) 1948
> 
> *Resolution adopted by UN*
> 
> 
> This is in UNSC records. Legally from the UN point of view there was no question on doubting India's claim on the entire state of J&K until the plebiscite is conducted. But the emerging cold war led to the US and UK siding with India and Pakistan was not pressured to vacate the state of J&K. As part 8 of the resolution states, the plebiscite proposal is not binding in the current scenario. AT that time right after the brutal invasion of the tribals, the Pakistani leaders were afraid that if a Plebescite is conducted under the popular leadership of Sheikh Abdulla, India might win and hence the part 1 and 2 of the requirements were not fulfilled.
> 
> Those who harp on the UNSC resolution also should know that the plebiscite was restricted to only India or Pakistan and the separatists want independence, there is hardly any support for joining Pakistan in the vale.
> 
> The only possible solution IMO is something along the lines of the 4-point Musharraf formula. The sooner all sides accept it, the sooner we will see peace.



Since you share the same name as mine I shall be as polite as possible.

*The resolution you have mentioned and quoted was not adopted by the UN because Pakistan rejected it.* I have searched and found no such record on the UN. This is what I found and is legally binding on Pakistan and India:

ODS HOME PAGE

ODS HOME PAGE

You are senior member and we expect facts from you. In future please try to post facts.


----------



## karan.1970

ejaz007 said:


> Since you share the same name as mine I shall be as polite as possible.
> 
> *The resolution you have mentioned and quoted was not adopted by the UN because Pakistan rejected it.* I have searched and found no such record on the UN. This is what I found and is legally binding on Pakistan and India:
> 
> ODS HOME PAGE
> 
> ODS HOME PAGE
> 
> You are senior member and we expect facts from you. In future please try to post facts.



Just so that we are clear.. The UN resolution on Kashmir belongs to a category of un enforcable resolutions. So legally nothing is binding on India or Pakistan..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

karan.1970 said:


> Just so that we are clear.. The UN resolution on Kashmir belongs to a category of un enforcable resolutions. So legally nothing is binding on India or Pakistan..



Yes my mistake. The resolutions pertaining to Kashmir are un enforceable. Perhaps I should have stated morally binding on both countries.


----------



## EjazR

*@ejaz007*
My post clearly states that this was an assurance given to India before the adoption of the 1948 resolution. If you read the UN resolutions as many have pointed out, the part I and part II of the resolutions required Pakistan to vacate their territory.

Hence all the requirements to hold plebiscite and arrange for a secure and peaceful environment for the it to occur is addressed to GoI. The last attempt to get both India and Pakistan to comply in 52 was a proposal for India to reduce its troop to 21,000 and Pakistan to 6,000 but both governments rejected this.

What I am saying is that the UN resolutions can't be implemented because the prereqs have not been fulfilled. Moreover, the options of the plebiscite are only India and Pakistan when the valley separatists want independence. We have to move forward from the cycle of violence and bring peace to the valley. And raising false mirages will not help.
And even on top of that, the polarisation is very strong where only the valley which consists of 4 million or so have between 80-90&#37; talking about independence. But the problem is that Jammu and Ladakh including their Muslim majority districts of Kargil, Poonch and Rajouri are overwhelmingly in favor of joining India.

So a small valley will not be economically or politically viable. Moreover, the valley Kashmiris want the entire state including Gilgit-Baltistan as the new state. The disintegration of J&K where each part goes its own way is even more unacceptable particularly to the valley Kashmirs than joining India under an assured autonomy clause.

Hence the move by Musharraf to solve the Kashmir solution along the 4 point formula was one that would have had the widest possible consensus. 

There will be hardliners who want entire J&K to go to Pakistan, others who want independence and still others who want the entire state to go to India and remove any autonomy in the state. But we cant keep everyone happy.


----------



## Xeric

Himal Southasian/Children of the tehreek

*Children of the tehreek*

By: Sanjay Kak
*
The recent violence suggests that, after 20 years, Kashmir has indeed changed  though not in the ways commonly suggested.*


When columns of the Indian Army drove through Srinagar on 7 July, rifles pointed out at the city, it was meant as a show of force; to tell its mutinous population  and those watching elsewhere  just who was really in charge. Disconcertingly for the Indian government, it has had the opposite effect. Alarm bells have been sounding off: the situation in Kashmir is again explosive; the lid looks ready to blow off.

Although the army has for years virtually controlled rural Kashmir, images of grim-faced soldiers on a flag-march in Srinagar carried a different symbolism. For Srinagar has been the exception  the showpiece of normalcy, of a possible return to the bosom of Indias accommodating heart. *Typically, the well-publicised entry of the soldiers was followed by a flurry of obtuse clarifications: the army was not taking over Srinagar; this was not a flag-march, only a movement of a convoy; yes, it was a flag-march, but only in the citys periphery. The contradictions seemed to stem from a reluctance to deal with the elephant in the room: after more than 15 years, the army had once again been called out to stem civil unrest in Srinagar.
*
When the Indian Army was deployed in Kashmir during the 1990s, the rebellion seemed to be fast spinning out of Indias control. Twenty years later, what has changed? There is now a massive investment in a security grid, built with more than 500,000 security personnel and shored up by a formidable intelligence network, said to involve some 100,000 people. The armed militancy, too, has officially been contained. Meanwhile, the exercise of free and fair elections has been carried out to persuade the world that democracy has indeed returned to Kashmir. (Elections certainly delivered the young and telegenic Omar Abdullah as Chief Minister; but about democracy, Kashmiris will be less sanguine. They will recognise it the day the military columns and camps are gone from the valley.)

_Yet July was haunted by echoes of the early years of the tehreek, the movement for self-determination. As a brutally imposed lockdown curfew entered its fourth day, there was no safe passage past the paramilitary checkpoints  not for ambulances, not for journalists. For those four days, Srinagars newspapers were not published; local cable channels were restricted to just 10 minutes a day, and still had to make time for official views. SMS services remained blocked the entire month; in some troubled towns, cell-phone services were completely discontinued. But Srinagar still reverberated with slogans every night, amplified from neighbourhood mosques: *Hum kya chahte? Azadi! (What do we want? Freedom!) and Go back, India! Go back!*_

*War of perception*
The real barometer of the panic in the Indian establishment, though, was not the armys flag march. It was the frantic speed (and dismal quality) of the attempts to obscure the crisis. In place of politics, it was once again left to disinformation to staunch the haemorrhage. At first, the Home Ministry began with the improbable charge that the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba was organising and funding stone-throwing on the streets of Srinagar. This was a rather tame accusation for a militant group whose real signature is the ferocity of its attacks, as displayed clearly in the Mumbai strikes of November 2008. The only people who appeared to swallow this line were the loyal television anchors on the national media; but with no real evidence to go on, even they let the mess quietly slide off the table.

Evidence arrived soon enough, when the Home Ministry made available a taped phone conversation between two men described as hardliner separatists. As the audio crackled and hissed, television channels provided translations: *There must be some more deaths; 10-15 people must be martyred; You are getting money but not doing enough. Despite the comic-book directness, it sounded like serious business. In the context of such evidence, mainstream television channels began parachuting their star power into Srinagar, and the empty, silent city became the backdrop against which they could stage their own spectacle.*

The CNN-IBN correspondent, happily embedded inside an army truck as it made its way through Srinagar, was extolling the impact of the flag march (even as an official was busy denying that there had been any such thing). NDTV provided its usual high-wire balancing act, with Barkha Dutt dredging up the pain on both sides. The grief of the mourning father of 17-year-old Tufail Mattoo, killed when his skull was taken apart by a teargas shell, was weighed against a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) commandant ruing the damage to his trucks bulletproof windscreen. But such expedient journalism paled before far more damaging hubris. While these national reporters had the run of curfew-bound Srinagar, they omitted to mention that their Srinagar-based colleagues  local, national and even international journalists  had been locked in their homes and offices for three days.

While the spin generated by New Delhi probably has an impact on the middle-class viewer of the mainstream Indian media, it has little effect on people in Kashmir. On the ground, they continue to make sense of their own reality. The inability, or refusal, to comprehend this has become endemic to all arms of the Indian state. An exaggerated, even fluid, notion of reality takes its place, in which perception is everything. This was underlined forcefully in June when the chiefs of the army, navy and air force announced the new Doctrine on Military Psychological Operations, a policy document that aims to create a conducive environment for the armed forces operating in sub-conventional operations such as Kashmir and the Northeast. The doctrine reportedly provides guidelines for activities related to perception management. Manipulating the output of a few dozen newspapers and television channels is certainly hard work, but nothing compared with the much harder task of understanding  perhaps even accommodating  the aspirations of Kashmiris.
*
Out of touch*
The intensity of the crisis did help in one way, though: it forced some candour out of the familiar faces of Kashmiri politics. (These are the visible ones, called up in times of crisis to represent Kashmir on television. The invisible ones were, as usual, already in detention.) Mehbooba Mufti of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) admitted on television that mainstream (or pro-India) political parties have lost all credibility, and now have no role to play in stemming the anger in the streets. When asked why politicians were not taking out peace marches, former separatist and now mainstream leader Sajjad Lone bluntly said that all of them ran the risk of being lynched by the people. Meanwhile, all the oxygen was taken up by discussion of the survival of Omar Abdullahs government, something that mattered little to protestors.

Amidst the baying chorus of TV panellists outraged by the gall of stone-pelters, many have forgotten that in 1991 it was precisely such public demonstrations  and civilian casualties at the hands of the CRPF  that finally triggered a full-fledged armed militancy. In recent weeks, Chief Minister Omar Abdullahs language has shown how out of touch he is, joining the talk of miscreants with his comments about frayed tempers and waiting for tempers to cool down. Across the board, this disconnect with the structures of electoral politics helped to put the elections of two years ago in some perspective.

In 2007, I finished a documentary film on Kashmir, which had tried to pull back from the quagmire of everyday events to understand the inchoate sentiment for azadi. Quite by coincidence, the film arrived at the very moment that the constructed normalcy of Kashmir was about ready to be shown off: tourists were flowing in, more than 400,000 people had taken part in the pilgrimage to the Amarnath shrine, and elections were being discussed. Screenings of the documentary in India were often met with raised eyebrows, with people incredulous that such sentiments could survive the weight of the cast-iron security grid  and, of course, the passage of 20 years. Yet things can change in a day, and so they did.

*In early summer 2008, isolated protests broke out over the acquisition of land for the Amarnath Shrine Board. This eventually turned into the most formidable upsurge of the past decade, with peaceful demonstrations of up to 20,000 people at a time. The cascading protests carried on for several months before being curbed, but not before more than 60 people lost their lives to the bullets of the security forces. In the summer of 2009, Shopian district was shaken by the rape and murder of two young women; once again, mostly peaceful protests paralysed the valley, and Shopian town was shut down for an unprecedented 47 days. The cycle of street violence in 2010 too began several months ago, with the uncovering of the Machil killings, where soldiers of the Indian Army (including a colonel and a major) were charged with the murder of three civilians, presenting them as militants for the reward money (see accompanying story by Dilnaz Boga). Protests led to the killing of protesters, which has led to more protests, and more killings.*
*
New front*
What do Kashmiris want? Most of all, even before azadi, they want justice. As they watched the Indian Army columns moving through Srinagar last month, Kashmiris would have been reminded that the protests this summer started with the Army in the killing fields of Machil. But like the Shopian incident, Machil too has begun to be edged off the burner, and forgotten, as have the hundreds of such killings that civil-society groups have painstakingly tried to resurrect. So, just as elections cannot be confused with democracy in Kashmir, an elected government is no substitute for a working justice system. Meanwhile, the prolonged use of the Public Safety Act, and the dangerous license of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, is slowly wearing thin for the young. This July, as the numbing news of young Kashmiris being shot in street protests started pouring in, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, the chairman of the All Parties Hurriyat Conference, told the press that the baton of the freedom struggle has now been passed on to the next generation. He could have added that, over twenty years, the baton might also have moved from the armed militancy and the separatists, straight onto the street.

_As the taped phone conversation provided by the Home Ministry was being celebrated on TV, in only a few hours a more accurate translation of what was actually an innocuous conversation was burning through the Internet. This phone evidence evaporated under the heat of scrutiny, its effects felt even in Delhi newsrooms. Such a speedy deconstruction of a suspect claim is only the latest in the deeply political use of the Internet by young Kashmiris. These are children of the tehreek, born and brought up in the turmoil of the last two decades. They have not, and probably will not, become armed mujahideen. But thousands are out on the streets, throwing stones, occasionally drawing blood, often taking hits, but in any case successfully paralysing the increasingly bewildered security forces. What armed militant could achieve more?_

*So will the Internet be the next threat for the Home Ministry? Will they accuse the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen of supporting the Facebook chatter about the intifada in Kashmir? And after that? Already, young Kashmiris on social-networking sites are reporting phone calls from belligerent police officers, threatening them with serious charges including waging war against the state. Reports said that Qazi Rashid, the young mirwaiz of south Kashmir, has been accused of instigating violence and justifying stone-pelting  through Facebook.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

Chess-writer said:


> Mate ! Resolution or no resolution.
> In 20 years at the most , India will be a part of the UN security council. The veto power that would come with it will render any previous resolutions meaningless. OK ! even without that , does Pakistan have any means , any at all of forcing India to conduct the plebiscite -- NO !! The only solution to Kashmir my friends is status quo however unpalatable it may be to India or Pakistan !! I don't know whats so hard to realise about that. Even a dumb goat like me can see that.
> 
> In India you get a lot many people who realise this simple fact derived through common sense. Hence almost all voices supporting status quo come from India. The problem is Pakistan's ego (an inflated one at that !) , which doesn't let you even consider the cost that both countries will have to pay for any solution other than that. And also, Pakistanis tend to see status quo as , a victory for India. The day you stop thinking with your heart and use your common sense - It will be clear to you too. Sooner or later the day will come. But ask yourself , till then is it necessary to build up the ante so much ,that finally when such a day arrives - Pakistan suffers a bigger blow to her self inflated ego.
> 
> Indeed, it has happened once previously , hasn't it ?? (No Offence meant)
> 
> The point is
> 1.Pakistan has no means to force India's hand on Kashmir
> 2.Any means that Pakistan uses as leverage against India is bound to backfire.
> 3.The limited leverage Pakistan does have right now is going to diminish further and further in the coming years
> 
> HENCE, Status quo is good for Pakistan.



First of all it is not yet clear if the new members shall have veto power or not. Second India is not yet a member of the UNSC so your logic is based on an assumption. What if India does not become a UNSC member?

Also recently India has shown willingness to discuss Kashmir and even a day or two ago Sonia said we have to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan. Perhaps you need to settle all your disputes before you sit as a permanent member in the UNSC.

Have you ever wondered why India is discussing Kashmir? One has to pay a price to get some privileges perhaps price India has to pay is to settle the Kashmir issue.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

*Massive protests in Held Kashmir, seven more killed*

** Thousands defy curfew, clash with forces, set govt buildings, vehicles on fire 

* Security forces open fire at protesters *

SRINAGAR: Indian troops fired live ammunition and tear gas into crowds of anti-India protesters on Monday, killing seven, police said as tens of thousands of people demonstrated across Indian-held Kashmir.

More than 60 protesters and almost 70 government officials were injured as violent clashes erupted between government forces and protesters in dozens of places across the region, as the protesters defied a round-the-clock curfew. 

At least two people were killed and another three wounded when government forces fired to disperse protesters blocking a highway in Sangam, a village south of Srinagar, said a police officer on condition of anonymity. 

Indian forces also fired on thousands of people holding street protests in the southern town of Kakpora, killing one and wounding five, the officer said. 

As the news of the killing reached nearby villages, thousands more took to streets and burned a police station and scores of vehicles parked there, the officer said. In the northern village of Kralpora, protesters set a security bunker on fire and ransacked a counterinsurgency police force camp, the officer said. Troops opened fire, killing one protester and injuring seven others, three critically, he said. 

In another police firing incident, one person was killed and another wounded in the southern village of Chawalgam, the officer said. 

Protesters also burned a government building and a local intelligence office in Budgam, a town to the west of Srinagar, the regions main city. Four protesters were wounded there, the officer said. 

The other injuries occurred in clashes elsewhere in the region, the officer said. agencies

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

senseless and cowardly acts


----------



## vsdoc

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> senseless and cowardly acts



Yeah, like the news of militants firing on the security forces from within cover of the mob.

Bahti Indus mein haath dhona koi tum logon se seekhe.

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TaimiKhan

vsdoc said:


> *Yeah, like the news of militants firing on the security forces from within cover of the mob.*
> 
> Bahti Indus mein haath dhona koi tum logon se seekhe.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Aap logon sae hi seekha hai, ab dosaroo koo sikhayeen gae. 

Good excuse by the way for killing innocents that freedom fighters were firing from within the crowd so we killed the innocents. 

Kiyaa kehnaaa.


----------



## storm seeker

Bezerk said:


> This thread should be made a sticky somewhere. All the solutions are addressed in here. Also, we currently don't have a forum section dedicated to the Kashmir Issue. This could be the start. Anyone else agree with that?



yeah sure we do agree


----------



## vsdoc

Taimi bhai, if the security forces needed an excuse, they could as well planted "militants" within the mob to open fire, and then retaliate by bringing the mob down. 

It would not be beyond the realm of possibility to "control" the news in such a way that the number of dead would never ever come to light.

The fact that you have *only* 14 dead in so many days of open violent provocation is ample testimony to the restraint exercised by our forces.

Please let us not kid ourselves here. You and I both know what is happening in Kashmir today, who is responsible, and why it is happening right now. If you wish, we can go onto PM and I can share names and other details with you ..... for you to confirm from your sources.

Wish you guys would concentrate your efforts on helping your flood victims instead.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## storm seeker

vsdoc said:


> Yeah, like the news of militants firing on the security forces from within cover of the mob.
> 
> Bahti Indus mein haath dhona koi tum logon se seekhe.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



kehte hain kashmir jannat nazir hai 
jannat kisi kafir ko mili hai na milay gi 

militants dont have to kill ur army ........ i have heard ur army is undergoing the prob of mass suicide ......army is afraid of the postings in kashmir


----------



## TaimiKhan

vsdoc said:


> Taimi bhai, if the security forces needed an excuse, they could as well planted "militants" within the mob to open fire, and then retaliate by bringing the mob down.
> 
> It would not be beyond the realm of possibility to "control" the news in such a way that the number of dead would never ever come to light.
> 
> The fact that you have *only* 14 dead in so many days of open violent provocation is ample testimony to the restraint exercised by our forces.
> 
> Please let us not kid ourselves here. You and I both know what is happening in Kashmir today, who is responsible, and why it is happening right now. If you wish, we can go onto PM and I can share names and other details with you ..... for you to confirm from your sources.
> 
> Wish you guys would concentrate your efforts on helping your flood victims instead.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Don't worry about us, we know well how to take care and concentrate on what and when. 

You Indians are too worried about us, don't be. 

You come here with flood caring advice, another of you come with where the money will come advices, why this weapon system purchasing advices and God knows what other BS. 

You guys take care of your own country, we will take care of ours.


----------



## storm seeker

vsdoc said:


> Taimi bhai, if the security forces needed an excuse, they could as well planted "militants" within the mob to open fire, and then retaliate by bringing the mob down.
> 
> It would not be beyond the realm of possibility to "control" the news in such a way that the number of dead would never ever come to light.
> 
> The fact that you have *only* 14 dead in so many days of open violent provocation is ample testimony to the restraint exercised by our forces.
> 
> Please let us not kid ourselves here. You and I both know what is happening in Kashmir today, who is responsible, and why it is happening right now. If you wish, we can go onto PM and I can share names and other details with you ..... for you to confirm from your sources.
> 
> Wish you guys would concentrate your efforts on helping your flood victims instead.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



yeah u are right ......... u should not poke ur nose in this thread u are just playing " u are wrong "game ....we wanna discuss it u may go !!!!


----------



## storm seeker

TaimiKhan said:


> Don't worry about us, we know well how to take care and concentrate on what and when.
> 
> You Indians are too worried about us, don't be.
> 
> You come here with flood caring advice, another of you come with where the money will come advices, why this weapon system purchasing advices and God knows what other BS.
> 
> You guys take care of your own country, we will take care of ours.



well i think some threads should be out of their reach .. espacially this one


----------



## INS Arihant

TaimiKhan said:


> Don't worry about us, we know well how to take care and concentrate on what and when.
> 
> You Indians are too worried about us, don't be.
> 
> You come here with flood caring advice, another of you come with where the money will come advices, why this weapon system purchasing advices and God knows what other BS.
> 
> You guys take care of your own country, we will take care of ours.



Ok we can care about our country but take care of Pakistani members also ........... they are more than inserted in LCA, Arjun program 

cause if ill show you truth so you gonna ban me .......... 
so chill


----------



## karan.1970

TaimiKhan said:


> Don't worry about us, we know well how to take care and concentrate on what and when.
> 
> You Indians are too worried about us, don't be.
> 
> You come here with flood caring advice, another of you come with where the money will come advices, why this weapon system purchasing advices and God knows what other BS.
> 
> *You guys take care of your own country, we will take care of ours.*



Very wise statement sir.. You focus on Karachi and rest of Sindh for now (35 dead within a day of the assassination) and we will focus on Srinagar and Kashmir. Better to look within our own houses before commenting on other's.


----------



## storm seeker

INS Arihant said:


> Ok we can care about our country but take care of Pakistani members also ........... they are more than inserted in LCA, Arjun program
> 
> cause if ill show you truth so you gonna ban me ..........
> so chill


----------



## TaimiKhan

karan.1970 said:


> Very wise statement sir.. You focus on Karachi and rest of Sindh for now (35 dead within a day of the assassination) and we will focus on Srinagar and Kashmir. Better to look within our own houses before commenting on other's.



Sorry, but Kashmir is not India's part, its a disputed territory, whose people are not willing to stay with India. 

So except for Kashmir, we have nothing else to do with whatever is there in India. 

Do you see us talk in length about Maoist insurgency hit areas or thread after thread about that problem. 

Kashmir is our problem and we will talk about it as much as we like, but rest of India isn't.


----------



## karan.1970

TaimiKhan said:


> Sorry, but Kashmir is not India's part, its a disputed territory, whose people are not willing to stay with India.
> 
> So except for Kashmir, we have nothing else to do with whatever is there in India.
> 
> Do you see us talk in length about Maoist insurgency hit areas or thread after thread about that problem.
> 
> Kashmir is our problem and we will talk about it as much as we like, but rest of India isn't.



Sure you are entitled to your POV on this. But however much you want to annex Kashmir or however disputed it is or however much a part of its population doesnt want to be in India, the crux of the matter is that it is still in India and is going to stay there. You are welcome to talk about it as much as you want and please do so about Maoists as well if your heart desires. 

My point here though was that it is a little prudent to focus on a more immidiate problem like the one in Karachi for you and Kashmir for us than going to town with the problems other countries are facing out side our borders (LOC/LAC or whatever). But thats just my view..


----------



## karan.1970

ejaz007 said:


> First of all it is not yet clear if the new members shall have veto power or not. Second India is not yet a member of the UNSC so your logic is based on an assumption. What if India does not become a UNSC member?
> 
> Also recently India has shown willingness to discuss Kashmir and even a day or two ago Sonia said we have to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan. Perhaps you need to settle all your disputes before you sit as a permanent member in the UNSC.
> 
> Have you ever wondered why India is discussing Kashmir? One has to pay a price to get some privileges perhaps price India has to pay is to settle the Kashmir issue.



Sure we will discussion Kashmir.. And you know what will be that discussion.. 2 words.. Hands off... And you will find Quereshi again cribbing like this time after the talks..

And you are dreaming if you think we will trade off Kashmir for a UNSC seat. Its the other way round. The aim at the UNSC seat is to negate any remaining influence of the misguided resolution of 1948. Fortunately today India has a lot many other things that can be used as a bargaining chip for that seat...


----------



## vsdoc

storm seeker said:


> kehte hain kashmir jannat nazir hai
> jannat kisi kafir ko mili hai na milay gi



Mere pak dost, jannat aur jahnoom ke beech ek goli ka antar hai.

Cheers, Kafir Doc


----------



## storm seeker

ppl let india have fun in kashmir .......... its a never ending war and costing him too much ..... we will keep supporting kashmir till the time comes and they will beg : please take this land frm us as a gift

lets hope for the best .... kashmir is geographically our land and if we ll fail to take it back in 5-6 yrs then china will do it cetainly as it usually keeps crawling in without visa or any thing and india can do nothing except saying :yar border ka khial karo


----------



## karan.1970

vsdoc said:


> Leaves have been cancelled. Troops are being mobilised to the Valley.
> 
> Looks like the PA has grown a set finally. Lots of cross border chatter.
> 
> There's an ongoing joke amongst fauji circles here with regards to our friendly neighbours. Roughly translated into English - "The ten year itch." (the punjabi/hindi version is infinitely more colorful in terms of description of the itch, its location, and the resultant cure).
> 
> The weeks ahead should be interesting .....
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Your posts never fail to get a smile...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SpArK

storm seeker said:


> ppl let india have *fun* in kashmir .......... its a never ending war and costing him too much ..... we will keep supporting kashmir till the time comes and they will beg : please take this land frm us as a *gift*
> 
> lets hope for the best .... kashmir is geographically our land and if we ll fail to take it back in *5-6 yrs* then *china will do it *cetainly as it usually keeps crawling in without visa or any thing and india can do nothing except saying :yar border ka khial karo



Amazing post.. the best post i have read today...

You need to be promoted to think tank level.


----------



## storm seeker

vsdoc said:


> Mere pak dost, jannat aur jahnoom ke beech ek goli ka antar hai.
> 
> Cheers, Kafir Doc



mot or zindagi main goli ka farq hai ....cheers dic ..... jannat or jahannum mot ke bad hi miltay hain ........ han ager ap kahain to drust hoga kun ke ap ke liay dunia soorag hi hai or marne ke bad u have got no place to hideexcept jahanum ... suna ap to pehle hi ag tapna shuru kardetay hain take jahanum main thanda garam na hojaey 


love dr storm


----------



## storm seeker

BENNY said:


> Amazing post.. the best post i have read today...
> 
> You need to be promoted to think tank level.


 smooooooookin


----------



## karan.1970

^^ Doc gets a smile and you get a belly laugh.. Reminds me of a Sniveling kid in my school bus whose only answer to everything was " I will get my elder brother to beat you up". Grow up dude... What China and India have understood and you have not is that economic might will get you what military might will not.

About Kashmir costing us, well see inside your house first. Your fascination with using insurgents in Kashmir and encouraging that form of extremism has landed you in the soup you are in today.. Continue and the *figurative *monkey trap will become unescapable.. All the best...


----------



## storm seeker

karan.1970 said:


> ^^ Doc gets a smile and you get a belly laugh.. Reminds me of a Sniveling kid in my school bus whose only answer to everything was " I will get my elder brother to beat you up". Grow up dude... What China and India have understood and you have not is that economic might will get you what military might will not.
> 
> About Kashmir costing us, well see inside your house first. Your fascination with using insurgents in Kashmir and encouraging that form of extremism has landed you in the soup you are in today.. Continue and the *figurative *monkey trap will become unescapable.. All the best...



well im not that kid as i was a bully ma self in ma school 
why getting jealoused of pak china friendship .... wat ever pakistan is doing weather in armed divisions , nuclear tech, engineering we are doing it in collaboration with china........ and mind it ........ it doesnt cost us any thing we are doing in kashmir iffff we are doing any thing !!! 
there are sm troubles regarding disguised intruders .... once we are done with them we will see this nauseatic schnook present in our neighbour


----------



## TaimiKhan

vsdoc said:


> Leaves have been cancelled. Troops are being mobilised to the Valley.
> 
> Looks like the PA has grown a set finally. Lots of cross border chatter.
> 
> There's an ongoing joke amongst fauji circles here with regards to our friendly neighbours. Roughly translated into English - "The ten year itch." (the punjabi/hindi version is infinitely more colorful in terms of description of the itch, its location, and the resultant cure).
> 
> The weeks ahead should be interesting .....
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Why are you dragging in Pakistan or PA or the BS itch thingy in here ?? 

What has Pakistan to do with whatever is going on in Kashmir ?? 

The leaves would be getting canceled as your IA needs to killl a few more innocents to quell the uprising as current troop strength may not be enough.

PA is doing its work as usual nor are there any leave cancellations or recalls to suggest what you are suggesting. 

And then you complain what i did or said. 

And next time if you came up with your such colorful BS itch terminologies, don't complain later on.


----------



## karan.1970

storm seeker said:


> well im not that kid as i was a bully ma self in ma school


Congratulations for being a bully as a child.. Good job...

Words of a bully

"kashmir is geographically our land and *if we ll fail to take it back in 5-6 yrs then china will do it cetainly *"

Sounds more like the kid I mentioned



storm seeker said:


> Why getting jealoused of pak china friendship .... wat ever pakistan is doing weather in armed divisions , nuclear tech, engineering we are doing it in collaboration with china........ and mind it ........ it doesnt cost us any thing we are doing in kashmir iffff we are doing any thing !!!


Good for you.. Always nice to have friends..

About cost, ask the people in NWFP who are bearing the brunt of WOT and your economy that was once 30% higher than India's on a per capita basis and now is lower than ours.





storm seeker said:


> there are sm troubles regarding disguised intruders .... once we are done with them we will see this nauseatic schnook present in our neighbour



The key word here is *once we are done with them*.. Dont see that anywhere in near future.

You know why we dont have to hit you back in the same coin of insurgency? Because you are doing a darn good job of hitting yourself...


----------



## vsdoc

TaimiKhan said:


> Why are you dragging in Pakistan or PA or the BS itch thingy in here ??
> 
> What has Pakistan to do with whatever is going on in Kashmir ??
> 
> The leaves would be getting canceled as your IA needs to killl a few more innocents to quell the uprising as current troop strength may not be enough.
> 
> PA is doing its work as usual nor are there any leave cancellations or recalls to suggest what you are suggesting.
> 
> And then you complain what i did or said.
> 
> And next time if you came up with your such colorful BS itch terminologies, don't complain later on.



I am "dragging" the PA into this as the Pakistan army is controlling what is being lauded by Pakistan as a "spontaneous" uprising of Kashmiri youth.

Pakistan gets "dragged" into this yet again because its hostage to the PA.

How do I know it? I just do. And I am not at liberty to mention my sources. 

Suffice to say, we know who is involved from your side, where their rats are hiding on our soil, and which "Indian" rats are taking money and orders from across the border.

All rats of whatever hue will be exterminated on our soil. That my fauji brothers have asked me to assure you and yours of. 

You will be surprised at the extent of the penetration of our intelligence Taimi. That too I can assure you of.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the next few weeks should be really interesting.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## TaimiKhan

vsdoc said:


> I am "dragging" the PA into this as the Pakistan army is controlling what is being lauded by Pakistan as a "spontaneous" uprising of Kashmiri youth.
> 
> Pakistan gets "dragged" into this yet again because its hostage to the PA.
> 
> How do I know it? I just do. And I am not at liberty to mention my sources.
> 
> Suffice to say, we know who is involved from your side, where their rats are hiding on our soil, and which "Indian" rats are taking money and orders from across the border.
> 
> All rats of whatever hue will be exterminated on our soil. That my fauji brothers have asked me to assure you and yours of.
> 
> You will be surprised at the extent of our intelligence Taimi. That too I can assure you of.
> 
> Cheers, Doc





typical fauji talk, we will do that and we will do this, the enemy will never be able to live, we will decimate the enemy. 

Keep dreaming , sorry for waking you up.

And yeah, we also know what intelligence you guys have and how to counter it, as previously said, let the US once leave (if it ever happened) then we will see. For now enjoy the moment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## vsdoc

TaimiKhan said:


> typical fauji talk



Though the quality of the faujs may differ, it takes one to know one. 

Cheers, Doc

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Raghu

deleted.............


----------



## TaimiKhan

vsdoc said:


> Though the quality of the faujs may differ, it takes one to know one.
> 
> Cheers, Doc



Yeah i know very well how much it differs, no need to tell me. 

I have a good idea of the qualities on both sides. 

Thanks for reminding.


----------



## storm seeker

TaimiKhan said:


> typical fauji talk, we will do that and we will do this, the enemy will never be able to live, we will decimate the enemy.
> 
> Keep dreaming , sorry for waking you up.
> 
> And yeah, we also know what intelligence you guys have and how to counter it, as previously said, let the US once leave (if it ever happened) then we will see. For now enjoy the moment.



main koi buri bat nahin ki thi ............ wesay code words use karne main koi harj nahin hai .... ap ko kia pata unhain samajh aye bhi ya nahin  ill try to restrain next time 


cheers n love frm my side


----------



## Raghu

Its time to free kashmir ...from stone pelters. 

PS:sorry there was network disruption.


----------



## vsdoc

TaimiKhan said:


> And yeah, we also know what intelligence you guys have and how to counter it, as previously said, let the US once leave (if it ever happened) then we will see. For now enjoy the moment.



*Every one* of the previous wars Pakistan Army has fought against the Indian Army has been with the US as a staunch ally on your side.

History is testimony to how each one of those confrontations ended for both of us.

Today with the ever widening chasm between us economically and militarily, and with the US now your "ally" only on paper, do you honestly think your veiled threat is causing anyone out here any shivers? 

We are enjoying our moment in the sun Taimi, with or without the US planted in the neighbourhood.

Maybe if Pakistan had not made the decisions it did in the past, you too would be enjoying the moment today.

Cheers, Doc


----------



## True_Pakistan_Zindabad

Raghu said:


> Its time to free kashmir ...from stone pelters.
> 
> PS:sorry there was network disruption.



1 million Indian soldiers putting tax money to good use, killing stone throwing kids. You guys have no right to support Palestine either.


----------



## Xeric

vsdoc said:


> How do I know it? *I just do*. And I am *not at liberty to mention my sources*.





Did you ever said, you really are a Doc?


----------



## r4rehan

it will decide by kashmir's pepole  let them decide where they wana go,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 

they have right to be a live as like as they want don't worry they are doing wht they should to do for their live style  


<(_|_)| AKBAR


----------



## ejaz007

*Four more protesters shot dead*

*Thousands defy curfew, take to streets across IHK

* APHC leader calls for peaceful protests, urges youth not to indulge in stone-pelting, provocative sloganeering *

SRINAGAR: Four people were killed on Tuesday as thousands of protesters ignored police warnings that they would be shot on sight if they defied a round-the-clock curfew declared in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) in an attempt to quell weeks of deadly civil unrest against the Indian rule.

More than 20 people were injured in clashes with government forces as they gathered and marched in Srinagar and two villages, a police officer said.

Two protesters were killed in Srinagar where government forces fired at hundreds who hurled rocks and shouted, Go India! Go back! and We want freedom.

The news of those casualties brought out more demonstrators, the officer said.

Another person was killed in the firing by government forces in southern village of Frisal where thousands of protesters set a police station on fire, the officer said. At least 15 people were injured, six critically.

Clashes also erupted in Zainakote, a village on the outskirts of Srinagar, where protesters hurled rocks at the troops, said the officer. Troops fired to disperse them, killing one and injuring at least two others.

Four people were injured, one of them critically, when paramilitary soldiers fired on protesters in the northern town of Baramulla, he said.

Meanwhile, a young Kashmiri Muslim died in a hospital in Srinagar on Tuesday, two days after he was injured in the southern town of Khrew in police firing, the officer said.

Hundreds also defied the curfew in the western town of Budgam and held a protest march. Government forces fired live ammunition and tear gas to disperse the protesters, injuring four people, the police officer said.

*For the sake of martyrs, I appeal to the youth not to indulge in stone pelting and provocative slogans, said Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a separatist leader in IHK. If we succeed in keeping protests peaceful, this would be the first step towards freedom. ap*

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*Pakistan urges India to exercise restraint in IHK *

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan on Tuesday called on rival New Delhi to exercise restraint in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), where at least 42 people have died in weeks of unrest. There is a need for the government of India to exercise restraint, a statement quoted Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi as saying. Pakistan is seriously concerned at the escalation of violence against the Kashmiri people that has resulted in the loss of innocent lives, Qureshi said. At least 42 people have died in weeks of unrest  most of them killed by Indian security forces trying to disperse angry protests against the Indian rule. Qureshi expressed Pakistans unequivocal solidarity with the people of Kashmir and said the country would continue to extend support to... their right to self-determination. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## vsdoc

xeric said:


> Did you ever said, you really are a Doc?



Yo. Am as much a doctor as you are a soldier bro.

And coming from a fauji background what that means is me and my mates clean up the mess created by you and yours.

Of course, on the flip side it also means I can kill you in more ways and with a lot more pain than you me. 

Koi shaq?

Cheers, Doc


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Raghu said:


> Its time to free kashmir ...from stone pelters.
> 
> PS:sorry there was network disruption.



Kashmiris also have network disruption....they are banned from using SMS; banned from even using facebook


----------



## ejaz007

*Massive protests as India deploys more force in IHK*

** Thousands continue to ignore shot-on-sight warning 

*New Delhi sends 2,000 additional paramilitary soldiers to valley*

SRINAGAR: Tens of thousands of Kashmiris marched on Wednesday to a town where seven people were killed over the weekend, defying a curfew and ignoring shot-on-sight warning in another day of massive protests against India.

Long lines of people carrying green and black protest flags thronged a big prayer ground in Khrew, a town south of Srinagar, even as police drove through the summer capital and other towns, warning residents for a second day that they would be shot on sight if they defied the round-the-clock curfew. But angry residents went out anyway.

Scores of civilian vehicles fitted with loudspeakers ferried people from different towns to pay homage to those killed in clashes in Khrew on Sunday. The protesters chanted slogans against India and its armed forces. Hundreds of the armed forces stepped back to avoid clashes as the protesters asked them through loudspeakers to withdraw from the streets and not to try to stop the march.

India has sent reinforcements to help the beleaguered state administration tackle the increasingly violent crowds who have clashed with paramilitary soldiers. In one Srinagar neighbourhood, residents shouted pro-independence slogans and chased away police and paramilitary soldiers, a police officer said. Later, the protesters burned a government jeep.

In another neighbourhood, thousands of people, including dozens of wailing women, took to the streets after a young man died in hospital from injuries he sustained in police gunfire on July 30. In the southern town of Shopian, protesters set two government buildings and a jeep on fire, police said. Hundreds also came out in the small towns of Sopore and Kupwara.

Jammu and Kashmir Tankers Association President Anand Sharma said that tanker convoys, which supply 2.4 million litres of petroleum every day to the valley, had been stranded in Srinagar with no one to unload them. At the same time, Indian Railways also said it had suspended services in the valley that were launched about two years ago. agencies

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*Manmohan Singh plans APC over IHK* 
By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is going to hold an all-parties conference to discuss the ongoing unrest in Indian-held Kashmir and to seek a political mandate for starting a meaningful dialogue with Pakistan.
Sources within the Indian government said on Wednesday that India would seek Pakistans cooperation in strengthening cross-Line of Control confidence building measures.
The sources said that some concrete proposals would be put before the meeting, comprising leaders of all national and state-level political parties.
The sources said the government would present a package of effective measures to stem the current anger among Kashmiris. However, the officials ruled out any possibility of changing or destabilising the IHK government. 
The governments new policy will particularly focus on winning the confidence of people, who are dissatisfied with India, the sources said.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*India faces full-blown uprising in IHK*

** Critics say Indias refusal to recognise roots of alienation may ignite violence

* Kashmir has little international resonance with no criticism from UN or US*

NEW DELHI: India faces a full-blown uprising in Indian-held Kashmir that may sink hopes for peace in the strategic region as disaffected Kashmiris rebel against a government seen as leaderless, complacent and out of touch.

New Delhi paints the street protests as incited by militants or radical bands of stone throwers. But the evidence is growing this may be a wider and spontaneous movement led by young Kashmiris angry at years of misrule.

Critics say the risk is that Indias refusal to recognise the roots of the alienation may ignite a vicious cycle of violence and return Kashmir to the kind of upheaval seen during the 1990s. It all bodes badly for a disputed region seen as key to wider long-term stability under South Asias security arch of Pakistan, India and Afghanistan.

This is the most serious challenge to central authority I have seen in 20 years, said Siddharth Varadarajan, strategic affairs editor of The Hindu newspaper. And the (Indian) government doesnt have much of a clue how to resolve it, he said.

The latest uprising started with the death of a teenage student in early June. The state has been locked down for weeks, and protesters have defied curfews to attack Indian armed forces and the police with stones. Basic foods and fuel supplies are running short and families have been confined to their houses for days, with schools and businesses shut.

For many Kashmiris, the whole population appears to support the protests. Volunteers have established blood donation camps, pooled rice and vegetables in community kitchens and supplied food to patients in hospitals. The protests seem to have taken a direction of their own, which weve never seen before, said Sajjad Ghani Lone, senior Kashmiri leader. There is not a leader who could say stop the protests and they would stop it, he said.

Indias political leadership took their eyes off the ball, said political analyst Mahesh Rangarajan. While Kashmir was a diplomatic football in the 1990s, this time round the troubles have had little international resonance, with no criticism from the UN or the US. Pakistan has made some diplomatic noise, but there is little sign that this will impact on relations. reuters

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

A number of new threads have been opened discussing Kashmir. Can we merge them all and rename the thread.

I would suggest Kashmir Freedom Movement.


----------



## shaka_shaka

haha who cares, kashmir is going to be controlled by india.
everytime pakistani intelligence/army tries to do something about getting kashmir back. someone just messes it up.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## arihant

I am not discussing subject matter. But what I am asking is that we are discussing future solution. So we should not put news here. (here subject matter is thread and not the subject itself)


----------



## Hulk

The problem is some Kashmiri's think that Independent Kashmir is an option. These guys are not practicle in their thinking, they should rather discuss specefic issue then independence. Every tom dick and hary cannot decide which country they should belong to.


----------



## Break the Silence

indianrabbit said:


> The problem is some Kashmiri's think that Independent Kashmir is an option. These guys are not practicle in their thinking, they should rather discuss specefic issue then independence. Every tom dick and hary cannot decide which country they should belong to.



Independent Kashmir????????
The day(suppose, although it will not going to happen) IA withdraw from Kashmir, By the evening you can see Pa marching there....


----------



## Hulk

Thats why I said impractical. Kashmiri's are really naive people.


----------



## ejaz007

indianrabbit said:


> The problem is some Kashmiri's think that Independent Kashmir is an option. These guys are not practicle in their thinking, they should rather discuss specefic issue then independence. Every tom dick and hary cannot decide which country they should belong to.



If internet existed in 1947 this is what British kids would be saying. They lost India didn't they. What makes you think India is stronger than UK. Indian border have changed a number of times during history why not this time?


----------



## ejaz007

*Indian Army's conduct in IHK worse than Israel's in Palestine* 
By Iftikhar Gilani


JERUSALAM: Israeli military officers facing international criticism for alleged human rights violations in the Palestinian territory were shocked to hear an Indian Army general narrating his experiences in Indian-held Kashmir.

Daniel Reisner, chief of the International Law Department of the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), said an Indian general shocked him by telling that every house in IHK that was suspected to have weapons could be barged in to and were the weapons found, the residents could be treated as terrorists engaged in or aiding the insurgency.

In an interaction last week with a group of visiting Indian journalists, Reisner said he told the Indian general, "We (Israelis), although are deemed bad in the world's eyes, cannot not take this recourse." 

Reisner has been a senior member of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak's delegation that undertook the failed Camp David talks in July 2000.

Amongst his current responsibilities is investigation or prosecution of Israeli soldiers for civil and human rights violations during the Palestinian Intifada in the occupied territories.

While on one hand the Indian government has been officially asking Israel to observe restraint, the Indian military is teaching Israeli Defence Forces to deal strictly with Palestinians on the other, even telling them to break their (Palestinians') doors and homes, advocating unrestrained and irrational operations.

Israel is now the second biggest source of arms for India and may soon overtake Russia as its number-one arms' supplier.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) recently issued a spate of statements criticising Israel for the use of force against Palestinians.

An MEA press release said, "It is disappointing to note that the use of disproportionate force (by Israel) is resulting in a large number of civilian casualties (in Gaza) on the one hand and the escalating violence on the other. This continued use of indiscriminate force is unwarranted and condemnable. The government of India urges utmost restraint (by Israel) so as to give peace a chance as the peace process may well get derailed irreversibly."

Either the Indian Foreign Office has little knowledge of what their defence forces are doing in IHK, or it does not know what their generals are teaching in Israel against Palestinians. Reisner's revelations between Indian and Israeli generals surprised Indian journalists.

Israel, according to Reisner, stopped dealing with such attacks as a law and order problem and hardened its response during Intifada-II of 2000.

He wrote new rules of engagement when Palestinians started using guns and missiles instead of stones, which was a hallmark of Intifada-I of 1987.

Reisner said that the Israelis, from their experience, told the Indian generals that their army's policies in IHK would not work unless they wanted to cut-off their civilian adversaries altogether.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Senthilwe

Who going to care kashmir ppl,At the time of partition princely states will go to either india or pakistan,So if you know the history no body is talking about azad kashmir,india and pakistan wont accept a independent nation,today r tomorrow the solution is LOC became permanent border may be india ll loose siachen and sir greek and pakistan ll get a fair deal on water..Thats it.


----------



## gurjot

ejaz007 said:


> *Indian Army's conduct in IHK worse than Israel's in Palestine*
> By Iftikhar Gilani
> 
> 
> JERUSALAM: Israeli military officers facing international criticism for alleged human rights violations in the Palestinian territory were shocked to hear an Indian Army general narrating his experiences in Indian-held Kashmir.
> 
> Daniel Reisner, chief of the International Law Department of the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), said an Indian general shocked him by telling that every house in IHK that was suspected to have weapons could be barged in to and were the weapons found, the residents could be treated as terrorists engaged in or aiding the insurgency.
> 
> In an interaction last week with a group of visiting Indian journalists, Reisner said he told the Indian general, "We (Israelis), although are deemed bad in the world's eyes, cannot not take this recourse."
> 
> Reisner has been a senior member of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak's delegation that undertook the failed Camp David talks in July 2000.
> 
> Amongst his current responsibilities is investigation or prosecution of Israeli soldiers for civil and human rights violations during the Palestinian Intifada in the occupied territories.
> 
> While on one hand the Indian government has been officially asking Israel to observe restraint, the Indian military is teaching Israeli Defence Forces to deal strictly with Palestinians on the other, even telling them to break their (Palestinians') doors and homes, advocating unrestrained and irrational operations.
> 
> Israel is now the second biggest source of arms for India and may soon overtake Russia as its number-one arms' supplier.
> 
> The Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) recently issued a spate of statements criticising Israel for the use of force against Palestinians.
> 
> An MEA press release said, "It is disappointing to note that the use of disproportionate force (by Israel) is resulting in a large number of civilian casualties (in Gaza) on the one hand and the escalating violence on the other. This continued use of indiscriminate force is unwarranted and condemnable. The government of India urges utmost restraint (by Israel) so as to give peace a chance as the peace process may well get derailed irreversibly."
> 
> Either the Indian Foreign Office has little knowledge of what their defence forces are doing in IHK, or it does not know what their generals are teaching in Israel against Palestinians. Reisner's revelations between Indian and Israeli generals surprised Indian journalists.
> 
> Israel, according to Reisner, stopped dealing with such attacks as a law and order problem and hardened its response during Intifada-II of 2000.
> 
> He wrote new rules of engagement when Palestinians started using guns and missiles instead of stones, which was a hallmark of Intifada-I of 1987.
> 
> Reisner said that the Israelis, from their experience, told the Indian generals that their army's policies in IHK would not work unless they wanted to cut-off their civilian adversaries altogether.
> 
> Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan



misleading news source


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

Kashmir may get greater autonomy under india large scale change in boundary of kashmir is impossible.


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

Kashmir may get greater autonomy under india, large scale change in boundary of kashmir is impossible.


----------



## Xeric

It would be very much possible if the indians continue to break (HR volition) world records.


----------



## foxbat

^ Sweet dreams.. Ummeed pe duniya kaayam hai

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

*Four killed in IHK violence*

SRINAGAR: Suspected rebels fired at the home of a pro-India politician and ambushed a military convoy in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), killing three policemen and one civilian, police said on Wednesday. A bus following the army vehicles was caught in an exchange of gunfire between the rebels and the soldiers, killing one woman passenger, police officer Ramesh Jalla said. ap

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*India asked to stop using UN helmets in IHK*

SRINAGAR: The UN has asked Indian forces cracking down on protests in violence-plagued Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) to stop wearing the distinctive powder-blue helmets of the UN peacekeeping force, a UN official said on Wednesday.

About 300 members of the paramilitary Rapid Action Force have been deployed in IHK since last week to help quell nearly two months of civil unrest that has reportedly killed more than 50 protesters and bystanders. Dozens of members of the force, armed with automatic rifles and dressed in full riot gear, have used UN-marked blue helmets and shields as they faced off against the protesters in the streets of Srinagar, the regions main city. While the bulk of their duties consists of marching down streets in a show of strength, they have also taken part in baton charges and fired tear gas into the crowds.

Their use of UN equipment has perplexed many Kashmiris, who wondered why UN troops had taken a side in the conflict and were assisting Indian forces. Weve already informed the authorities about this problem, said an officer at the UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to talk to the media. The authorities have promised to solve this situation, he said. ap

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Xeric

Bloody cheats!


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

no clearly the UN doesn't want its name tarnished by such dictatorial and brutal tactics against unarmed people


----------



## Xeric

See, how low can one go to hide its mischief. Man, if they would have had any guts, they would have accepted that they are the (lone) aggressors there.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

the Muslims in Hyderabad Deccan are taking the stand at least 


http://www.kashmirobserver.net/inde...e-in-kolkatta-&catid=3:regional-news&Itemid=4


----------



## RollingStones

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the Muslims in Hyderabad Deccan are taking the stand at least
> 
> 
> Kashmir: Protest in Hyderabad, Hunger Strike in Kolkatta



Here is why I think Kashmir's freedom movement wont be successful:

- it is tough to portray India as a HR violator. The theme Kashmiris are trying to convey to the external world that India is a HR violator is simply not going to succeed. 
- At the end of the day, India is a parliamentary democracy. No one is going to put down a parliamentary democracy. To claim that a parliamentary democracy violates HR by design is ludicrous at best.
- The reason why Kashmir should be independent is tenuous at best: what will an independent Kashmir do for the region and the world? 
- The world does not need another poorly governed area: Kashmir will end up like that. We simply do not need any more loosely governed countries and more paperwork in the world. We certainly dont need more diplomats and more confusion in international trade and legal obligations. We also dont need one more country spending on Arms purchases in the name of so-called defense.
- Kashmir can be a totally autonomous area within India with a unique government of its own such as Hong Kong: to me, the Hong Kong or Macau model is the best for Kashmir. But we want small areas to belong to larger entities so there are fewer entities to deal with in the world. We need Unions and NOT disintegrations. 

My solution: form a United States of South Asia, merging all South Asian Countries with a federal system like in the US - senate, house of rep and popularly elected chief executive. 

Benefits: no more useless antagonistic defense spending between India and Pakistan; better use of water resources; better trade between entities; no more nuclear threat; focus is on education, employment, and human growth.

Bottom line: the world wants South Asia to act as an integrated whole and not balkanize. Kashmir will end up balkanizing South Asia and no one wants that. I am dead against Kashmir becoming an independent nation. It can choose to become like Hong Kong or Macau, which I greatly support.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SONOFAGUN

RollingStones said:


> Here is why I think Kashmir's freedom movement wont be successful:
> 
> - it is tough to portray India as a HR violator. The theme Kashmiris are trying to convey to the external world that India is a HR violator is simply not going to succeed.
> - At the end of the day, India is a parliamentary democracy. No one is going to put down a parliamentary democracy. To claim that a parliamentary democracy violates HR by design is ludicrous at best.
> - The reason why Kashmir should be independent is tenuous at best: what will an independent Kashmir do for the region and the world?
> - The world does not need another poorly governed area: Kashmir will end up like that. We simply do not need any more loosely governed countries and more paperwork in the world. We certainly dont need more diplomats and more confusion in international trade and legal obligations. We also dont need one more country spending on Arms purchases in the name of so-called defense.
> - Kashmir can be a totally autonomous area within India with a unique government of its own such as Hong Kong: to me, the Hong Kong or Macau model is the best for Kashmir. But we want small areas to belong to larger entities so there are fewer entities to deal with in the world. We need Unions and NOT disintegrations.
> 
> My solution: form a United States of South Asia, merging all South Asian Countries with a federal system like in the US - senate, house of rep and popularly elected chief executive.
> 
> Benefits: no more useless antagonistic defense spending between India and Pakistan; better use of water resources; better trade between entities; no more nuclear threat; focus is on education, employment, and human growth.
> 
> Bottom line: the world wants South Asia to act as an integrated whole and not balkanize. Kashmir will end up balkanizing South Asia and no one wants that. I am dead against Kashmir becoming an independent nation. It can choose to become like Hong Kong or Macau, which I greatly support.




Excellent suggestion. Only issue is Pakistan thinks being secular is a crime. ..how do you address this cancer.

The reason why Kashmir Freedom movement will end is Indian Bureacracy and Politicians..ability to manage it......being politicians and not dictators. India had gone through worse in Punjab for decades and now it is so peaceful. We have a Sikh Prime Minister.....Democarcy & Secularism will again conqer in the end.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Here is why I think Kashmir's freedom movement wont be successful:
> 
> - it is tough to portray India as a HR violator. The theme Kashmiris are trying to convey to the external world that India is a HR violator is simply not going to succeed.
> - At the end of the day, India is a parliamentary democracy. No one is going to put down a parliamentary democracy. To claim that a parliamentary democracy violates HR by design is ludicrous at best.
> - The reason why Kashmir should be independent is tenuous at best: what will an independent Kashmir do for the region and the world?
> - The world does not need another poorly governed area: Kashmir will end up like that. We simply do not need any more loosely governed countries and more paperwork in the world. We certainly dont need more diplomats and more confusion in international trade and legal obligations. We also dont need one more country spending on Arms purchases in the name of so-called defense.
> - Kashmir can be a totally autonomous area within India with a unique government of its own such as Hong Kong: to me, the Hong Kong or Macau model is the best for Kashmir. But we want small areas to belong to larger entities so there are fewer entities to deal with in the world. We need Unions and NOT disintegrations.
> 
> My solution: form a United States of South Asia, merging all South Asian Countries with a federal system like in the US - senate, house of rep and popularly elected chief executive.
> 
> Benefits: no more useless antagonistic defense spending between India and Pakistan; better use of water resources; better trade between entities; no more nuclear threat; focus is on education, employment, and human growth.
> 
> Bottom line: the world wants South Asia to act as an integrated whole and not balkanize. Kashmir will end up balkanizing South Asia and no one wants that. I am dead against Kashmir becoming an independent nation. It can choose to become like Hong Kong or Macau, which I greatly support.


OOoo.i just forgot that we are living in a unipolar world!!

Thanks for reminding.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RollingStones said:


> Here is why I think Kashmir's freedom movement wont be successful:
> 
> - it is tough to portray India as a HR violator. The theme Kashmiris are trying to convey to the external world that India is a HR violator is simply not going to succeed.
> - At the end of the day, India is a parliamentary democracy. No one is going to put down a parliamentary democracy. To claim that a parliamentary democracy violates HR by design is ludicrous at best.
> - The reason why Kashmir should be independent is tenuous at best: what will an independent Kashmir do for the region and the world?
> - The world does not need another poorly governed area: Kashmir will end up like that. We simply do not need any more loosely governed countries and more paperwork in the world. We certainly dont need more diplomats and more confusion in international trade and legal obligations. We also dont need one more country spending on Arms purchases in the name of so-called defense.
> - Kashmir can be a totally autonomous area within India with a unique government of its own such as Hong Kong: to me, the Hong Kong or Macau model is the best for Kashmir. But we want small areas to belong to larger entities so there are fewer entities to deal with in the world. We need Unions and NOT disintegrations.
> 
> My solution: form a United States of South Asia, merging all South Asian Countries with a federal system like in the US - senate, house of rep and popularly elected chief executive.
> 
> Benefits: no more useless antagonistic defense spending between India and Pakistan; better use of water resources; better trade between entities; no more nuclear threat; focus is on education, employment, and human growth.
> 
> Bottom line: the world wants South Asia to act as an integrated whole and not balkanize. Kashmir will end up balkanizing South Asia and no one wants that. I am dead against Kashmir becoming an independent nation. It can choose to become like Hong Kong or Macau, which I greatly support.



Kashmiris can decide how to 'design' and implement reforms or changes to their lands....that is external matter you have no say in at all. You mentioned parliamentary democracy -- Azad Kashmir enjoys that status. 


I think you forgot what your stated objectives were; you wanted to somehow convince me that the freedom struggle would fail for X Y Z reasons; if you werent just re-stating your hypothesis without supporting evidence, you were bringing up Hong Kong and ''Unions'' among other things






















p.s. if birth of a country rests solely on whether it will ''contribute'' towards the world (as opposed to merely allowing people their existential right to 'exist') then I wonder why Kosovo got its independence in 2008?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## linkinpark

The future of Kashmir as I see it will be status-quo given the current strategic geo-politics. The current hullabaloo of separatists is the like flickering of flame before dying.


----------



## RollingStones

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Kashmiris can decide how to 'design' and implement reforms or changes to their lands....that is external matter you have no say in at all. You mentioned parliamentary democracy -- Azad Kashmir enjoys that status.
> 
> 
> I think you forgot what your stated objectives were; you wanted to somehow convince me that the freedom struggle would fail for X Y Z reasons; if you werent just re-stating your hypothesis without supporting evidence, you were bringing up Hong Kong and ''Unions'' among other things
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> p.s. if birth of a country rests solely on whether it will ''contribute'' towards the world (as opposed to merely allowing people their existential right to 'exist') then I wonder why Kosovo got its independence in 2008?



BS...how many governments do you want in South Asia doing the same bureaucratic work that delays everything for everyone? In today's world, people are trying to be more efficient. Your arguments are all so backward looking - freedom for what? Are Kashmiris being prevented from learning, from starting new companies and creating wealth, from owning land in other parts of India, from marrying people of their choosing, from practicing a religion of their choosing, from moving freely between economic opportunity points...? What exactly are they fighting for? And using stones is so medieval that I actually do not want handing over government to people who are so medieval in their approach to solving problems. Kosovo, as you mentioned, suffered from several of their real freedoms I pointed above being severely restricted. There is no such thing happening in Kashmir. If they want to be masters of their own economic opportunity and governance, they can be like Hong Kong or Macau. I can assure you that there will never be any international support for Kashmir's "freedom" unless they come up with real, tangible reasons as to why they want to be free from a reasonably well functioning democracy called the Union of India. Yes, india has its governance issues, crime, mob violence etc., but you cannot expect the international community to agree to Kashmir's freedom because of these issues. I think both Indian and Pakistani Kashmir should have Hong Kong like status within their own federations and that's the end of that. Everything else is just a sheer waste of time and resources. 

Start trimming governments, make them more efficient. Improve justice delivery, governance and representation. Telling the world that dividing Unions is the best way to achieve this is nonsensical at best and this is exactly why the Kashmir "freedom" movement will fail.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## linkinpark

RollingStones said:


> BS...how many governments do you want in South Asia doing the same bureaucratic work that delays everything for everyone? In today's world, people are trying to be more efficient. Your arguments are all so backward looking - freedom for what? Are Kashmiris being prevented from learning, from starting new companies and creating wealth, from owning land in other parts of India, from marrying people of their choosing, from practicing a religion of their choosing, from moving freely between economic opportunity points...? What exactly are they fighting for? And using stones is so medieval that I actually do not want handing over government to people who are so medieval in their approach to solving problems. Kosovo, as you mentioned, suffered from several of their real freedoms I pointed above being severely restricted. There is no such thing happening in Kashmir. If they want to be masters of their own economic opportunity and governance, they can be like Hong Kong or Macau. I can assure you that there will never be any international support for Kashmir's "freedom" unless they come up with real, tangible reasons as to why they want to be free from a reasonably well functioning democracy called the Union of India. Yes, india has its governance issues, crime, mob violence etc., but you cannot expect the international community to agree to Kashmir's freedom because of these issues. I think both Indian and Pakistani Kashmir should have Hong Kong like status within their own federations and that's the end of that. Everything else is just a sheer waste of time and resources.
> 
> Start trimming governments, make them more efficient. Improve justice delivery, governance and representation. Telling the world that dividing Unions is the best way to achieve this is nonsensical at best and this is exactly why the Kashmir "freedom" movement will fail.



Excellent post mate!!!.

Pakistanis portray India as an occupying force in Kashmir, but historically occupying forces are there to economically exploit those places for resources. On the contrary, India central government is spending more money on Jammu and Kashmir state than any other Indian state. 

And one needs to ask these separatists the following questions...

Are Kashmiris being exploited economically? - No
Are there any resources that India is taking away from Kashmir? - No
Are they being not allowed to follow their religion? - No
Are they being expelled from their homes? - No
Are their properties being confiscated from them? - No

So, what exactly these separatists are asking independence from??.


----------



## RollingStones

linkinpark said:


> Excellent post mate!!!.
> 
> Pakistanis portray India as an occupying force in Kashmir, but historically occupying forces are there to economically exploit those places for resources. On the contrary, India central government is spending more money on Jammu and Kashmir state than any other Indian state.
> 
> And one needs to ask these separatists the following questions...
> 
> Are Kashmiris being exploited economically? - No
> Are there any resources that India is taking away from Kashmir? - No
> Are they being not allowed to follow their religion? - No
> Are they being expelled from their homes? - No
> Are their properties being confiscated from them? - No
> 
> So, what exactly these separatists are asking independence from??.



But India has to do the following asap as well:

- repeal its security forces from Kashmir's town and villages and confine them to bases
- repeal or amend Acts that provide immunity to the armed forces; if situation gets worse, you can always reimpose
- track down people who shot innocent Kashmiris and punish them heavily; knowing India's notoriously slow judicial process, fast track such cases
- institute scholarships for students affected by warfare to go to schools and colleges in different parts of the country
- provide free psychological counseling to affected folks
- mount a heavy ad campaign enunciating the advantages of going to schools and colleges



India has to remove security forces from Kashmir's towns and villages asap and amend high handed acts.


----------



## Indiarox

RollingStones said:


> But India has to do the following asap as well:
> 
> - repeal its security forces from Kashmir's town and villages and confine them to bases


Army is in the barracks plus a lot of them are deployed along the line of control to stop infiltrators from Pakistan.


RollingStones said:


> - repeal or amend Acts that provide immunity to the armed forces; if situation gets worse, you can always reimpose


When the armed forces are acting in counter insurgency in volatile areas they need some sort of safeguards ,there is talk of amendment. 


RollingStones said:


> - track down people who shot innocent Kashmiris and punish them heavily; knowing India's notoriously slow judicial process, fast track such cases


Sort of agree with you but most of the cases are handled by the military courts and the guilty are Court Martial-ed 


RollingStones said:


> - institute scholarships for students affected by warfare to go to schools and colleges in different parts of the country


Already happening!Just this year a Kashmiri doctor topped the Indian civil service exam.


RollingStones said:


> - provide free psychological counseling to affected folks


Ya it is being done for those who approach the Govt


RollingStones said:


> - mount a heavy ad campaign enunciating the advantages of going to schools and colleges


Already being done.





RollingStones said:


> India has to remove security forces from Kashmir's towns and villages asap and amend high handed acts.


I already replied to both these charges.


This situation is not as simple as it seams.
There are three parts of J&K which is under Indian administration which are Jammu,Srinagar valley and Ladakh .jammu and Ladakh would never want to leave India and there is also a problem of displaced Kashmiri Pundits (Hindu's) who were displaced during the insurgency period their concerns should also be addressed.


----------



## RollingStones

Indiarox said:


> Army is in the barracks plus a lot of them are deployed along the line of control to stop infiltrators from Pakistan.
> 
> When the armed forces are acting in counter insurgency in volatile areas they need some sort of safeguards ,there is talk of amendment.
> 
> Sort of agree with you but most of the cases are handled by the military courts and the guilty are Court Martial-ed
> 
> Already happening!Just this year a Kashmiri doctor topped the Indian civil service exam.
> 
> Ya it is being done for those who approach the Govt
> 
> Already being done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I already replied to both these charges.
> 
> 
> This situation is not as simple as it seams.
> There are three parts of J&K which is under Indian administration which are Jammu,Srinagar valley and Ladakh .jammu and Ladakh would never want to leave India and there is also a problem of displaced Kashmiri Pundits (Hindu's) who were displaced during the insurgency period their concerns should also be addressed.



After looking at everything and the number of disgruntled people, the solution to me appears simple:

India needs to give a choice to the people of Kashmir who want to live in India or ne independent. I think India needs to let go of people who want to be in Pakistan and give them,say, a $10,000 relocation assistance per person and be done with it. I think there already is an independent kashmir called Azad Kashmir, I believe. I think the Indian Govt can work out a deal with this Azad Kashmir where it gives 50% of the allowance or $5K to the Govt. of AK and 50% to the person who is relocating. It can even go further and see if it can secure a piece of land in AK or a house there for relocating families. Some innovative schemes like that are required. I think India is making a huge error keeping disgruntled Kashmiris in their part of kashmir. It is going to blow up big time on India's face if problems are not solved structurally and economically right NOW.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> BS...how many governments do you want in South Asia doing the same bureaucratic work that delays everything for everyone? In today's world, people are trying to be more efficient. Your arguments are all so backward looking - freedom for what? Are Kashmiris being prevented from learning, from starting new companies and creating wealth, from owning land in other parts of India, from marrying people of their choosing, from practicing a religion of their choosing, from moving freely between economic opportunity points...? What exactly are they fighting for? And using stones is so medieval that I actually do not want handing over government to people who are so medieval in their approach to solving problems. Kosovo, as you mentioned, suffered from several of their real freedoms I pointed above being severely restricted. There is no such thing happening in Kashmir. If they want to be masters of their own economic opportunity and governance, they can be like Hong Kong or Macau. I can assure you that there will never be any international support for Kashmir's "freedom" unless they come up with real, tangible reasons as to why they want to be free from a reasonably well functioning democracy called the Union of India. Yes, india has its governance issues, crime, mob violence etc., but you cannot expect the international community to agree to Kashmir's freedom because of these issues. I think both Indian and Pakistani Kashmir should have Hong Kong like status within their own federations and that's the end of that. Everything else is just a sheer waste of time and resources.
> 
> Start trimming governments, make them more efficient. Improve justice delivery, governance and representation. Telling the world that dividing Unions is the best way to achieve this is nonsensical at best and this is exactly why the Kashmir "freedom" movement will fail.


Ok, so by this definition half of Africa must perish.

Just because you dont care of people's emotions and sensibilities and grade everything terms of material (money, progress, wealth etc) it wouldnt imply that you (lone) got to decide their fate.

Kashmiris must get what the lean for, this includes independence and/or joining india.

May be the independence and liberty that you enjoy in the US should also be slashed once we found out that they have been detrimental to world as a whole.


----------



## Xeric

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/world/asia/14kashmir.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

*Deadly Clashes Continue in Kashmir*

By LYDIA POLGREEN
Published: August 13, 2010





Kashmiri protesters run for cover as Indian paramilitary soldiers chase them during a protest in Srinagar, India on Friday. 


NEW DELHI  Kashmiris demanding independence from India flooded the streets in protests across the troubled region Friday[Rolling, your 'suggestion' just went down that drain which empties in Gulf of Mexico], clashing repeatedly with the police and Indian security forces, the 

Four people were killed, bringing the total number of dead to at least 55 since the unrest began in June. Kashmiris have been marching in increasing numbers, and in increasingly bold defiance of strictly enforced curfews, in an effort to force India to withdraw its troops from the disputed region, which is claimed by India and Pakistan. It was the first Friday of the Ramadan fasting month, and many people in the mostly Muslim region tried to visit mosques to offer prayers.

The clashes dampened hopes that Ramadan, during which Muslims neither drink nor eat from sunrise to sunset, would cool the simmering anger here. The protests, which began when a teenager was killed by a tear gas shell in June, have spiraled into a broad, unarmed popular revolt that Indian authorities have struggled to control.

Poorly trained and equipped security forces use live ammunition to fend off angry, stone-throwing crowds. The resulting deaths have fed still more protests, and the state government has resorted to calling in still more troops to try to wrest control of the streets.

On Friday police officers fired on a crowd of protesters in the town of Pattan, and a 58-year-old man died of injuries sustained there. In the separatist stronghold of Sopore a large crowd gathered after Friday Prayers and threw stones at a camp occupied by Indian paramilitaries, who opened fire, killing two people, the police said. In Kupwara, a local official ordered the police to open fire on a crowd of 2,000 people who had gathered in defiance of curfew, police officials said. A 23-year-old man died of a gunshot wound.

In Srinagar, the regional capital, officials did not impose curfew, and Friday Prayers were held at the historic, pagoda-shaped mosque for the first time in six weeks. Officials had feared violence if they tried to prevent worshipers from visiting the mosque.

Many Indian paramilitary forces were deployed in Kashmir to fight a brutal, Pakistan-backed insurgency that swept across the Kashmir Valley in the 1990s. They operate under special laws that shield them from prosecution, and many Kashmiris say that this has led to many human rights violations in the region.

Hari Kumar contributed reporting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## HitNRun

India is loosing kashmir now


----------



## Indiarox

RollingStones said:


> After looking at everything and the number of disgruntled people, the solution to me appears simple:
> 
> India needs to give a choice to the people of Kashmir who want to live in India or ne independent.


The State level elections reveled that 65-70% want to stay with India. 


RollingStones said:


> I think India needs to let go of people who want to be in Pakistan and give them,say, a $10,000 relocation assistance per person and be done with it. I think there already is an independent kashmir called Azad Kashmir, I believe. I think the Indian Govt can work out a deal with this Azad Kashmir where it gives 50% of the allowance or $5K to the Govt. of AK and 50% to the person who is relocating. It can even go further and see if it can secure a piece of land in AK or a house there for relocating families. Some innovative schemes like that are required. I think India is making a huge error keeping disgruntled Kashmiris in their part of kashmir. It is going to blow up big time on India's face if problems are not solved structurally and economically right NOW.



the problem is that these disgruntled people intend to take the whole state of Kashmir with them when they leave for Pakistan the Hindu's ,Buddhist and 35-40%Muslims and other minorities simply don't want to leave India.
We simply can't abandon these people because India saw what kind of atrocities the Pundits faced at the hand of these people so what guarantee that the rest of the people wont be treated in the same way.Pakistan is not exactly known for its religious tolerance.


----------



## Indiarox

HitNRun said:


> India is loosing kashmir now



Nope not happening any time soon J&K also has Buddhists,Hindus and Minorities not to mention the Pundits of the valley.


----------



## Indiarox

xeric said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/world/asia/14kashmir.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
> 
> *Deadly Clashes Continue in Kashmir*
> 
> By LYDIA POLGREEN
> Published: August 13, 2010
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kashmiri protesters run for cover as Indian paramilitary soldiers chase them during a protest in Srinagar, India on Friday.
> 
> 
> NEW DELHI  Kashmiris demanding independence from India flooded the streets in protests across the troubled region Friday[Rolling, your 'suggestion' just went down that drain which empties in Gulf of Mexico], clashing repeatedly with the police and Indian security forces, the
> 
> Four people were killed, bringing the total number of dead to at least 55 since the unrest began in June. Kashmiris have been marching in increasing numbers, and in increasingly bold defiance of strictly enforced curfews, in an effort to force India to withdraw its troops from the disputed region, which is claimed by India and Pakistan. It was the first Friday of the Ramadan fasting month, and many people in the mostly Muslim region tried to visit mosques to offer prayers.
> 
> The clashes dampened hopes that Ramadan, during which Muslims neither drink nor eat from sunrise to sunset, would cool the simmering anger here. The protests, which began when a teenager was killed by a tear gas shell in June, have spiraled into a broad, unarmed popular revolt that Indian authorities have struggled to control.
> 
> Poorly trained and equipped security forces use live ammunition to fend off angry, stone-throwing crowds. The resulting deaths have fed still more protests, and the state government has resorted to calling in still more troops to try to wrest control of the streets.
> 
> On Friday police officers fired on a crowd of protesters in the town of Pattan, and a 58-year-old man died of injuries sustained there. In the separatist stronghold of Sopore a large crowd gathered after Friday Prayers and threw stones at a camp occupied by Indian paramilitaries, who opened fire, killing two people, the police said. In Kupwara, a local official ordered the police to open fire on a crowd of 2,000 people who had gathered in defiance of curfew, police officials said. A 23-year-old man died of a gunshot wound.
> 
> In Srinagar, the regional capital, officials did not impose curfew, and Friday Prayers were held at the historic, pagoda-shaped mosque for the first time in six weeks. Officials had feared violence if they tried to prevent worshipers from visiting the mosque.
> 
> Many Indian paramilitary forces were deployed in Kashmir to fight a brutal, Pakistan-backed insurgency that swept across the Kashmir Valley in the 1990s. They operate under special laws that shield them from prosecution, and many Kashmiris say that this has led to many human rights violations in the region.
> 
> Hari Kumar contributed reporting.


Do you expect the cops to stand and stare when their are quarter pound stone hurled at them at a rate of 40-50 per min.


----------



## HitNRun

Indiarox said:


> Nope not happening any time soon J&K also has Buddhists,Hindus and Minorities not to mention the Pundits of the valley.



still international people and with sharp eye we can see india is loosing kashmire day by day and soon they will let go muslims majority area .... thats important for indian other states now ...

or the final result will be each state will declare indepandance.......


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Indiarox said:


> Do you expect the cops to stand and stare when their are quarter pound stone hurled at them at a rate of 40-50 per min.



because people in Kashmir just have a reasonless 'fetish' to just throw stones, right?


----------



## HitNRun

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> because people in Kashmir just have a reasonless 'fetish' to just throw stones, right?



very good point ..... as a human being indians need to think now ... how long they will kill innocent people.....


----------



## Xeric

^^ Have you people ever thought (for once) why at the first place these people are throwing stones?

i bet, had you done this for once, things must have been much easier for you in general and the Kashmiris in particular.


----------



## Indiarox

xeric said:


> Oooo....my mighty indian (civil) armed forces (the one who claim to be the backbone of a regional superpower and on the basis of which she extends her influence all around its borders) is trying justifying use of excessive force against stone peddlers.
> 
> FAIL!



Do you know the effects of a quarter pound stone can have on the body when its hurled at you???

You guys are talking as though the Protesters are hurling pillows at the cops and the cops shoot back.


----------



## zeeshe100

yeah i also think Scenario 7 is the best solution for both countries....


----------



## amit27

The only viable solution is the one proposed by Musharraf and Vajpayee that the whole area could be demilitarised and made autonomous and be jointly controlled by India and Pakistan.


----------



## EjazR

MEHBOOBA MUFTI ON WHAT KASHMIR SHOULD BE
Tehelka - India's Independent Weekly News Magazine

NDIA AND Pakistan have been fed on the theory that it pays to go hard on Kashmir. They cant deliver on corruption, development, electricity, or jobs but they want to get hard on Kashmir. Beating Kashmir is the easiest thing to do. But by doing so, we have pushed people into a civil movement. It is time, therefore, to look at what Jammu and Kashmir ought to be. We have enough scope in our countrys system to accommodate the urges and aspirations of the Kashmiri people, provided we are ready to walk the extra mile. We at the Peoples Democratic Party want to see the unification of the two Kashmirs, by making borders irrelevant. This does not mean only that you can go across. It also means removing impediments like currency. We can use both Indian and Pakistani currency because we have trade in both Pakistan Administered Kashmir (PAK) and here.

We can have a joint mechanism where representatives of both sides can meet and be an advisory council. They may not discuss legal matters. They can talk about environment policy: how we feel about environment, how we use our resources, or how we should do tourism and trade together. If we are able to do that, it will kind of fulfil the aspirations of the Kashmiris who want to see the two Kashmirs together. We should also open the old routes that connected Kashmir. Kashmir is so well placed but we got squeezed after accession because you cant grow without roads connecting with each other and also leading to the other world. Kashmir has land routes to Central Asia, South Asia, and China. All those routes have got closed. Only one route is left connecting us to Delhi and this gets blocked for months because of snow. People like to see those routes open. Kashmir offers options for projects to pass through it. Therefore, gas pipelines must be considered through Kashmir as well.

With regards to elected representatives, we already have in our Parliament about 12 seats reserved for the other Kashmir because we say that is part of our country. So, we can restore that in the form of a joint legislative council. Have 25 members from that side and maybe 25 or more from this side. New Delhi can nominate four or five persons from this side and Pakistan can nominate an equal number from PAK. Let that council have an advisory role; just be a symbol of unification. This will not undermine the sovereignty of our country in any way because we already say PAK is ours. But impact it can have. The whole of the erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir can then be a model for SAARC cooperation. Let India and Pakistan start in building this as a model.

At all times, Kashmir will be within the Indian Constitution. The only thing is that you have to throw Kashmir open to the world. You can have visa offices in Kashmir so we dont have to rush to Delhi, if we have an international airport. This will also enable Kashmiris to feel a sense of freedom. You cant give them freedom in technical terms, like saying India should vacate and go back. But without doing that, without undermining the sovereignty of the country, let us do what we can. Another important thing is financial self-reliance. We feel we have been cheated in the Indus Water Treaty. We cannot revoke that because both our country and Pakistan are benefiting, but let our country compensate us for that loss. Water resource is the only resource we have and we are incurring losses of ` 50,000 crore every year.

SELF-RULE also means decentralisation of powers within the region because we want Jammu and Ladakh to equally benefit. We want unification of Jammu and Kashmir with no exchange or conceding of territory from either side. It should be de facto (actually existing), not de jure (by right). The autonomy part comes in Centre-State relations where we want a Governor elected by rotation. So, if he is from Jammu, people there will feel they are sharing power with Kashmir. Article 356 of the Constitution must be revoked. Its the people who elect the government and its the people who should have the power to remove it, except in the case of an emergency where the country may have a part.

If we take these steps, we might be able to reverse the slide of several months. Today, there are no guns in Kashmir but the sentiment is getting consolidated. You can fight guns with more guns, but when the thought starts getting transferred from person to person, consolidation of sentiment takes place. Then, everything else becomes irrelevant. People dont really care even if you give them everything under the sun. So, for the political process to take off reconciliation has to take place. This is more likely if the Armed Forces Special Powers Act is revoked and troops are withdrawn from civilian areas. If we had started withdrawal of troops slowly and steadily, then we wouldnt have an uprising against the forces.

If you deny people the basic freedom of democracy, you mutilate your own election process. You are denying them legitimate space within your system to voice their opinion. The voice of dissent grows, it collects mass, and there is more insecurity. This is what is eating the relationship between the Kashmiris and the rest of the country.


----------



## ejaz007

*Amid conflict, mental stress, Kashmiris resort to suicides*

** Resident says he tried 13 times to end his pain with suicide, sometimes slicing open his wrists 

* Psychiatrist says depression, stress, mental illness are rampant as everyone is suffering 

* Teens, torn apart by killing of relatives by Indian troops, regularly sniff glue, liquids, cooking gas*

SRINAGAR: The wounds of Kashmirs never-ending war are reflected in Arshad Maliks red, downcast eyes, in the tremble of the cigarette in his hand, in the self-inflicted knife scars gouged into his left forearm.

Tormented by unrelenting memories of death and violence, he tried 13 times to end his pain with suicide, sometimes slicing open his wrists, other times swallowing fistfuls of pills, he said. I was crying inside, but there was nobody I could talk to because everyone was grieving, the 36-year-old said. More than two decades of brutal warfare between militants and largely Hindu Indian troops in this Himalayan region have left Kashmiris exhausted, traumatized and broken. The rate of suicide, once unthinkable in this Islamic society, has gone up 26-fold, from .5 per 100,000 before the insurgency to 13 per 100,000 now, according to Dr Arshad Hussain, a psychiatrist. Depression, stress and mental illness are rampant. Directly or indirectly, everyone is suffering, said Dr Muzzaffar Khan, who runs a small rehab clinic in Srinagar, the main city in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK). 

One man turned to drugs after seeing an uncle and two cousins shot in front of him; another became an addict after he was kidnapped by a pro-government militia, Khan said. A third-grader wouldnt go back to school for two years after he watched gunmen break into his classroom, tie up his teacher and shoot him, another doctor said. Villagers accustomed to late-night searches by security forces have developed midnight knock syndrome and are so jumpy they cant sleep without pills, Khan said. Despite the fierce fighting, the tight-knit Muslim families of IHK formed a durable safety net. That fell apart when an insurgency erupted against occupying Indian troops in 1989. Children were caught in the crossfire between militants and the pro-Indian forces. Others were forced into informing on their families. Parents disappeared in the middle of the night, many into mass graves where their bodies were never unidentified.

An estimated 68,000 people were killed. Nearly every one of the valleys 6 million people has been touched by violence. The conflict has created two lost generations, the teenagers of 1989 who saw their childhoods collapse into civil war, and the teenagers of today who never had a childhood at all.

About 19 percent of Kashmiris suffer from depression, said Dr Mushtaq Margoob, a psychiatrist who has done extensive studies on trauma in IHK. Nearly 16 percent have post-traumatic stress disorder. In the US, less than 7 percent of adults suffer from depression and 3.5 percent have post-traumatic stress disorder, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. They see someone get killed in their presence, some friend, some relative, and they get stuck in that moment, Margoob said. IHKs mental health network is overwhelmed. Before the conflict, Margoob and the other doctors at the psychiatric hospital in Srinagar saw 1,700 patients a year; now they see 100,000, he said. A newly opened psychiatric ward in a nearby hospital sees another 40,000.

One-third of Kashmiris questioned in a 2006 Doctors Without Borders survey said they had thought of killing themselves in the previous month. Most said they were nervous, tense or worried, were easily frightened and suffered from trembling hands. Nearly half had trouble sleeping and cried more than usual.

Children, inured to the violence, have become angry, aggressive and helpless, said Margoob. Worse, they dont fear death. It is this generation that picked up rocks in violent protests this summer, ignoring a crackdown by security forces that has killed more than 50 people. There is a complete breakdown of the social fabric, said Dr Waqar Bashir, who is haunted by the 9-year-old he was unable to revive after the boy hanged himself four months ago. Children that young are simply not supposed to think about suicide, he said. Drug abuse has become widespread. IHK, a traditional centre of mystical Sufi Islam, has a long history of opium and marijuana use in cultural practices. But now many are addicted to smoking heroin and hash, while others are taking codeine-laced cough syrup and prescription opiates from the rash of unregulated pharmacies that sell even morphine without a prescription. Teens regularly sniff glue, liquids and cooking gas. ap

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

Indiarox said:


> Do you know the effects of a quarter pound stone can have on the body when its hurled at you???
> 
> You guys are talking as though the Protesters are hurling pillows at the cops and the cops shoot back.



So you are justifying killing of unarmed people by the security forces.

This is exactly what the Indians were doing during their independence movement. So you were also wrong and Britishers were right in killing demonstrators. You were also not throwing pillows at the police then remember.


----------



## Xeric

ejaz007 said:


> *Amid conflict, mental stress, Kashmiris resort to suicides*
> 
> ** Resident says he tried 13 times to end his pain with suicide, sometimes slicing open his wrists
> 
> * Psychiatrist says depression, stress, mental illness are rampant as everyone is suffering
> 
> * Teens, torn apart by killing of relatives by Indian troops, regularly sniff glue, liquids, cooking gas*
> 
> SRINAGAR: The wounds of Kashmirs never-ending war are reflected in Arshad Maliks red, downcast eyes, in the tremble of the cigarette in his hand, in the self-inflicted knife scars gouged into his left forearm.
> 
> Tormented by unrelenting memories of death and violence, he tried 13 times to end his pain with suicide, sometimes slicing open his wrists, other times swallowing fistfuls of pills, he said. I was crying inside, but there was nobody I could talk to because everyone was grieving, the 36-year-old said. More than two decades of brutal warfare between militants and largely Hindu Indian troops in this Himalayan region have left Kashmiris exhausted, traumatized and broken. The rate of suicide, once unthinkable in this Islamic society, has gone up 26-fold, from .5 per 100,000 before the insurgency to 13 per 100,000 now, according to Dr Arshad Hussain, a psychiatrist. Depression, stress and mental illness are rampant. Directly or indirectly, everyone is suffering, said Dr Muzzaffar Khan, who runs a small rehab clinic in Srinagar, the main city in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK).
> 
> One man turned to drugs after seeing an uncle and two cousins shot in front of him; another became an addict after he was kidnapped by a pro-government militia, Khan said. A third-grader wouldnt go back to school for two years after he watched gunmen break into his classroom, tie up his teacher and shoot him, another doctor said. Villagers accustomed to late-night searches by security forces have developed midnight knock syndrome and are so jumpy they cant sleep without pills, Khan said. Despite the fierce fighting, the tight-knit Muslim families of IHK formed a durable safety net. That fell apart when an insurgency erupted against occupying Indian troops in 1989. Children were caught in the crossfire between militants and the pro-Indian forces. Others were forced into informing on their families. Parents disappeared in the middle of the night, many into mass graves where their bodies were never unidentified.
> 
> An estimated 68,000 people were killed. Nearly every one of the valleys 6 million people has been touched by violence. The conflict has created two lost generations, the teenagers of 1989 who saw their childhoods collapse into civil war, and the teenagers of today who never had a childhood at all.
> 
> About 19 percent of Kashmiris suffer from depression, said Dr Mushtaq Margoob, a psychiatrist who has done extensive studies on trauma in IHK. Nearly 16 percent have post-traumatic stress disorder. In the US, less than 7 percent of adults suffer from depression and 3.5 percent have post-traumatic stress disorder, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. They see someone get killed in their presence, some friend, some relative, and they get stuck in that moment, Margoob said. IHKs mental health network is overwhelmed. Before the conflict, Margoob and the other doctors at the psychiatric hospital in Srinagar saw 1,700 patients a year; now they see 100,000, he said. A newly opened psychiatric ward in a nearby hospital sees another 40,000.
> 
> One-third of Kashmiris questioned in a 2006 Doctors Without Borders survey said they had thought of killing themselves in the previous month. Most said they were nervous, tense or worried, were easily frightened and suffered from trembling hands. Nearly half had trouble sleeping and cried more than usual.
> 
> Children, inured to the violence, have become angry, aggressive and helpless, said Margoob. Worse, they dont fear death. It is this generation that picked up rocks in violent protests this summer, ignoring a crackdown by security forces that has killed more than 50 people. There is a complete breakdown of the social fabric, said Dr Waqar Bashir, who is haunted by the 9-year-old he was unable to revive after the boy hanged himself four months ago. Children that young are simply not supposed to think about suicide, he said. Drug abuse has become widespread. IHK, a traditional centre of mystical Sufi Islam, has a long history of opium and marijuana use in cultural practices. But now many are addicted to smoking heroin and hash, while others are taking codeine-laced cough syrup and prescription opiates from the rash of unregulated pharmacies that sell even morphine without a prescription. Teens regularly sniff glue, liquids and cooking gas. ap
> 
> Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan



indian army ki jay...!!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KS

xeric said:


> indian army ki jay...!!



Good going ...blame everything on India..even if the undies of someone in Srinagar get stolen....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

undies? that's random.

in the past did indian police or jawans steal Kashmiri existentialists' undies too?


----------



## Xeric

Multiple Mutinies Now - Edit Page - Opinion - Home - The Times of India

*Multiple Mutinies Now*


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

stick to topic rather than resort to cheap diversionary tactics


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

or the most common-sense and sustainable solution


the long-ago proposed plebicite


----------



## RollingStones

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> or the most common-sense and sustainable solution
> 
> 
> the long-ago proposed plebicite



Sorry, we dont want small districts declaring independence and turning into yet another non-governed region. Small districts such as Hong Kong, Macau and Kashmir should stay within large federations as Special Autonomous Regions (SARs). 60 years ago, the world did not face problems of terrorism. Today we do. And we need responsible solutions - not every district within current federations wanting to go their own way. A small independent Kashmir district is a recipe for disaster. The best solution is to turn South Asia into a large federation with meaningless borders subjected to strict rule of law, uniform education and governance standards. We need to solve the problem of terrorism coming out of large ungoverned areas in South Asia and that should be the world's priority.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## KS

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the long-ago proposed *NON-BINDING* plebicite



I just made a small correction in ur original post.

Tel me if u dont understand that.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RollingStones said:


> Sorry, we dont want small districts declaring independence and turning into yet another non-governed region. Small districts such as Hong Kong, Macau and Kashmir should stay within large federations as Special Autonomous Regions (SARs). 60 years ago, the world did not face problems of terrorism. Today we do. And we need responsible solutions - not every district within current federations wanting to go their own way. A small independent Kashmir district is a recipe for disaster. The best solution is to turn South Asia into a large federation with meaningless borders subjected to strict rule of law, uniform education and governance standards. We need to solve the problem of terrorism coming out of large ungoverned areas in South Asia and that should be the world's priority.




thanks for cutting and pasting what you already posted last week


you dont want Kashmir issue solved using world mediation, but you're happy to have world prioritize and focus on ''large ungoverned areas in South Asia''

does that include the red corridor, west bengal and tamil regions as well?

do I smell unhidden selectiveness?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RollingStones

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> thanks for cutting and pasting what you already posted last week
> 
> 
> you dont want Kashmir issue solved using world mediation, but you're happy to have world prioritize and focus on ''large ungoverned areas in South Asia''
> 
> does that include the red corridor, west bengal and tamil regions as well?
> 
> do I smell unhidden selectiveness?



I dont know what these other regions are and how they fare in the overall scheme of things. But my thought would be to use currently available federations to solve the problem of governance. South Asia current and only priority should be to solve governance, education, health and justice/liberty issues. Re-federating, realigning districts, small population exoduses are all not the current priority for South Asia. The regions you mentioned, if they can all be solved under current federations through effective governance, then great. If not, the need would be to change the ELECTION and GOVERNANCE methods and not letting these regions go independent in the hopes that somehow magically, post-independence these areas would have better rights and governance. That part of the predication is what i am opposed to. I can never support creating more problems to solve an existing problems. Kosovo, former soviet states - no one knows if their governance and rights have improved at all? Also, Hong Kong by re-federating with China has not seen a drop in rights?? So, it is questionable that small, independent districts will be able to govern themselves better and afford more rights for their people. Unless we know for sure the district of Kashmir or whatever it is called can prove conclusively that they are better off being independent of a federation, not a whole lot of people will support its cause. The same thing happened with Tibet. Tibet is not able to prove that it'll be so much better off and will be an asset to the world when NOT under Chinese sovereignty. Today's world is preoccupied with a global economic disaster. Kashmir becoming a separate country is certainly only a blip on the radar.


----------



## toppys

xeric said:


> indian army ki jay...!!



In US also kids do drugs smell glue etc . may be because of indian army. I think in pakistan kids dont do glue as they get original stuff easily.


----------



## Jungibaaz

Pakistanis want scenario 3 or 7 but does India agree...
Indians want scenario 3 but do Pakistanis agree...

Pointless thread....


----------



## ejaz007

bhagathsingh said:


> So what do pakistani force do at baluchistan and other areas when stones come ?



This type of stupid question was asked by some one else and I have answered before in the thread. Do not try to derail the thread.

Balochistan is not disputed Kashmir is.


----------



## ejaz007

*New Delhi not ready to part ways with IHK CM*

** Indian home minister Chidambaram says India ready for dialogue, doing all it can for return to normalcy*

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: Though the Congress-led Indian government does not want to disturb Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) chief minister Omar Abdullah, it is ready to undertake confidence-building measures (CBMs), including an amendment in the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), release of political prisoners and allowing peaceful marches. 

Though Abdullah is stated to have himself expressed the desire to quit, the Indian government does not want to come directly in the line of fire. We will continue to guide the chief minister and issue instructions to him. But the idea of imposing governors rule would have repercussions both nationally as well as internationally, a senior official said.

Agreeing that Omars presence does not infuse confidence within Jammu and Kashmir administration and police alike, sources said Indian authorities would use force to the fullest to quell the unrest through the young chief minister. However, despite reservations, New Delhi may finally send an all-party parliamentary delegation to Srinagar to assess the situation first-hand.

Briefing the Congress Working Committee (CWC) meeting on Monday, Home Minister P Chidambaram emphasised the need for dialogue, but said that separatists had developed cold feet after the December 2009 attack on Fazl Haq Qureshi. 

He said the situation was worrisome and the government was doing all in its power to help the return of normalcy.

Armed with statistics of killings and injuries, Chidambaram said the security forces were being placed in a tough situation.

Though the meeting was called to finalise the election of the Congress president, sources said IHK situation dominated the proceedings. They said the members expressed concern at the situation in IHK.

In an advisory to Abdullah, New Delhi has reportedly asked the government to reactivate the civil administration and to bring in senior civil servants from outside, if needed. The Indian government has also asked the state government to facilitate points of contact for people to vent their frustrations. The state government has also been asked to look beyond Srinagar and other towns and focus on rural areas.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*Four killed in two-day gun battle in IHK*

SRINAGAR: An Indian soldier and three Kashmiri youth were killed in a two-day gun battle in Held Kashmir, police said Monday.

An Indian police spokesman claimed that the slain youth belonged to Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, an organisation banned in Pakistan during former president Pervez Musharrafs regime. India blames the organisation for promoting the freedom struggle in Kashmir. Indian security forces engaged the three gunmen in Rajouri district on Saturday and the encounter only ended in the early hours of Monday morning, police said. 

Indian-held Kashmir has been the scene of a bitter insurgency since 1989 that has left more than 47,000 people dead according to an official count.

In the past, the holy fasting month of Ramazan has seen increased violence in Kashmir, as militants believe those who die fighting during the Ramazan period will be specially rewarded. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Hulk

How to handle rioting mob does not change if territory is disputed. It is common sense that riots will be dealt with Iron hands. If people having problems does not know how to do peaceful protest then they should not compalin. The problem is not though they really want Independence with India, I feel what they are saying is not what they mean. They are tired of restrictions and presence of force and by Azadi they want to feel free in moving. We should start process of reducing forces and restriction as militancy has come down.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RollingStones said:


> I dont know what these other regions are and how they fare in the overall scheme of things. But my thought would be to use currently available federations to solve the problem of governance. South Asia current and only priority should be to solve governance, education, health and justice/liberty issues. Re-federating, realigning districts, small population exoduses are all not the current priority for South Asia.



re-federating? re-aligning? Where do you read this stuff, or did you come up with this yourself? 

and in the VERY hypothetical and unlikely event that such were to unfold, how on earth would that help anything? 





> The regions you mentioned, if they can all be solved under current federations through effective governance, then great. If not, the need would be to change the ELECTION and GOVERNANCE methods and not letting these regions go independent in the hopes that somehow magically, post-independence these areas would have better rights and governance.



it's obvious that after 6 decades, hindustan should prepare for a Kashmir that is not under her forced and coerced 'influence'

why? because it isn't an ''integral part'' of hindustan...the people through their words and actions are mirroring such sentiment




> I can never support creating more problems to solve an existing problems.



allowing people in a disputed territory like Kashmir to determine their own fate would solve a LOT of problems! 




> Kosovo, former soviet states - no one knows if their governance and rights have improved at all?



those are mostly leadership issues; especially in the case of the CARs. Closed societies with little access to outside world; but no problems with disenfranchised, angry people demaning independence. They already got their independence.

are you a pro soviet? 





> Today's world is preoccupied with a global economic disaster. Kashmir becoming a separate country is certainly only a blip on the radar.



Kashmir is not an economic issue; it is an existential one.


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> I dont know what these other regions are and how they fare in the overall scheme of things. But my thought would be to use currently available federations to solve the problem of governance. South Asia current and only priority should be to solve governance, education, health and justice/liberty issues. Re-federating, realigning districts, small population exoduses are all not the current priority for South Asia. The regions you mentioned, if they can all be solved under current federations through effective governance, then great. If not, the need would be to change the ELECTION and GOVERNANCE methods and not letting these regions go independent in the hopes that somehow magically, post-independence these areas would have better rights and governance. That part of the predication is what i am opposed to. I can never support creating more problems to solve an existing problems. Kosovo, former soviet states - no one knows if their governance and rights have improved at all? Also, Hong Kong by re-federating with China has not seen a drop in rights?? So, it is questionable that small, independent districts will be able to govern themselves better and afford more rights for their people. Unless we know for sure the district of Kashmir or whatever it is called can prove conclusively that they are better off being independent of a federation, not a whole lot of people will support its cause. The same thing happened with Tibet. Tibet is not able to prove that it'll be so much better off and will be an asset to the world when NOT under Chinese sovereignty. Today's world is preoccupied with a global economic disaster. Kashmir becoming a separate country is certainly only a blip on the radar.


Are you by any chance a communist..??

Just wondering.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

a couple glances at his post; and its obvious he is one

perhaps he would propose a Leninist approach to ''demographic re-arrangement'' as well


take a communist with a grain of salt and some Caspian sea caviar


----------



## Xeric

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> a couple glances at his post; and its obvious he is one
> 
> perhaps he would propose a Leninist approach to ''demographic re-arrangement'' as well



The usual materialistic approach. The regular habit of seeing everything through that darkened eye glass of greed, manipulation and oppression.

We cant blame the guy, he's too blinded by the 'freedom' he enjoys himself in the States. i wish he has to suffer what the Kashmiris have been suffering since decades! Seriously, this guy is biting the hand that feeds him. What a shame, rather pity!

i am surprised that God even give such privileges to those people who never had deserved them.




> take a communist with a grain of salt and some Caspian sea *caviar*



Nah.. i am not wasting such an expensive delicacy on an extremist (or should i say a fundamentalist?)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> The usual materialistic approach. The regular habit of seeing everything through that darkened eye glass of greed, manipulation and oppression.
> 
> We cant blame the guy, he's too blinded by the 'freedom' he enjoys himself in the States. i wish he has to suffer what the Kashmiris have been suffering since decades! Seriously, this guy is biting the hand that feeds him. What a shame, rather pity!
> 
> i am surprised that God even give such privileges to those people who never had deserved them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah.. i am not wasting such an expensive delicacy on an extremist (or should i say a fundamentalist?)




Well then...the Kashmiris would have to get their district to become "independent" all on their own. You can be rest assured that there would be no global support for this for the several reasons I mentioned before. What does having another small independent country do for the world? Nothing. They can stay where they are. I really fail to see a case where India is systematically engaged in depriving them of their freedoms. And no, I am not a communist. But if Kashmiris want global support, they need to give the world a reason. No one's stopping them, so they better have a believable one. Throwing stones at Indian forces and then saying India is the oppressor, especially when India holds Tibetan refugees, despite China's power and ire, is going to sound very hollow. Good luck with painting India as a monster or a devil but no one is going to buy that, I am afraid. I mean it is laughable to paint a parliamentary democracy as a suppressing force. Yes, they are corrupt and inept but to paint them as unscrupulous oppressors...well, like I said before, good luck convincing anyone with that and using that to get Kashmir's "freedom".

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

*Clashes erupt after protester dies in IHK*

SRINAGAR: Stone-hurling protesters fought police on Tuesday after the death of a young man injured in a clash with security forces in Indian-held Kashmir, police said. The latest death brought to 58 the number of protesters and bystanders killed in two months of violent protests, most of them young men or teenagers shot dead by security forces. The man had been injured in Anantnag on Friday and died in hospital on Tuesday. His relatives said the security forces had beaten him during a protest but police claimed he had been injured in a stampede during a clash between security forces and protesters. The police said it had clamped a curfew to prevent further unrest. In Srinagar, young protesters blocked roads at several places and hurled stones at security forces. Police retaliated by firing warning shots and used teargas and batons. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

RollingStones said:


> Well then...the Kashmiris would have to get their district to become "independent" all on their own. You can be rest assured that there would be no global support for this for the several reasons I mentioned before. What does having another small independent country do for the world? Nothing. They can stay where they are. I really fail to see a case where India is systematically engaged in depriving them of their freedoms. And no, I am not a communist. But if Kashmiris want global support, they need to give the world a reason. No one's stopping them, so they better have a believable one. Throwing stones at Indian forces and then saying India is the oppressor, especially when India holds Tibetan refugees, despite China's power and ire, is going to sound very hollow. Good luck with painting India as a monster or a devil but no one is going to buy that, I am afraid. I mean it is laughable to paint a parliamentary democracy as a suppressing force. Yes, they are corrupt and inept but to paint them as unscrupulous oppressors...well, like I said before, good luck convincing anyone with that and using that to get Kashmir's "freedom".



Well perhaps you are not aware of the strategic importance of Kashmir. Anyone who sits in Kashmir can keep an eye on three of the eight nuclear powers.

Americans have been interested in Kashmir since 50's. During 1953 there were a serious of meetings between Indian and Pakistani PM's for resolving the issue and Americans were active behind the scene. It was only Nehru who decided to abandon the negotiations otherwise the issue was almost resolved.


----------



## RollingStones

ejaz007 said:


> Well perhaps you are not aware of the strategic importance of Kashmir. Anyone who sits in Kashmir can keep an eye on three of the eight nuclear powers.
> 
> Americans have been interested in Kashmir since 50's. During 1953 there were a serious of meetings between Indian and Pakistani PM's for resolving the issue and Americans were active behind the scene. It was only Nehru who decided to abandon the negotiations otherwise the issue was almost resolved.



Sure, we can always have a consulate in Kashmir district with a defense attache and be done with it. Even today laws of India or Pakistan do not prevent us from doing that. We have consulates all over India, I believe. America was interested to the extent that this area could have become a nuclear flashpoint. Now that the situation is more akin to a civil war and not as a flash between two countries - India and Pakistan - the whole "struggle" has been diluted. I actually think the problem in India and Pakistan is a lack of governance. I mean there are large areas that are already free of governance. that means they are almost independent. They are inside the federation all but in a name. This being the case, the argument that there is excessive government interference in select areas (such as Kashmir) just does not seem plausible. Once the security threat dies down, my guess is that Kashmir will return to a weak federal control with badly written laws and not much governance, much like the rest of India, with its inept and corrupt governance systems. So, basically Kashmiris are asking for something that is already there -not much of Indian governance - due to India's inept bureaucracy. They just need to get rid of the armed forces and they'll have a district with weak federal control and a large State control (like in their own people controlling them), which is almost the same as "freedom". Then, the Kashmiris just need to go on to figure out how to elect better people/put in place better governance systems to serve them. All else is just a sheer waste of time, in my opinion.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

what is this nonsense? Are occupied Kashmiris event granted the same laws and protection as hindustanys in hindustan?


there is no connection between the 2. It's occupied territory, and the people are fighting for their freedom.

I'm sorry to see another day, more death.


and that isnt just limited to Kashmir.


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Well then...the Kashmiris would have to get their district to become "independent" all on their own. You can be rest assured that there would be no global support for this for the several reasons I mentioned before. What does having another small independent country do for the world? Nothing.


Being beneficial for the world is NOT the ONLY criterion basing on which one would the right for its inception. If that be the case every baby born should first be checked if he/she would bring some guud to the world or not. If yes, it has the right to survive or else it must perish!

That's stupid!



> They can stay where they are.


You should also have stayed the way you were before the civil war. 

Germany should have also stayed the way it was during the WWs (remember what the treaty of versailles bring to the world?)

The jews should also have stayed the same way they were being treated during the holocaust. How did they qaulify to get an independent land AMIDST a settled land where some other race had already living, but the same cannot be garaunteed to the Kashmiris? Now should i say, are YOU racist of what..??!!

i dont want to refresh your general knowledge by writing many other examples but then you must understand that the size or the race dont matter, it is humanity that we are concerned about.

You probably want that the Kashmiris should continue to live the same miserable life that they have been since the past decades, without giving a single thought that they are no lesser humans than you or your likes!

And seriously, if you think the Kashmiris are 'happy' under the indian control (read occupation) than you are sadly mistaken. North Koreans are also 'free' and so were the Soviets, so, a simple question now, are you ready to renounce your (free) life and lead the one being lead by Kashmiris (or for that matter the Koreans, Chinese etc etc)?



> I really fail to see a case where India is systematically engaged in depriving them of their freedoms.



Lolz... So that's the only criteria full-fling which would only allow the world to step ahead into the Kashmir Issue, and if not then Kashmiris are suppose to burn for life and the indians have a free ticket to ruin their lives, right?



> And no, I am not a communist.



Oh yes you are!

And you may not even know 



> But if Kashmiris want global support, they need to give the world a reason.



Oookay....Right, right.

A reason....hmm.... a reason like another holocaust or another Nagasaki. Perfect!



> No one's stopping them, so they better have a believable one.


The prevalent reason is more than enough for THOSE who are not communists and racists.



> Throwing stones at Indian forces and then saying India is the oppressor,


Ok. Please enlighten us, what else they must do to prove that they are being oppersed by the indian military and state?

Mass suicide?

Another Mumbai Attack?

More terrorism/terrorists?

More suffering and human right violations?

Choose you pick!



> Good luck with painting India as a monster or a devil but no one is going to buy that, I am afraid.


May be i should post those YT vids where you would see everyone calling india a monster and a devil (guud selection of words, BTW )



> I mean it is laughable to paint a parliamentary democracy as a suppressing force.


_I mean it is laughable to paint a_ Superpower (a democracy too) as an oppressor, but guess what, the world does that.

Just because i keep a beard (though i dont) doesnt make me a better Muslim (or a terrorist - suite yourself, please), just as you having sarcastic (read communist) views dont make you a communist, similarly, a 'parliamentary democracy' doest absolve india from being an oppressor.

If that be the case, your country would not have supported Dictators all around the world (Gen Musharraf inclusive)!! Where did your democracy go then? A democracy that doesnt suite you would automatically fall into the wrong side of the fall, a one-man-show that favors you has to be right, always right. Isn't it a bit selective, my free friend? 



> Yes, they are corrupt and inept but to paint them as unscrupulous oppressors...


i must appreciate that you do make use of that tiny thing up in your head sometimes 



> well, like I said before, good luck convincing anyone with that and using that to get Kashmir's "freedom".



Dont blame Muslims for (god-forbidden) another 9/11 (or Mumbai attack) next time.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

what did the creation of Kosovo bring to the world? Are our pockets lining? Is the world any safer or worse off? NO! NO! and NO!

the people demanded a homeland, a long overdue demand that eventually became realized -despite serbian/russian resistance


----------



## toppys

What is the situation in azad kashmir. Is that a highly developed area and kashmiris there feel happy that they are part of pakistan.Or there also groups who want full freedom of kashmir operate? Is there any surveys or polls. Just curious. How are minorities treated there?
When we already have an example we should look at it and see how it performs.


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> Being beneficial for the world is NOT the ONLY criterion basing on which one would the right for its inception. If that be the case every baby born should first be checked if he/she would bring some guud to the world or not. If yes, it has the right to survive or else it must perish!
> 
> That's stupid!
> 
> 
> You should also have stayed the way you were before the civil war.
> 
> Germany should have also stayed the way it was during the WWs (remember what the treaty of versailles bring to the world?)
> 
> The jews should also have stayed the same way they were being treated during the holocaust. How did they qaulify to get an independent land AMIDST a settled land where some other race had already living, but the same cannot be garaunteed to the Kashmiris? Now should i say, are YOU racist of what..??!!
> 
> i dont want to refresh your general knowledge by writing many other examples but then you must understand that the size or the race dont matter, it is humanity that we are concerned about.
> 
> You probably want that the Kashmiris should continue to live the same miserable life that they have been since the past decades, without giving a single thought that they are no lesser humans than you or your likes!
> 
> And seriously, if you think the Kashmiris are 'happy' under the indian control (read occupation) than you are sadly mistaken. North Koreans are also 'free' and so were the Soviets, so, a simple question now, are you ready to renounce your (free) life and lead the one being lead by Kashmiris (or for that matter the Koreans, Chinese etc etc)?
> 
> 
> 
> Lolz... So that's the only criteria full-fling which would only allow the world to step ahead into the Kashmir Issue, and if not then Kashmiris are suppose to burn for life and the indians have a free ticket to ruin their lives, right?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yes you are!
> 
> And you may not even know
> 
> 
> 
> Oookay....Right, right.
> 
> A reason....hmm.... a reason like another holocaust or another Nagasaki. Perfect!
> 
> 
> The prevalent reason is more than enough for THOSE who are not communists and racists.
> 
> 
> Ok. Please enlighten us, what else they must do to prove that they are being oppersed by the indian military and state?
> 
> Mass suicide?
> 
> Another Mumbai Attack?
> 
> More terrorism/terrorists?
> 
> More suffering and human right violations?
> 
> Choose you pick!
> 
> 
> May be i should post those YT vids where you would see everyone calling india a monster and a devil (guud selection of words, BTW )
> 
> 
> _I mean it is laughable to paint a_ Superpower (a democracy too) as an oppressor, but guess what, the world does that.
> 
> Just because i keep a beard (though i dont) doesnt make me a better Muslim (or a terrorist - suite yourself, please), just as you having sarcastic (read communist) views dont make you a communist, similarly, a 'parliamentary democracy' doest absolve india from being an oppressor.
> 
> If that be the case, your country would not have supported Dictators all around the world (Gen Musharraf inclusive)!! Where did your democracy go then? A democracy that doesnt suite you would automatically fall into the wrong side of the fall, a one-man-show that favors you has to be right, always right. Isn't it a bit selective, my free friend?
> 
> 
> i must appreciate that you do make use of that tiny thing up in your head sometimes
> 
> 
> 
> Dont blame Muslims for (god-forbidden) another 9/11 (or Mumbai attack) next time.



Your kind of speech is exactly the one that is refuted in the world today. If you go out and say these things, you will find that even moderate Muslim countries such as Turkey and Malaysia would support you. Looking at your answers, there is no chance of global support for Kashmiris. In your replies, there's a lot of shouting but a lot less reasoning. If you take your replies and go talk to another person disconnected with kashmir conflict, you would have failed to convince that person that India is an oppressor.


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Your kind of speech is exactly the one that is refuted in the world today. If you go out and say these things, you will find that even moderate Muslim countries such as Turkey and Malaysia would support you. Looking at your answers, there is no chance of global support for Kashmiris. In your replies, there's a lot of shouting but a lot less reasoning. If you take your replies and go talk to another person disconnected with kashmir conflict, you would have failed to convince that person that India is an oppressor.



Dont teach me how convince. i am not here for that purpose. You, RS are very much in picture of the Kashmir Issue and the problems connected to it, so there's no point in 'convincing' you, as you are already 'indoctrinated.'

i was actually awaiting that you could counter my 'reasoning' but alas, you just ducked it out with your rant.

Have a guud day or night, whatever.


----------



## Indiarox

toppys said:


> What is the situation in azad kashmir. Is that a highly developed area and kashmiris there feel happy that they are part of pakistan.Or there also groups who want full freedom of kashmir operate? Is there any surveys or polls. Just curious. How are minorities treated there?
> When we already have an example we should look at it and see how it performs.



Care full man to talk about Azad Kashmir not developing and facing many problems is a crime ,but to do India bashing on the situation of people on Indian side of the border is a well appreciated thing . what Hypocrisy!!!!!!!!


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

no Pakistani/Kashmiri even was given the chance to anwer the question prior to your uncalled for rant!

there are issues existing in Azad Kashmir as well; economic and social. We can outline those issues gladly. Don't get emotional and resort to diversionary tactics however, as it is highly frowned upon.


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> Dont teach me how convince. i am not here for that purpose. You, RS are very much in picture of the Kashmir Issue and the problems connected to it, so there's no point in 'convincing' you, as you are already 'indoctrinated.'
> 
> i was actually awaiting that you could counter my 'reasoning' but alas, you just ducked it out with your rant.
> 
> Have a guud day or night, whatever.



You cannot go to the world with emotional rants. Simply put, only rational reasoning can be rationally debated with. Emotional opinions are rather like beliefs - no point debating those. I am of the firm opinion that the Kashmir district can be made mostly independent within the Indian federation and that is enough for everyone. India has the resources and the leadership to bring prosperity to Kashmir district and that's all that matters. Everything else is just noise, which the world does not want.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## toppys

Indiarox said:


> Care full man to talk about Azad Kashmir not developing and facing many problems is a crime ,but to do India bashing on the situation of people on Indian side of the border is a well appreciated thing . what Hypocrisy!!!!!!!!



I am just trying to understand. Is it better or just ok there? If a kashmiri from that side can answer the better. Do u get special privileges? If so what?


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> You cannot go to the world with emotional rants. Simply put, only rational reasoning can be rationally debated with. Emotional opinions are rather like beliefs - no point debating those. I am of the firm opinion that the Kashmir district can be made mostly independent within the Indian federation and that is enough for everyone. India has the resources and the leadership to bring prosperity to Kashmir district and that's all that matters. Everything else is just noise, which the world does not want.



Like i said reasoning should be inclusive of logic, reality and humanity. You cannot over rule one of these and call the remainder legitimate reasoning. You are more biased towards the materialistic side we, on the hand do like to give some credit to humanity, life and most importantly the "will of people". If that wouldnt be the case, the likes of John Stossel shouldnt be that popular in your country. May be this can ring some bell:





And on the contrary, if you wish for Kashmiris to stay in the unholy clutches of the indians, then you see, we are here you are also here and we'll see when would that actually happen. Decisions which are against the peoples' wishes and demand are bound to fail. The history is witness to this and you know it. Or else this entire would have been one country.


----------



## Jackdaws

Omar1984 said:


> India cant keep on sending hundreds of thousands of its troop to Kashmir, how long will India keep on doing this?
> 
> The world is realizing now what is going on in Kashmir. I'm glad Obama is talking about it, the 61 year old dispute must come to an end for both India and Pakistan to move on.
> 
> If there was no Kashmir problem, there would not be any India-Pakistan tensions rising. The center of India-Pakistan problem is Kashmir.



I would agree if Indians viewed Kashmir as a foreign country. Thing is no Indian thinks of Kashmir as out of India - so India is not "sending" troops - it is merely stationing troops. Obama has shut up a long time back - and he is free to talk about it.


----------



## Jackdaws

The question Pakistan must ask is: How many countries have they been able to convince that India is an occupying force in so-called "Indian Occupied Kashmir"? Even all the Muslim countries don't support this allegation nor have I seen support among general world population which is aware of the situation. Has India denied any rights to Kashmiris? No. Compare this to Pakistan's all-weather friend China - globally, people support the Tibet movement and the Dalai Lama is invited all over the world to give speeches despite China's wrath. Does the world roll out the red carpet for Hafiz Saeed? Till Pakistan is able to convince most of the world that India is somehow proactively oppressive and not using force reactively - no one is going to support Pakistan's claim.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Xeric

Though your rant doesnt merit a reply, but in order to sooth your intellect, i must say that the fact that the entire world (including the UN) still consider Kashmir as a Disputed territory and not india's _atoot anng_ is enough an evidence that they are quite convinced. And why they dont speak it out, is another facet of the story.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Though your rant doesnt merit a reply, but in order to sooth your intellect, i must say that the fact that the entire world (including the UN) still consider Kashmir as a Disputed territory and not india's _atoot anng_ is enough an evidence that they are quite convinced. And why they dont speak it out, is another facet of the story.



When was it last that the UNSC made a reference to Kashmir in any of its resolutions or asked India to fulfill the non binding resolution of 1948?


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> When was it last that the UNSC made a reference to Kashmir in any of its resolutions or asked India to fulfill the non binding resolution of 1948?



When was the last time it did not?


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> When was the last time it did not?



Every time since late 1950s...


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> Every time since late 1950s...



And by doing so Kashmir became your _atoot anng_, or did it? 

You want to live in a fool's paradise, be my guest.


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> And by doing so Kashmir became your _atoot anng_, or did it?
> 
> You want to live in a fool's paradise, be my guest.



If you say so, where as I was simply responding to your post below where you mentioned on how the ENTIRE world is so much against INdia's stand on Kashmir. 

And fool's paradise co exists with the fool. The jury however is still out on who turns out to be the fool on the Kashmir issue. I would though like to believe its going to be Pakistan.




xeric said:


> Though your rant doesnt merit a reply, but in order to sooth your intellect, *i must say that the fact that the entire world (including the UN) still consider Kashmir as a Disputed territory *and not india's _atoot anng_ is enough an evidence that they are quite convinced. And why they dont speak it out, is another facet of the story.


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> If you say so, where as I was simply responding to your post below where you mentioned on how the *ENTIRE world is so much against INdia's stand on Kashmir.*



Oh did i..??

Care to quote an instance?

No, may be you are actually a fool and not someone merely residing inside their paradise that you dared to misquote me by trying to equate *"i must say that the fact that the entire world (including the UN) still consider Kashmir as a Disputed territory"* with *"ENTIRE world is so much against INdia's stand on Kashmir."*

My concern still stands, can you please enlighten us by putting forth a few names that consider Kashmir is india's atoot anng? Or even if consider it to be part of indian territory? Seriously, which part of indian-*held*-Kashmir and indian-*occupied*-Kashmir you DID NOT understand?

Or may be you like to run in circles and want us to start debating maps and long lats and we did a few pages back on this thread?



> And fool's paradise co exists with the fool. The jury however is still out on who turns out to be the fool on the Kashmir issue.


Exactly!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Oh did i..??
> 
> Care to quote an instance?
> 
> No, may be you are actually a fool and not someone merely residing inside their paradise that you dared to misquote me by trying to equate *"i must say that the fact that the entire world (including the UN) still consider Kashmir as a Disputed territory"* with *"ENTIRE world is so much against INdia's stand on Kashmir."*



And may be you are the real fool who can not understand that with India's stand of Kashmir being an integral part (atoot ang) of India, Entire world considering Kashmir to be disputed( as you said) , is actually going against India's stand on Kashmir (as I said). 

But.. whatever...


----------



## Xeric

karan.1970 said:


> And may be you are the real fool who can not understand that with India's stand of Kashmir being an integral part (atoot ang) of India, Entire world considering Kashmir to be disputed( as you said) , is actually going against India's stand on Kashmir (as I said).
> 
> But.. whatever...



Jija jee's Taoji's Didi's Taiji's Son, something like that, right?


----------



## karan.1970

xeric said:


> Jija jee's Taoji's Didi's Taiji's Son, something like that, right?



whatever floats your boat..


----------



## Jackdaws

xeric said:


> Though your rant doesnt merit a reply, but in order to sooth your intellect, i must say that the fact that the entire world (including the UN) still consider Kashmir as a Disputed territory and not india's _atoot anng_ is enough an evidence that they are quite convinced. And why they dont speak it out, is another facet of the story.



Of course the world knows there is a dispute and of course the world is not keen to change the status quo. From the exalted Operation Gibraltar and Grand Slam in 1965 to Nawaz Sharif being forced to eat humble pie by Clinton at Blair House in July 99 during Kargil - the world - including Pakistan's buddy China has shown interest in maintaining the status quo. Pakistan repeats this atoot ang thingy more than India does btw.


----------



## RollingStones

Jackdaws said:


> Of course the world knows there is a dispute and of course the world is not keen to change the status quo. From the exalted Operation Gibraltar and Grand Slam in 1965 to Nawaz Sharif being forced to eat humble pie by Clinton at Blair House in July 99 during Kargil - the world - including Pakistan's buddy China has shown interest in maintaining the status quo. Pakistan repeats this atoot ang thingy more than India does btw.



I saw a You Tube video aired by Pervez Hoodbhoy (??), a Pakistani with academic credentials from MIT. From that I understand the following:

- Nehru did promise that Kashmiris can have part ways with India if they so choose
- One of the heads of a now declared terrorist group says that he believed in the Indian democratic ways until 1989, when elections in Kashmir were rigged. If this is truly the case, then India did a terrible thing for its democratic cause.
- Some Kashmiri leaders are now saying that the armed struggle and infusion of terrorists in the name of Jihad has damaged the cause of Kashmiri freedom considerably - a valid point. 
- It was heart wrenching to watch the thousands of innocent Hindu and Muslim lives being snuffed out. 
- Roots of the kashmir problem lies in the partition days
- based on the sloganeering, I got a feeling that poor and illiterate people of both countries and faiths can be easily manipulated to wage a million year Jihad war on each other, if need be. 

Kashmir is a complicated problem, one rooted in historical animosity and a war of religions. It is not going to have an easy solution, I am afraid, if at all it gets any solution. Given this, the best and logical solution is status quo and/or greater autonomy within the respective federations.


----------



## RamGorur

RollingStones said:


> - Nehru did promise that Kashmiris can have part ways with India if they so choose


True. But what remains unspoken whenever the promise is reminded, is that the promise was conditional upon Kashmir returning back to pre-infiltration situation. In fact, even before India had appealed to UN for cessation of hostilities in Kashmir, India had gone out of the way to propose plebiscite under UN supervision in Nov, 1947. Jinnah, the creator of Pakistan and the then Governor General of Pakistan, had rejected it out of hand, for reasons best known to him.



> - One of the heads of a now declared terrorist group says that he believed in the Indian democratic ways until 1989, when elections in Kashmir were rigged. If this is truly the case, then India did a terrible thing for its democratic cause.


True. That is a shameful episode in the history of Indian democracy. The elections (1987) were rigged so that Farooq Abdullah, the father of current Chief Minister of Kashmir, Omar Abdullah, and the then president of National Conference, could come to power. Irony is that, in the 2008 elections, the same Kashmiris came out in hordes to vote the same National Conference into power.



> - Some Kashmiri leaders are now saying that the armed struggle and infusion of terrorists in the name of Jihad has damaged the cause of Kashmiri freedom considerably - a valid point.


The moment they picked up Kalashnikovs their cause was lost. The moment they massacred and finally drove out the minorities  Hindus and Sikhs  their cause no longer remained something that a secular country could even give a patient hearing. 


> - It was heart wrenching to watch the thousands of innocent Hindu and Muslim lives being snuffed out.


So true.


> - Roots of the kashmir problem lies in the partition days


Of course.



> - based on the sloganeering, I got a feeling that poor and illiterate people of both countries and faiths can be easily manipulated to wage a million year Jihad war on each other, if need be.


Cant say about this side, but leaders from the other side have indeed promised us a thousand years jihad against India.



> Kashmir is a complicated problem, one rooted in historical animosity and a war of religions. It is not going to have an easy solution, I am afraid, if at all it gets any solution. Given this, the best and logical solution is status quo and/or greater autonomy within the respective federations.


Status quo with a bit of autonomy is the only viable solution.


----------



## Xeric

Boy dies in Kashmir violence, death toll rises to 60 - India - The Times of India

*Boy dies in Kashmir violence, death toll rises to 60*
IANS, Aug 19, 2010, 12.47pm IST

SRINAGAR: An eight-year-old boy, hit by a stray bullet during clashes between security forces and protesters, died here on Thursday, taking the toll in the Kashmir Valley unrest since June 11 to 60.

Milat Ahmad Dar was injured Saturday in Harnagh village of Anantnag district. He was playing with his friends when a bullet fired some distance away hit him.

"The boy was not part of any mob. He had come to his mother's ancestral village from Wanpora village in Kulgam district when destiny cut short his life," said a sobbing villager who did not wanted to be named.

"The bullet was fired somewhere else and it claimed an innocent life somewhere else. This is the tragedy of the Kashmiri people," the man said.

Reports said a car and a van belonging to the security forces were attacked by a mob in Harnagh village Saturday when security forces fired in the air to disperse protesting against the firing.

As news of the boy's death spread in south Kashmir, tension gripped the area. The authorities imposed curfew in Koimoh and Anantnag towns.

Authorities have also imposed curfew in Srinagar and north Kashmir's Sopore town while strict restrictions are in place in Baramulla, Handwara, Kupwara and Pulwama towns of the valley.

Yet another shutdown called on Thursday by the separatist Hurriyat group headed by Syed Ali Geelani paralyzed life in the valley. Shops, businesses, educational institutions, banks and post offices were shut while public transport went off the roads in all major towns.

The valley has been reeling under an unprecedented spell of unrest since June 11 leaving 60 people dead so far.


----------



## Xeric

AFP: Boy killed as fresh clashes erupt in Kashmir: police

*Boy killed as fresh clashes erupt in Kashmir: police*

(AFP)  7 hours ago

SRINAGAR, India  Twenty people were hurt Thursday in fresh clashes with police after the death of a nine-year old boy injured during a weekend protest in Indian Kashmir, police said.

The death brought to 59 the number of protesters and bystanders killed in two months of violent protests in the mainly Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley, most of them young men or teenagers shot dead by security forces.

The boy, who was not part of any protest, had been shot in southern Kulgam district Saturday and died in hospital Thursday, police said.

"He was injured when a stray bullet hit him after security forces opened fire to quell a demonstration," a police spokesman said.

Thousands of Kulgam residents, shouting "We want freedom" and "blood for blood" attended his funeral, which dispersed peacefully.

In Srinagar, the Kashmiri summer capital, hundreds defied strict curfew restrictions in several places and staged protests against Indian rule, witnesses said.

Riot police fired live ammunition, tear-gas and wielded batons, injuring 17 protesters and bystanders, a police officer said, asking not to be named.

He said three of the injured suffered bullet wounds and were from the same family -- a man, his daughter and daughter-in-law.

Protesters retaliated by hurling rocks and bricks, injuring three policemen.

Srinagar has been under a rolling curfew after separatists called on residents to hold protests against Indian rule.

Anti-Indian sentiments run deep in the valley, and recent protests that started on June 11 after a teenage student was killed by a police tear-gas shell, are the biggest in recent years.

Kashmir is in the grip of a 20-year-old insurgency against Indian rule that has left more than 47,000 people dead by an official count.


----------



## Jackdaws

RollingStones said:


> I saw a You Tube video aired by Pervez Hoodbhoy (??), a Pakistani with academic credentials from MIT. From that I understand the following:
> 
> - Nehru did promise that Kashmiris can have part ways with India if they so choose
> - One of the heads of a now declared terrorist group says that he believed in the Indian democratic ways until 1989, when elections in Kashmir were rigged. If this is truly the case, then India did a terrible thing for its democratic cause.
> - Some Kashmiri leaders are now saying that the armed struggle and infusion of terrorists in the name of Jihad has damaged the cause of Kashmiri freedom considerably - a valid point.
> - It was heart wrenching to watch the thousands of innocent Hindu and Muslim lives being snuffed out.
> - Roots of the kashmir problem lies in the partition days
> - based on the sloganeering, I got a feeling that poor and illiterate people of both countries and faiths can be easily manipulated to wage a million year Jihad war on each other, if need be.
> 
> Kashmir is a complicated problem, one rooted in historical animosity and a war of religions. It is not going to have an easy solution, I am afraid, if at all it gets any solution. Given this, the best and logical solution is status quo and/or greater autonomy within the respective federations.



Nehru was a good man. I have reservations about his statecraft and common sense - but he was not the bad sort. Yea - he did promise a plebiscite and the U.N. Resolution required Pakistan to move out of the territory it occupied. Of course, considering the tribal Afridis from Pakistani who had led the invasion had raped women and pillaged Kashmir and Nehru was confident that India would win the plebiscite. Pakistan never withdrew and hence the plebiscite never took place. Upto 1991 - elections EVERYWHERE in India could be rigged. Between the death of Shastri in 1965 and election of Vajpayee in 1996 - electoral fraud was rampant everywhere. Another gift that Indira Gandhi bestowed upon us Indians - large scale corruption. 

Root of Kashmir problem is not partition - it is ideology. Pakistan believes Hindus and Muslims are two separate nations. India doesn't think so and is officially secular. That is precisely why in the other thread I was arguing with some alleged Indian buf foons - when they deny certain rights to Kashmiris - they dilute secularism and prove Pakistan right.


----------



## ejaz007

RamGorur said:


> True. But what remains unspoken whenever the &#8216;promise&#8217; is reminded, is that the promise was conditional upon Kashmir returning back to pre-infiltration situation. In fact, even before India had appealed to UN for cessation of hostilities in Kashmir, India had gone out of the way to propose plebiscite under UN supervision in Nov, 1947. Jinnah, the creator of Pakistan and the then Governor General of Pakistan, had rejected it out of hand, for reasons best known to him.



The talks were held between Mountbatten and Jinnah in 1947. What Mountbatten offered was that a plebescite may be held provided the tribals and Pakistan Army withdraw from the Kashmir. Indian army was to stay in Kashmir. This was stupid proposal and any person with commonsense would reject it.

That is the reason Jinnah rejected it.


----------



## RamGorur

ejaz007 said:


> The talks were held between Mountbatten and Jinnah in 1947. What Mountbatten offered was that a plebescite may be held provided the tribals and Pakistan Army withdraw from the Kashmir. Indian army was to stay in Kashmir. This was stupid proposal and any person with commonsense would reject it.
> 
> That is the reason Jinnah rejected it.


Actually Mountbatten had proposed a plebiscite under the vigilance of UN. Jinnah's reply to that was that he would only deal with Mountbatten. 

Immediately on Mountbatten's return to India, he had filed his official report with Nehru. I am providing some excerpt of the report. It is taken from _Sardar Patel's Correspondence, 1945-50, Vol-I_, edited by Durga Das.

_'I asked Mr. Jinnah why he objected so strongly to a plebiscite, and he said he did so because with the troops of the Indian Dominion in military occupation of Kashmir and with the National Conference under Sheikh Abdullah in power, such propaganda and pressure could be brought to bear that the average Muslim would never have the courage to vote for Pakistan. *I suggested that we might invite UNO to undertake the plebiscite and send observers and organisers in advance to ensure that the necessary atmosphere was created for a free and impartial plebiscite.* I reiterated that the last thing my Government wished was to obtain a false result by a fraudulent plebiscite. Mr. Jinnah repeated that he and I were the only two who could organise a plebiscite and said that we should do it together. Lord Ismay and I went to great trouble to explain that I was a constitutional Governor-General and a Britisher, and that even if my Government would trust me sufficiently to see this through, I was sure that Mr. Attlee would not give his consent.'_

Elsewhere, in the same report, Mountbatten wrote:

_'I pointed out the similarity between the cases of Junagadh and Kashmir and *suggested that plebiscites should be held under UNO as soon as conditions permitted*. I told Mr. Jinnah that I had drafted out in the aeroplane a formula which I had not yet shown to my Government but to which I thought they might agree. This was the formula:

"The Governments of India and Pakistan agree that, where the ruler of a State does not belong to the community to which the majority of his subjects belong, and where the State has not acceded to that Dominion whose majority community is the same as the State's, the question of whether the State should finally accede to one or the other of the Dominions should in all cases be decided by an impartial reference to the will of the people." 

*Mr. Jinnah's first observation was that it was redundant and undesirable to have a plebiscite when it was quite clear that States should go according to their majority population*, and if we would give him the accession of Kashmir he would offer to urge the accession of Junagadh direct to India. I told him that my Government would never agree to changing the accession of a State against the wishes of the ruler or the Government that made the accession unless a plebiscite showed that the particular accession was not favoured by the people.'_

As you can see that India was pretty much ready to conduct the plebiscite under UN, long before situations had spiraled out of hand and it was only Pakistan that resisted such plebiscite. Irony is that later, at the UN, only after the situation had already become a nightmare, Pakistan finally agreed to a similar suggestion of plebiscite, which they had previously rejected.

If only Pakistan had agreed to that plebiscite when it was first proposed, then, who knows, may be South Asia would have been spared a lot of blood shed.

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Xeric

An excellent attempt to mislead a very simple issue. Some wordplay and a few quotes and you have a propagandist among you!

BTW, ramgour forgot that the partition of india was decided (primarily) on the basis of Muslim/Hindu majority/population. Occupying a piece of land and then suggesting plebiscite was never the practice until india decided to aggress against Kashmiris.

How about you steal my cat and then you tell me, let the cat decide for itself if it wants to go back or wants to continue staying with you? And then surprisingly you simply refuse to listen; hey smarta$$ the cat was never yours at the first place!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Guynextdoor

The list leaves out the eighth and most viable option- Pakistan vacates territories it's been illegally occupying since 1947 so that India can unite the two territories. This means that Kashmiri people will finally feel unaliented and since their political and cultuiral rights are constitutionally protected by India will finally see the dawn of prosperity and happiness.


----------



## sab

xeric said:


> An excellent attempt to mislead a very simple issue. Some wordplay and a few quotes and you have a propagandist among you!
> 
> BTW, ramgour forgot that the partition of india was decided (primarily) on the basis of Muslim/Hindu majority/population. Occupying a piece of land and then suggesting plebiscite was never the practice until india decided to aggress against Kashmiris.
> 
> How about you steal my cat and then you tell me, let the cat decide for itself if it wants to go back or wants to continue staying with you? And then surprisingly you simply refuse to listen; hey smarta$$ the cat was never yours at the first place!


Smart*** , you had your cats that you took with you (East Bengal, Sindh, west Punjub etc). Then you tried to take a cat that belong to somebody else (read Hari Singh). The 'somebody' then gave the cat to us and asked to protect it from you. However you managed to retain the tail of the cat (P0K). Now the cat wants its tail. So either you have to give the tail to us or we have to give the cat to you. If we both leave the cat and his tail on street (read Azad Kashmir) it will die starving (You know why)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

sab said:


> Smart*** , you had your cats that you took with you (East Bengal, Sindh, west Punjub etc).



Are you actually stupid or just pretending to be one in order to screw the thread?

Antwaz, E.Bengal, Sindh, Punjab etc etc are not something that was given to us in charity. It was how it (the partition) was supposed to work. i suggest you read the 3rd June Plan which was something that became the basis of the actual division between the two new dominions.

Here let me help you out:

The following were the main clauses of this Plan:
_
*1. The Provincial Legislative Assemblies of Punjab and Bengal were to meet in two groups, i.e., Muslim majority districts and non-Muslim majority districts. If any of the two decided in favor of the division of the province, then the Governor General would appoint a boundary commission to demarcate the boundaries of the province on the basis of ascertaining the contiguous majority areas of Muslims and non-Muslims.*

2. The Legislative Assembly of Sindh (excluding its European Members) was to decide either to join the existing Constituent Assembly or the New Constituent Assembly.

3. In order to decide the future of the North West Frontier Province, a referendum was proposed. The Electoral College for the referendum was to be the same as the Electoral College for the provincial legislative assembly in 1946.
*
4. Baluchistan was also to be given the option to express its opinion on the issue.*

5. If Bengal decided in favor of partition, a referendum was to be held in the Sylhet District of Assam to decide whether it would continue as a part of Assam, or be merged with the new province of East Bengal. _

So, whatever landed in our lap was not something that we had snatched but it was something that belonged to us by the law and the arrangement between Jinnah, Nehru and the Brits, so i would suggest you to stop overloading your common sense and refrain from posting illogical arguments which has not basis whatsoever. BTW, if we go by your logic than those areas which formed part of india were again a charity given to you by Pakistan?



> Then you tried to take a cat that belong to somebody else (read Hari Singh).


Lastly, just because the ruler was a Singh wouldnt automatically imply that he would decide the fate of a state. If that be the case and if you people still justify this possibility than i must say you people are doing a great disservice to the 'largest' democracy and the secular establishment of your country. It, indeed is against the very basics of your existence! Decide, do you want to become a flag-bearer of democracy or may be some of you think everything should be done as was being done in the USSR and is done in Korea? Something akin to one man/ruler/organization/establishment (pick whatever suites you) show.

Again, Hari being the ruler would never had meant that the _"cat belong to somebody else"_(read india).



> The 'somebody' then gave the cat to us and asked to protect it from you. However you managed to retain the tail of the cat (P0K). Now the cat wants its tail. So either you have to give the tail to us or we have to give the cat to you. If we both leave the cat and his tail on street (read Azad Kashmir) it will die starving (You know why)


Rant!


----------



## ejaz007

*Six injured as troops fire at protesters in Held Kashmir*

SRINAGAR: The Indian armed forces fired tear-gas shells and live rounds at scores of protesters hurling rocks and defying a curfew on Sunday in Indian-held Kashmir, and at least six civilians were wounded, police said.

The Indian paramilitary soldiers and police first fired tear-gas shells at the angry protesters who were chanting anti-India slogans but later opened fire into the rock-throwing crowds in the main city, Srinagar, a police official said on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak to reporters.

In a statement, the police said that the incident took place, when police were conducting a flag march. Some miscreants pelted stones heavily on the police, which used (teargas) and pump action ammunition to chase them away, the statement said, adding that six people were hurt. Doctors said one was in a critical condition.

Witnesses told media that the armed forces used force on worshippers who were coming out of a mosque and that there was no stone-pelting. The paramilitary forces sealed off neighbourhoods with barbed wire and put up road blockades in the summer capital. The popular protests against India have intensified over the past two years.

On Sunday, most towns and villages in the region were under curfew, but sporadic, peaceful protests were reported in several areas. The curfew, imposed intermittently for two months, had been relaxed on Friday to allow people to stock up on food and other supplies. The Kashmiris reject Indian sovereignty and struggle for independence.

During two months of demonstrations, tensions have been threatening to boil over with 62 protesters and bystanders  some as young as nine  killed in the region where anti-India feelings run deep. The anger has not abated despite the deployment of thousands of troops and an appeal for calm from the Indian prime minister. agencies

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> An excellent attempt to mislead a very simple issue. Some wordplay and a few quotes and you have a propagandist among you!


You can verify the quote form Z.H.Zaidi's _'Jinnah Papers'_. Its there as well.


> BTW, ramgour forgot that the partition of india was decided (primarily) on the basis of Muslim/Hindu majority/population. Occupying a piece of land and then suggesting plebiscite was never the practice until india decided to aggress against Kashmiris.


Two quick questions. Was Kashmir a territorial part of British India, which was proposed to be partitioned or was it a Princely State? If it was a Princely State, was the principle of partition of British India applicable to the Princely States? 

Strangely though, when Jinnah refused to the plebiscite, he, for some reason, forgot to mention these points.


> How about you steal my cat and then you tell me, let the cat decide for itself if it wants to go back or wants to continue staying with you? And then surprisingly you simply refuse to listen; hey smarta$$ the cat was never yours at the first place!


The cat was neither yours.


----------



## sab

xeric said:


> Are you actually stupid or just pretending to be one in order to screw the thread?
> 
> Antwaz, E.Bengal, Sindh, Punjab etc etc are not something that was given to us in charity. It was how it (the partition) was supposed to work. i suggest you read the 3rd June Plan which was something that became the basis of the actual division between the two new dominions.
> 
> Here let me help you out:
> 
> The following were the main clauses of this Plan:
> _
> *1. The Provincial Legislative Assemblies of Punjab and Bengal were to meet in two groups, i.e., Muslim majority districts and non-Muslim majority districts. If any of the two decided in favor of the division of the province, then the Governor General would appoint a boundary commission to demarcate the boundaries of the province on the basis of ascertaining the contiguous majority areas of Muslims and non-Muslims.*
> 
> 2. The Legislative Assembly of Sindh (excluding its European Members) was to decide either to join the existing Constituent Assembly or the New Constituent Assembly.
> 
> 3. In order to decide the future of the North West Frontier Province, a referendum was proposed. The Electoral College for the referendum was to be the same as the Electoral College for the provincial legislative assembly in 1946.
> *
> 4. Baluchistan was also to be given the option to express its opinion on the issue.*
> 
> 5. If Bengal decided in favor of partition, a referendum was to be held in the Sylhet District of Assam to decide whether it would continue as a part of Assam, or be merged with the new province of East Bengal. _
> 
> So, whatever landed in our lap was not something that we had snatched but it was something that belonged to us by the law and the arrangement between Jinnah, Nehru and the Brits, so i would suggest you to stop overloading your common sense and refrain from posting illogical arguments which has not basis whatsoever. BTW, if we go by your logic than those areas which formed part of india were again a charity given to you by Pakistan?
> 
> 
> Lastly, just because the ruler was a Singh wouldnt automatically imply that he would decide the fate of a state. If that be the case and if you people still justify this possibility than i must say you people are doing a great disservice to the 'largest' democracy and the secular establishment of your country. It, indeed is against the very basics of your existence! Decide, do you want to become a flag-bearer of democracy or may be some of you think everything should be done as was being done in the USSR and is done in Korea? Something akin to one man/ruler/organization/establishment (pick whatever suites you) show.
> 
> Again, Hari being the ruler would never had meant that the _"cat belong to somebody else"_(read india).
> 
> 
> Rant!


Then Why u r criticising the plebiscite??? Ruler Sing does not imply the state belong to India....similarly a most of the population muslim does not imply it belongs to pakistan.


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> You can verify the quote form Z.H.Zaidi's _'Jinnah Papers'_. Its there as well.


i am not quite a fan of his, but it seems as if you are quite obsessed with the guy. Dont worry, that's natural.



> Two quick questions. Was Kashmir a territorial part of British India, which was proposed to be partitioned or was it a Princely State? If it was a Princely State, was the principle of partition of British India applicable to the Princely States?


It was a princely state, but as you lacked the knowledge about the partition mechanism regarding those areas which formed part of india before partition, i dont have to think much to conclude that you also lack the info regarding how the fate of princely states was to be decided as per the 3rd June Plan.

Seriously, the Plan was not that difficult to comprehend. Moreover, a princely state or not, it doesnt exactly matter when india had no right to occupy it whatsoever - the partition happened because of the people and was to take place according to their will, period.



> Strangely though, when Jinnah refused to the plebiscite, he, for some reason, forgot to mention these points.


Which points?



> The cat was neither yours.


It wasnt, but then who were you to decide this?

The decision was of the people who belonged to the land. But then who can better understand this from someone who hails from the 'largest democracy'..??!!


----------



## TIBERIUMMAN

Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.
George Bernard Shaw


----------



## TIBERIUMMAN

True love comes quietly, without banners or flashing lights. If you hear bells, get your ears checked.
Erich Segal


----------



## Xeric

sab said:


> Then Why u r criticising the plebiscite??? Ruler Sing does not imply the state belong to India....similarly a most of the *population muslim does not imply it belongs to pakistan.*



Oh yes it did!

i am sorry, if you cant comprehend the partition mechanism (as proposed in 3 June Plan), it is useless to continue debating with you. i cant teach you indo-pak history over and again.

BTW, if you missed, the 3rd June Plan was already influenced by Nehru himself before it was even put on paper, so you dont have any grounds to reject it


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> i am not quite a fan of his, but it seems as if you are quite obsessed with the guy. Dont worry, that's natural.


Exactly who are we talking here?



> It was a princely state, but as you lacked the knowledge about the partition mechanism regarding those areas which formed part of india before partition, i dont have to think much to conclude that you also lack the info regarding how the fate of princely states was to be decided as per the 3rd June Plan.


I admit, I am a student. I learn a little bit, everyday. For example I learned today that the *3rd June* plan, popularly known as Mountbatten plan, was applicable to Princely States. Surely Mountbatten himself was not aware of this. Why else would he, on *25th July*, 1947, go to great lengths to spell out the modalities of accession of Princely States; to the Princes; at the Chamber of Princes. Probably he was drunk.

Makes me wonder why Jinnah accepted Junagadh's accession. Could it be that he too was.....



> Seriously, the Plan was not that difficult to comprehend. Moreover, a princely state or not, it doesnt exactly matter when india had no right to occupy it whatsoever - the partition happened because of the people and was to take place according to their will, period.


India had no right to occupy it. Right. That's why India didn't occupy it. Pakistan did. India went there only after it became a part of India. 

I understand that this is rocket science. 


> Which points?


That since partition of India was on the basis of religion, India shouldn't be in Kashmir. Jinnah also forgot this point while accepting Junagadh's IoA.



> It wasnt, but then who were you to decide this?


The ruler decided this, as per law.


> The decision was of the people who belonged to the land. But then who can better understand this from someone who hails from the 'largest democracy'..??!!


Is that why Jinnah didn't accept the principle of vox populi while accepting Junagadh's accession? After all, he was not from the largest democracy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jackdaws

xeric said:


> Oh yes it did!
> 
> i am sorry, if you cant comprehend the partition mechanism (as proposed in 3 June Plan), it is useless to continue debating with you. i cant teach you indo-pak history over and again.
> 
> BTW, if you missed, the 3rd June Plan was already influenced by Nehru himself before it was even put on paper, so you dont have any grounds to reject it




Read the June 3 plan again. The Princely states were free to remain independent. India had no intention of touching those which were on the periphery - they would serve as a buffer against China which is why India did not bother with Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim and Kashmir. As it is, the former 3 are Hindu/Buddhists - so why didn't we take them over? If you had not invaded Kashmir, perhaps Kashmir would have fallen into Pakistan hands anyway. You jumped the gun and Hari Singh signed Treaty of Accession. Now deal with it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> i cant teach you indo-pak history over and again.




Thanks for the comic relief.


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Exactly who are we talking here?


i hope you can let us know.




> I admit, I am a student. I learn a little bit, everyday. For example I learned today that the *3rd June* plan, popularly known as Mountbatten plan, was applicable to Princely States. Surely Mountbatten himself was not aware of this. Why else would he, on *25th July*, 1947, go to great lengths to spell out the modalities of accession of Princely States; to the Princes; at the Chamber of Princes. Probably he was drunk.


Ahh...

So just because the Plan does not specifically make any mention of the princely states you assumed (as you have been since long) that the 3 June Plane had to connection or application over the princely states. Voila!

if you missed, there's a _thing_ known as Indian Independence Act which indeed was the implementation of the 3rd June Plan: *The Indian Independence Act 1947 was the implementation of June 3 Plan.*

Moreover the Pretext of the Indian Independence Act was the following:


> _*3 June Plan*
> 
> The British government proposed a plan on announced on 3 June 1947 that included these principles:----------
> 
> *Attlees announcement
> *
> The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Clement Attlee, announced on 20 February 1947 that:-----_



In short:



> _
> Princely States of India: there were a total of 562 princely states in India. Mountbatten in his press conference on 4 June 1947 gave the framework on their fate:
> 
> 1. Indian States were independent in treaty relations with Britain
> 2. On 15 August 1947 the paramountancy of British Crown was to lapse
> *3. Consequently the princely states would assume independent status*
> *4. The states would be free to choose one or other constituent assembly*_



Conclusively, the British parliament passed the Indian Independence Act 1947 on 11 July 1947 giving the native states three choices: to remain independent or to accede to either of the two new dominions, the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan.

So tell me, which part of '_to remain independent or to accede to either of the two new dominions, the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan' _you did not understand?

3 June, 11 July, 25 July or whatever, my concern was regarding that fact that it was the (princely) states' decision to take, not india's o Pakistan's to send in boots and OCCUPY the land!



> Makes me wonder why Jinnah accepted Junagadh's accession. Could it be that he too was.....




Like i asked earlier, are you dumb or what?

You cherry-picked THE part that suited you and skipped that didnt.

What was the end result in Junagadh's case? 

Did Pakistan send in forces as was done in case of Kashmir when indian forces occupied it?

Wasn't a referendum organized in Junagardh which is still pending in Kashmir since the last 6 decades...??!!

BTW, if you consider Pakistan's/Jinnah's acceptance of IoA in case of Junagardh 'wrong' what the heck did india did the same wrong by accepting Kashmir's IoA..??

india should have shown that moral ascendancy (that it always try to portray) by rejecting Hari singh's IoA.

As it is said: _Do, do or choprian.._??

Seriously, you people have no (moral and legal) right/authority to discuss Junagadh with us!




> India had no right to occupy it. Right. That's why India didn't occupy it. Pakistan did. India went there only after it became a part of India.
> 
> I understand that this is rocket science.


Would this have been true and right in case of Junagadh also..??

If you are so pained by Jinnah's acceptance of Muhammad Mahabat Khanji's (Nawab of Junagadh) IoA in case of Junagadh, why would you do the same mistake twice (Kashmir case)?

Or may be, the largest democracy is the holy cow spared from every sin..?



> That since partition of India was on the basis of religion, India shouldn't be in Kashmir. Jinnah also forgot this point while accepting Junagadh's IoA.


Rhetorical!


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> The ruler decided this, as per law.
> 
> Is that why Jinnah didn't accept the principle of vox populi while accepting Junagadh's accession? After all, he was not from the largest democracy.



For you kind info, though the princely states were given three choices:

to remain independent or to accede to either of the two new dominions, the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan.

Most importantly,* the accession was to be chosen by the ruler of the state and not by the population*though, in practice, there were exceptions to this rule.

Also pertinent to mention is the following statement by Lord Mountbatten of Burma, the Governor-General of India, who *on conditionally accepting the Instrument of Accession* wrote:* "consistently with their policy that in the case of any state where the issue of accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the state.*

Mountbatten of Burma - Cuil

So,

though Pakistan honored this in case of Junagadh (though this statement by Mountbatten was post Junagdh issue), but india committed double crime, first by negating the law (dishonoring the decision of Junagadh's Nawab as allowed to him by the Indian Independence Act 1947) and then by failing to fulfill Mountbatten's 'instruction' regarding disputed accessions!!

Probably, you people want us to believe that india can do wrongs and project them as right, but on the other hand we can't even talk about our legitimate rights...

Ain't happening!


----------



## Jackdaws

xeric said:


> For you kind info, though the princely states were given three choices:
> 
> to remain independent or to accede to either of the two new dominions, the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan.
> 
> Most importantly,* the accession was to be chosen by the ruler of the state and not by the population*though, in practice, there were exceptions to this rule.
> 
> Also pertinent to mention is the following statement by Lord Mountbatten of Burma, the Governor-General of India, who *on conditionally accepting the Instrument of Accession* wrote:* "consistently with their policy that in the case of any state where the issue of accession has been the subject of dispute, the question of accession should be decided in accordance with the wishes of the people of the state.*
> 
> Mountbatten of Burma - Cuil
> 
> So,
> 
> though Pakistan honored this in case of Junagadh (though this statement by Mountbatten was post Junagdh issue), but india committed double crime, first by negating the law (dishonoring the decision of Junagadh's Nawab as allowed to him by the Indian Independence Act 1947) and then by failing to fulfill Mountbatten's 'instruction' regarding disputed accessions!!
> 
> Probably, you people want us to believe that india can do wrongs and project them as right, but on the other hand we can't even talk about our legitimate rights...
> 
> Ain't happening!



You are right. Since the Treaty of Accession was signed by the ruler of Junagadh and accepted by Jinnah, it should have been part of Pakistan. So why didn't Pakistan take this matter to the U.N.? Was it because most of the citizens of this protectorate of Pakistan were Hindus and thus Pakistan from 1947 itself did not care about its Hindu citizens? Why hasn't Pakistan ever disputed this Indian wrong?


----------



## Xeric

Jackdaws said:


> Read the June 3 plan again. The Princely states were free to remain independent. India had no intention of touching those which were on the periphery - they would serve as a buffer against China which is why India did not bother with Nepal, Bhutan, Sikkim and Kashmir. As it is, the former 3 are Hindu/Buddhists - so why didn't we take them over? If you had not invaded Kashmir, perhaps Kashmir would have fallen into Pakistan hands anyway. You jumped the gun and Hari Singh signed Treaty of Accession. Now deal with it.


Ask this from ramgour, he's quite fond of Junagadh, perhaps he could explain you the following:

- why Indian forces encircled Junagadh and stopped the movement of goods, transport and postal articles.

- Why a squadron of eight Tempest aircraft was stationed at Rajkot and additional companies of Armed Forces were deployed at Rajkot?

- What was 'Kathiawar Defence Force' (formed by the Government of India) required for?

- Why three warships were anchored at the port of Porbandar.

Atleast we can say; in case of Kashmir unrest was due to uprising by the locals but in Junagadh's case it was an blatant act of aggression by the regular indian forces - the would be 'largest democracy'!!


i am sure he will help you by explaining you the above mentioned.


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> Ask this from ramgour, he's quite fond of Junagadh, perhaps he could explain you the following:
> 
> - why Indian forces encircled Junagadh and stopped the movement of goods, transport and postal articles.
> 
> - Why a squadron of eight Tempest aircraft was stationed at Rajkot and additional companies of Armed Forces were deployed at Rajkot?
> 
> - What was 'Kathiawar Defence Force' (formed by the Government of India) required for?
> 
> - Why three warships were anchored at the port of Porbandar.
> 
> Atleast we can say; in case of Kashmir unrest was due to uprising by the locals but in Junagadh's case it was an blatant act of aggression by the regular indian forces - the would be 'largest democracy'!!
> 
> 
> i am sure he will help you by explaining you the above mentioned.



Kashmir discussion is going around in circles with no end in sight. Right now, it appears that there is really no global support for this movement.


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Kashmir discussion is going around in circles with no end in sight. Right now, it appears that there is really no global support for this movement.



And that's the best your intellect can come up with?

Dont jump (to conclusions just because the issues went past your tiny brain).

BTW, you got tired of Kashmir just after 105 pages, we are on it since last 6 decades (and would continue for another 6). You gotta build some stamina ASAP.


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> And that's the best your intellect can come up with?
> 
> Dont jump (to conclusions just because the issues went past your tiny brain).
> 
> BTW, you got tired of Kashmir just after 105 pages, we are on it since last 6 decades (and would continue for another 6). You gotta build some stamina ASAP.



BS...you are just a preacher. That style, if you didnt know, went out of style some years ago. Anything that comes out as preachy will not get any support these days. The problem for anyone advocating Kashmir is that as India gets economically stronger, they will have more options to deal with this strife of theirs. Right now, the Kashmiri "freedom" cries are from a bunch of unemployed youth in very limited areas - some thing that can be related more toward lack of jobs than anything else. Asking for "freedom" these days is just such an unusual thing that no one can relate to this.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

xeric said:


> BTW, you got tired of Kashmir just after 105 pages, we are on it since last 6 decades (and would continue for another 6). You gotta build some stamina ASAP.


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> BS...you are just a preacher. That style, if you didnt know, went out of style some years ago. Anything that comes out as preachy will not get any support these days. The problem for anyone advocating Kashmir is that as India gets economically stronger, they will have more options to deal with this strife of theirs. Right now, the Kashmiri "freedom" cries are from a bunch of unemployed youth in very limited areas - some thing that can be related more toward lack of jobs than anything else. Asking for "freedom" these days is just such an unusual thing that no one can relate to this.



Advice ignored..!


----------



## toppys

May be pakistan can declare azad kashmir really azad for a start. Then we will be in pressure to reciprocate.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RollingStones said:


> as India gets economically stronger, they will have more options to deal with this strife of theirs



I beg to differif anything, occupied Kashmir is proof that the economics of hindustan have little bearing or impact over the attitudes or sentiments of the common Kashmiri.

Maybe it did only to pundits who ran away on their own will. Not to Kashmiris of Kashmir, who were born in Kashmir, live in Kashmir, and will likely die honourably in Kashmir. 



> Right now, the Kashmiri "freedom" cries are from a bunch of unemployed youth in very limited areas - some thing that can be related more toward lack of jobs than anything else.



a lot of the protestors are employed, and or students; i guess either its too difficult to travel because of the constant curfews; or they see no hope for livelihood and sustainability as long as unwelcome forces are in their lands causing problems




> Asking for "freedom" these days is just such an unusual thing that no one can relate to this.



Ask this to patriotic, God-fearing Afghans who were around during soviet occupation


----------



## toppys

pandits ran on their own will! May be they like running a lot. No wonder we dont have a good solution.


----------



## Jackdaws

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> I beg to differif anything, occupied Kashmir is proof that the economics of hindustan have little bearing or impact over the attitudes or sentiments of the common Kashmiri.
> 
> Maybe it did only to pundits who ran away on their own will. Not to Kashmiris of Kashmir, who were born in Kashmir, live in Kashmir, and will likely die honourably in Kashmir.
> 
> 
> 
> a lot of the protestors are employed, and or students; i guess either its too difficult to travel because of the constant curfews; or they see no hope for livelihood and sustainability as long as unwelcome forces are in their lands causing problems
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ask this to patriotic, God-fearing Afghans who were around during soviet occupation




"Maybe it did only to pundits who ran away on their own will."

Indeed. Who would not want to give up homes, work and ancestral places to live in refugee camps ?


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> i hope you can let us know.


You claimed not to be a fan of someone, and now you are telling me that you dont even know who you are talking of. Hilarious.



> Ahh...
> 
> So just because the Plan does not specifically make any mention of the princely states you assumed (as you have been since long) that the 3 June Plane had to connection or application over the princely states. Voila!
> 
> if you missed, there's a _thing_ known as Indian Independence Act which indeed was the implementation of the 3rd June Plan: *The Indian Independence Act 1947 was the implementation of June 3 Plan.*
> 
> Moreover the Pretext of the Indian Independence Act was the following:
> 
> 
> In short:
> 
> 
> 
> Conclusively, the British parliament passed the Indian Independence Act 1947 on 11 July 1947 giving the native states three choices: to remain independent or to accede to either of the two new dominions, the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan.
> 
> So tell me, which part of '_to remain independent or to accede to either of the two new dominions, the Union of India or the Dominion of Pakistan' _you did not understand?


So what does Indian Independence Act, 1947 say about the Princely States? O wait. It doesnt say anything about it. Because, 3rd June plan had nothing to do with Princely States. It was India Act, 1935 that governed the fate of Princely States, not Indian Independence Act, 1947. 



> 3 June, 11 July, 25 July or whatever, my concern was regarding that fact that it was the (princely) states' decision to take, not india's o Pakistan's to send in boots and OCCUPY the land!


Didnt you say earlier:



xeric said:


> Lastly, just because the ruler was a Singh wouldnt automatically imply that he would decide the fate of a state.



and in the next paragraph



xeric said:


> Hari being the ruler would never had meant that the "cat belong to somebody else"(read india).



Btw, didn't I say the same thing:



RamGorur said:


> The ruler decided this, as per law.


You are either one confused Pakistani or you just have a memory of a goldfish. Possibility of being both is even higher.



> What was the end result in Junagadh's case? *[1]*
> 
> Did Pakistan send in forces as was done in case of Kashmir when indian forces occupied it? *[2]*
> 
> Wasn't a referendum organized in Junagardh which is still pending in Kashmir since the last 6 decades...??!! *[3]*
> 
> BTW, if you consider Pakistan's/Jinnah's acceptance of IoA in case of Junagardh 'wrong' what the heck did india did the same wrong by accepting Kashmir's IoA..?? *[4]*
> 
> india should have shown that moral ascendancy (that it always try to portray) by rejecting Hari singh's IoA. *[4]*



[1] The end result in Junagadh is irrelevant because if Jinnah had refused to accept the IoA, following what you think was the guiding principle of accession of Princely States; i.e. communal hue of the population, Junagadh wouldnt have begun in the first place.

[2] Jinnah, as was the Nawab of Junagadh, was hell bent on sending troops to Junagadh. Pakistan couldnt because Pakistan was unable to do so. So these days, even incompetence is a matter of pride in Pakistan?

[3] Referendum in Kashmir was made subject to Pakistans withdrawal from Kashmir and returning of law and order. Those conditions remain unfulfilled. Hence no referendum. No such hassle arose in case of Junagadh and hence referendum could be completed there. Duh!!!

[4] I have never implied Jinnahs acceptance of IoA of Junagadh was wrong par law. I have implied that if you are right then Jinnah was wrong. You can't have it both ways, can you?



> Would this have been true and right in case of Junagadh also..??
> 
> If you are so pained by Jinnah's acceptance of Muhammad Mahabat Khanji's (Nawab of Junagadh) IoA in case of Junagadh, why would you do the same mistake twice (Kashmir case)?
> 
> Or may be, the largest democracy is the holy cow spared from every sin..?


Your inability to grasp an argument is epic. Jinnahs acceptance of IoA of Junagadh wasnt wrong par law. It was wrong because it was against the understanding that was reached between Congress and ML, and vetted by Mountbatten. The understanding was that contiguity of Princely States with the Dominions should be considered while accepting IoA. Junagadh was not contiguous to Pakistan. Kashmir was.



> Rhetorical!


Do you even know what a rhetorical point means?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> So,
> 
> though Pakistan honored this in case of Junagadh (though this statement by Mountbatten was post Junagdh issue), but india committed double crime, first by negating the law (dishonoring the decision of Junagadh's Nawab as allowed to him by the Indian Independence Act 1947) and then by failing to fulfill Mountbatten's 'instruction' regarding disputed accessions!!


A quick question. If accession of Junagadh was valid by reason of execution of IoA by the ruler, in favour of Pakistan, why is then, accession of Kashmir invalid by same reason i.e. execution of IoA, by the ruler, in favour of India?


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Ask this from ramgour, he's quite fond of Junagadh, perhaps he could explain you the following:
> 
> - why Indian forces encircled Junagadh and stopped the movement of goods, transport and postal articles. *[1]* & *[2]*
> 
> - Why a squadron of eight Tempest aircraft was stationed at Rajkot and additional companies of Armed Forces were deployed at Rajkot? *[2]*
> 
> - What was 'Kathiawar Defence Force' (formed by the Government of India) required for? *[3]*
> 
> - Why three warships were anchored at the port of Porbandar. *[2]*
> 
> Atleast we can say; in case of Kashmir unrest was due to uprising by the locals but in Junagadh's case it was an blatant act of aggression by the regular indian forces - the would be 'largest democracy'!! *[4]*
> 
> 
> i am sure he will help you by explaining you the above mentioned.


Yes, masterji. Your wish is my command and I am going to make spoon feeding you, my day job.

[1] Lies. India did no such thing. Immediately as the news of accession spread across Junagadh, the people started a massive civil disobedience movement, which in no time spiraled into complete chaos. There were communal riots and severe plundering. The Nawab, to cover up his legendary incompetence (I understand now that this is a matter of pride), squarely blamed it on India  that India had stopped movement of goods and transport. Regarding cutting off of postal services, pray tell if postal services were cut off, how did the Nawab kept sending telegrams and communiqués to Pakistan on regular basis. 

[2] Because all the States surrounding the Princely State of Junagadh had acceded to India and therefore security of those States vested in India. You are not suggesting that we place our air force and armed men all around Bangladesh because we are preparing an invasion. 

[3] Kathiwar defence force was not formed by India.

[4] You are clueless about the revolt of citizens of Junagadh. Actually the revolt in Junagadh was more severe than in Kashmir, because in case of Junagadh, it was all across the State, while in case of Kashmir, it was just a local revolt in a couple of districts  Poonch and the other one I forgot. Add to that, it was on the invitation of the Dewan, that IA had entered Junagadh; and was actually led by Major Harvey Jones, the officer-in-charge of State forces; and IA took control of the situation without firing a single shot. Now compare that to Kashmir.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> So what does Indian Independence Act, 1947 say about the Princely States? O wait. It doesn&#8217;t say anything about it.




Yeah it didnt say anything at all about the princiley states, see it did not:

*Indian Independence Act 1947*
*Principal points*

Passed on 15 June 1947, the Act stipulated that:

* Two independent dominions, India and Pakistan shall be set up in India .
* The dominions would be set up on a fixed date: the fifteenth of August 1947.
* The responsibility as well as suzerainty of the government of the United Kingdom shall cease on fifteenth of August 1947.
** That all Indian princely states shall be released from their official commitments and treaty relationships with the British Empire, and will be free to join either dominion.*
*........


Another one:

*Salient features of the act
*
11 ...........
12 ............

13. *Princely States of India*: there were a total of 562 princely states in India. Mountbatten in his press conference on 4 June 1947 gave the framework on their fate:

*1. Indian States were independent in treaty relations with Britain
2. On 15 August 1947 the paramountancy of British Crown was to lapse
3. Consequently the princely states would assume independent status
4. The states would be free to choose one or other constituent assembly*........


So, as you have contemplated, the Indep Act '47 makes no effort to decide the fate of the Princely States whatsoever!!

What a @!#$



> Because, 3rd June plan had nothing to do with Princely States. It was India Act, 1935 that governed the fate of Princely States, not Indian Independence Act, 1947.



Like i said you are an idiot.

i wrote two posts to make myself clear over your deliberated doubt regarding the fate of princely states by providing you with the linkage between 3 June Plan, Indep Act 1947 and Atlee's Speech, but with a thickhead like you, we all can see that it was all in vain.



> You are either one confused Pakistani or you just have a memory of a goldfish. Possibility of being both is even higher.



To me you look more of a kid with a pea size brain who finds it difficult to comprehend simple and logical arguments. So please dont overload your intellectual capacity or your sack may explode!





> [1] The end result in Junagadh is irrelevant because if Jinnah had refused to accept the IoA, following what you think was the guiding principle of accession of Princely States; i.e. communal hue of the population, Junagadh wouldn&#8217;t have begun in the first place
> 
> [2] Jinnah, as was the Nawab of Junagadh, was hell bent on sending troops to Junagadh. Pakistan couldn&#8217;t because Pakistan was unable to do so. So these days, even incompetence is a matter of pride in Pakistan?
> 
> [3] Referendum in Kashmir was made subject to Pakistan&#8217;s withdrawal from Kashmir and returning of law and order. Those conditions remain unfulfilled. Hence no referendum. No such hassle arose in case of Junagadh and hence referendum could be completed there. Duh!!!
> 
> [4] I have never implied Jinnah&#8217;s acceptance of IoA of Junagadh was wrong par law. I have implied that if you are right then Jinnah was wrong. You can't have it both ways, can you?


So now anything that wouldn't serve your purpose would become irrelevant, right?

BTW, what exactly do you want to tell us?

Are you wronging Qaid's acceptance of IoA or the Nawab's decisions to join Pakistan or that referendum basing on which you acceded Junagadh?

Please make your mind ASAP. After seeing your quality to vacillate between choices and the fact that your are haunted with intuitions it seems to me that you must be standing before that mirror for hours before you decide which tie you want to wear!

Shifting poles is another of your quality. You have shifted your poles you much that you just have lost your start-point with such a margin that you wont reach it even if Garmin comes to help!!

You are just another e-warrior who likes to quote nothing and spew all of his 'knowledge' assuming that he alone knows it all.



> Your inability to grasp an argument is epic.



i wish you had put forth an argument for me to grasp. All you did was to run in circles and produce ostentatious points which were intellectually vacuous.



> And yours to put forth an argument is too Jinnah&#8217;s acceptance of IoA of Junagadh wasn&#8217;t wrong par law. It was wrong because it was against the understanding that was reached between Congress and ML, and vetted by Mountbatten. The understanding was that contiguity of Princely States with the Dominions should be considered while accepting IoA. Junagadh was not contiguous to Pakistan. Kashmir was.


Yeah carry on. Keep on licking your own spit.



> Do you even know what a rhetorical point means?



How would i know. You are the only genius around here. The only genius who is lost in 3 June Plan, who cant sift the essentials out of Indep Act '47 and who fails to stick to one argument of his own - the Junagadh case!


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> A quick question. If accession of Junagadh was valid by reason of execution of IoA by the ruler, in favour of Pakistan, why is then, accession of Kashmir invalid by same reason i.e. execution of IoA, by the ruler, in favour of India?



Hey smartass, i asked you the same a few posts ago.

Asking a question in response to a questions shows nothing but your ineptness.


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Yes, masterji. Your wish is my command and I am going to make spoon feeding you, my day job.



Thankyou, but you failed. Jack must be disappointed.



> [1] Lies. India did no such thing. Immediately as the news of accession spread across Junagadh, the people started a massive civil disobedience movement, which in no time spiraled into complete chaos. There were communal riots and severe plundering. The Nawab, to cover up his legendary incompetence (I understand now that this is a matter of pride), squarely blamed it on India &#8211; that India had stopped movement of goods and transport. Regarding cutting off of postal services, pray tell if postal services were cut off, how did the Nawab kept sending telegrams and communiqu&#233;s to Pakistan on regular basis.
> 
> 
> [2] Because all the States surrounding the Princely State of Junagadh had acceded to India and therefore security of those States vested in India. You are not suggesting that we place our air force and armed men all around Bangladesh because we are preparing an invasion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [3] Kathiwar defence force was not formed by India.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> India's bismarck, Sardar Vallabhbhai ... - Google Books
> 
> [4] You are clueless about the revolt of citizens of Junagadh. Actually the revolt in Junagadh was more severe than in Kashmir, because in case of Junagadh, it was all across the State, while in case of Kashmir, it was just a local revolt in a couple of districts &#8211; Poonch and the other one I forgot. Add to that, it was on the invitation of the Dewan, that IA had entered Junagadh; and was actually led by Major Harvey Jones, the officer-in-charge of State forces; and IA took control of the situation without firing a single shot. Now compare that to Kashmir.
Click to expand...

Nothing more than brain farts!

i'll rest till you come up with some (neutral) links to support your yaps.

As by now we all know about your credibility, why dont you stop with the rants and give us something tangible?


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Yeah it didnt say anything at all about the princiley states, see it did not:
> 
> *Indian Independence Act 1947*
> *Principal points*
> 
> Passed on 15 June 1947, the Act stipulated that:
> 
> * Two independent dominions, India and Pakistan shall be set up in India .
> * The dominions would be set up on a fixed date: the fifteenth of August 1947.
> * The responsibility as well as suzerainty of the government of the United Kingdom shall cease on fifteenth of August 1947.
> ** That all Indian princely states shall be released from their official commitments and treaty relationships with the British Empire, and will be free to join either dominion.*
> *........
> 
> 
> Another one:
> 
> *Salient features of the act
> *
> 11 ...........
> 12 ............
> 
> 13. *Princely States of India*: there were a total of 562 princely states in India. Mountbatten in his press conference on 4 June 1947 gave the framework on their fate:
> 
> *1. Indian States were independent in treaty relations with Britain
> 2. On 15 August 1947 the paramountancy of British Crown was to lapse
> 3. Consequently the princely states would assume independent status
> 4. The states would be free to choose one or other constituent assembly*........
> 
> 
> So, as you have contemplated, the Indep Act '47 makes no effort to decide the fate of the Princely States whatsoever!!
> 
> What a @!#$


Right. 

_A State shall be deemed to have acceded to the Federation if His Majesty has signified his acceptance of an Instrument of Accession executed by the Ruler thereof _[Sec 6(1) of India Act, 1935]

State refers to the Princely States. It is by virtue of this section that Princely States were given the right to accede to any one of the Domains. And it is not the Indian Independence Act, 1947.



> Like i said you are an idiot.
> 
> i wrote two posts to make myself clear over your deliberated doubt regarding the fate of princely states by providing you with the linkage between 3 June Plan, Indep Act 1947 and Atlee's Speech, but with a thickhead like you, we all can see that it was all in vain.


The accession of Princely States was still governed by India Act, 1935.



> To me you look more of a kid with a pea size brain who finds it difficult to comprehend simple and logical arguments. So please dont overload your intellectual capacity or your sack may explode!


Then you must be spending an awful lot of time before your mirror. You have now begun to see yourself in everyone. But it is nice to know how you keep your sack intact. It really explains a lot. Seriously.




> So now anything that wouldn't serve your purpose would become irrelevant, right?


Wrong; anything that is not relevant to an argument will always remain irrelevant.



> BTW, what exactly do you want to tell us?
> 
> Are you wronging Qaid's acceptance of IoA or the Nawab's decisions to join Pakistan or that referendum basing on which you acceded Junagadh?


Didnt I make it clear  if you are right, i.e. accession of Princely States was to be based solely on the basis of '_Muslim/Hindu majority/population_' or, as you later claimed that the ruler didn't '_automatically_' have the right to take the decision of accession, then Jinnah was wrong by accepting the IoA of Junagadh.

If Jinnah was right, then you are wrong. 


> Please make your mind ASAP. After seeing your quality to vacillate between choices and the fact that your are haunted with intuitions it seems to me that you must be standing before that mirror for hours before you decide which tie you want to wear!


Thats right. It was me who first insinuated that accession of Princely States was supposed to be on the basis of '_Muslim/Hindu majority/population_'; then claimed that the rulers of the State were not '_automatically_' entitled to take the decision of accession; and then changed my mind and claimed that the ruler was indeed entitled to make such accession.

No wait. That was you, all the way you.



> Shifting poles is another of your quality. You have shifted your poles you much that you just have lost your start-point with such a margin that you wont reach it even if Garmin comes to help!!
> 
> You are just another e-warrior who likes to quote nothing and spew all of his 'knowledge' assuming that he alone knows it all.
> 
> 
> 
> i wish you had put forth an argument for me to grasp. All you did was to run in circles and produce ostentatious points which were intellectually vacuous.
> 
> 
> Yeah carry on. Keep on licking your own spit.
> 
> 
> 
> How would i know. You are the only genius around here. The only genius who is lost in 3 June Plan, who cant sift the essentials out of Indep Act '47 and who fails to stick to one argument of his own - the Junagadh case!


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Hey smartass, i asked you the same a few posts ago.
> 
> Asking a question in response to a questions shows nothing but your ineptness.


O wise one, can you point to this lesser mortal where you have asked the same question?


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Thankyou, but you failed. Jack must be disappointed.


As long as you are happy, who cares about Jack and Jill.



> Nothing more than brain farts!


Sure. I don't doubt your ability to smell out one. After all, all that practice of smelling your own must mean something.



> i'll rest till you come up with some (neutral) links to support your yaps.


UN meetings 257 & 264.


> As by now we all know about your credibility, why dont you stop with the rants and give us something tangible?


You wouldn't know anything tangible, even if it sat on your face, farted and took a huge dump. 

PS: That book doesn't contradict what I wrote. Try again next time.


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Right.
> 
> _A State shall be deemed to have acceded to the Federation if His Majesty has signified his acceptance of an Instrument of Accession executed by the Ruler thereof _[Sec 6(1) of India Act, 1935]
> 
> State refers to the Princely States. It is by virtue of this section that Princely States were given the right to accede to any one of the Domains. And it is not the Indian Independence Act, 1947.
> 
> 
> The accession of Princely States was still governed by India Act, 1935.




i supposed '47 comes after '35.

But then it is useless to argue with you. '35 and '47 both make connection to the States, but we were discussing the latter and there was no need to bring in '35. It was just an attempt by you to confuse the issue as you couldnt get something better to chew on.



> Then you must be spending an awful lot of time before your mirror. You have now begun to see yourself in everyone. But it is nice to know how you keep your sack intact. It really explains a lot. Seriously.


Yeah right!



> Didnt I make it clear  if you are right, i.e. accession of Princely States was to be based solely on the basis of '_Muslim/Hindu majority/population_' or, as you later claimed that the ruler didn't '_automatically_' have the right to take the decision of accession, then Jinnah was wrong by accepting the IoA of Junagadh.


See, you have mixed it all up, again.

My only concern have been the following fact; the ruler decides, but if it is disputed by the population it needs to go by the will of the people. The same thing that happened in case of Junagadh but which india failed to implement in Kashmir. And yes, stop the BS of withdrawing of forces from Kashmir for a referendum to take place, india is equally responsible for the unfulfillment of the requirement.

We were discussing the scenario where the ruler had already exercised his power to join Pakistan or india i.e. the post IoA scenario (in both the case - Kashmir and Junagadh). Now, as per the procedure, the people's wish was to be catered for, which india did in case of Junagadh (as it suited her) and did not do in case of Kashmir (as it did not suite her). The issue of bringing in the truth that the ruler had the right to decide was only needed as you brought in Junagadh as if Jinnah committed a sin by accepting Nawab of Junagadh's IoA!!

See, like i said, you are dumb!



> If Jinnah was right, then you are wrong.


That's what you have been miserably failing over and again to prove. Better luck next time! 



> Thats right. It was me who first insinuated that accession of Princely States was supposed to be on the basis of '_Muslim/Hindu majority/population_'; then claimed that the rulers of the State were not '_automatically_' entitled to take the decision of accession; and then changed my mind and claimed that the ruler was indeed entitled to make such accession.
> 
> No wait. That was you, all the way you.


Eat that spit!

Must be tasty.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Jackdaws said:


> "Maybe it did only to pundits who ran away on their own will."



i stand by my words, because that's how things really did transpire

i have no sympathy at all for those poor ''oppressed'' 'pundits'




> Indeed. Who would not want to give up homes, work and ancestral places to live in refugee camps ?





people with honour and pride never abandon their ancestral homelands while their neigbhours, friends & families suffer......they fled for purely economic reasons and are now integrated into hindustany society. More power to them; but they dare not call themselves ''Kashmiris'' anymore since they pledged allegiance to hindustan, the very entity that is oppressing Kashmiris today.

we can see what this oppression is leading to; a lot of anger and resentment


for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toppys

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i stand by my words, because that's how things really did transpire
> 
> i have no sympathy at all for those poor ''oppressed'' 'pundits'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people with honour and pride never abandon their ancestral homelands while their neigbhours, friends & families suffer......they fled for purely economic reasons and are now integrated into hindustany society. More power to them; but they dare not call themselves ''Kashmiris'' anymore since they pledged allegiance to hindustan, the very entity that is oppressing Kashmiris today.
> 
> we can see what this oppression is leading to; a lot of anger and resentment
> 
> 
> for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction



It will be dark when you have shut your eyes yourself.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

negligible....i wear Aviators -especially in the summer


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> i supposed '47 comes after '35.
> 
> But then it is useless to argue with you. '35 and '47 both make connection to the States, but we were discussing the latter and there was no need to bring in '35. It was just an attempt by you to confuse the issue as you couldnt get something better to chew on.


Congratulations. You have cracked the biggest mystery of the world - 47 comes after 35. Now buy yourself some candy.

_Except in so far as other provision is made by or in accordance with a law made by the Constituent Assembly of the Dominion under subsection (i) of this section, *each of the new Dominions and all Provinces and other parts thereof shall be governed as nearly as may be in accordance with the Government of India Act, 1935* ; and *the provisions of that Act, and of the Orders in Council, rules and other instruments made thereunder, shall, so far as applicable*, and subject to any express provisions of this Act, and with such, omissions, additions, adaptations and modifications as may be specified in orders of the Governor-General under the next succeeding section, *have effect accordingly*_ [Sec 8(2) of Indian Independence Act 1947]

Accordingly, necessary amendments were made in India Act 1935. This kind of embarrassing mistakes happen when one's primary source is Google _chacha_.



> My only concern have been the following fact; the ruler decides, but if it is disputed by the population it needs to go by the will of the people.


Are you effing bull$hitting me. That was precisely India's stand and it was conveyed by Mountbatten to Jinnah, which Jinnah had rejected out of hand. It was to prove this point I posted that report by Mountbatten which you dismissed as '_an excellent attempt to mislead_' and then pulled from your rectal orifice your own explanation that the States were supposed to accede '_on the basis of Muslim/Hindu majority/population_'. You then went on to explain to another poster that Hari Singh couldn't 'automatically' accede to India. 

Now that you have dug yourself in an effing hole, you are shamelessly eating your own words and taking an exact opposite stand. At least delete your posts before bull$hitting.


> The same thing that happened in case of Junagadh but which india failed to implement in Kashmir. And yes, stop the BS of withdrawing of forces from Kashmir for a referendum to take place, india is equally responsible for the unfulfillment of the requirement.


The word 'equally' is an acknowledgment that on the other side of the equation Pakistan is also '_responsible for the fulfillment of the requirement_', which obviously Pakistan has failed to this day.

Thank you for your inadvertent acknowledgment.



> The issue of bringing in the truth that the ruler had the right to decide was only needed as you brought in Junagadh as if Jinnah committed a sin by accepting Nawab of Junagadh's IoA!!


You do realize that your posts still exist and everybody can read those posts from pg 103, post#1542?



> That's what you have been miserably failing over and again to prove. Better luck next time!


Actually you have proved me right and you are not even aware of it. 



> Eat that spit!
> 
> Must be tasty.


So you know how spit might taste. I can only guess how.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RamGorur

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i have no sympathy at all for those poor ''oppressed'' 'pundits'


What a terrible loss for the pundits.


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Congratulations. You have cracked the biggest mystery of the world - 47 comes after 35. Now buy yourself some candy.
> 
> _Except in so far as other provision is made by or in accordance with a law made by the Constituent Assembly of the Dominion under subsection (i) of this section, *each of the new Dominions and all Provinces and other parts thereof shall be governed as nearly as may be in accordance with the Government of India Act, 1935* ; and *the provisions of that Act, and of the Orders in Council, rules and other instruments made thereunder, shall, so far as applicable*, and subject to any express provisions of this Act, and with such, omissions, additions, adaptations and modifications as may be specified in orders of the Governor-General under the next succeeding section, *have effect accordingly*_ [Sec 8(2) of Indian Independence Act 1947]
> 
> Accordingly, necessary amendments were made in India Act 1935. This kind of embarrassing mistakes happen when one's primary source is Google _chacha_.
> 
> 
> Are you effing bull$hitting me. That was precisely India's stand and it was conveyed by Mountbatten to Jinnah, which Jinnah had rejected out of hand. It was to prove this point I posted that report by Mountbatten which you dismissed as '_an excellent attempt to mislead_' and then pulled from your rectal orifice your own explanation that the States were supposed to accede '_on the basis of Muslim/Hindu majority/population_'. You then went on to explain to another poster that Hari Singh couldn't 'automatically' accede to India.
> 
> Now that you have dug yourself in an effing hole, you are shamelessly eating your own words and taking an exact opposite stand. At least delete your posts before bull$hitting.
> 
> The word 'equally' is an acknowledgment that on the other side of the equation Pakistan is also '_responsible for the fulfillment of the requirement_', which obviously Pakistan has failed to this day.
> 
> Thank you for your inadvertent acknowledgment.
> 
> 
> You do realize that your posts still exist and everybody can read those posts from pg 103, post#1542?
> 
> 
> Actually you have proved me right and you are not even aware of it.
> 
> 
> So you know how spit might taste. I can only guess how.


As they say; "There's nothing more dangerous than a resourceful idiot."



Game over!


----------



## Jackdaws

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i stand by my words, because that's how things really did transpire
> 
> i have no sympathy at all for those poor ''oppressed'' 'pundits'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people with honour and pride never abandon their ancestral homelands while their neigbhours, friends & families suffer......they fled for purely economic reasons and are now integrated into hindustany society. More power to them; but they dare not call themselves ''Kashmiris'' anymore since they pledged allegiance to hindustan, the very entity that is oppressing Kashmiris today.
> 
> we can see what this oppression is leading to; a lot of anger and resentment
> 
> 
> for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction




They will call themselves Kashmiris all the time and there is pretty much nothing Pakistan can do about it.


----------



## Xeric

Bangkok Post : New death sparks protests in Indian Kashmir

*New death sparks protests in Kashmir*

* Published: 26/08/2010 at 12:56 AM






_Kashmiri women mourn at the funeral of Umar Qayoom, 13, in Srinagar. Thousands of people poured on to the streets of Indian Kashmir summer capital Srinagar on Wednesday after another protester died, taking the toll in two months of violence to 64, police said. _

Thousands of people poured on to the streets of Indian Kashmir summer capital Srinagar on Wednesday after another protester died, taking the toll in two months of violence to 64, police said.

The teenager who died in hospital on Wednesday had been admitted on Monday. Witnesses said he had been beaten by federal paramilitary forces during a protest against Indian rule.

His family said he had also been tortured by police in custody.

Police said they were investigating the death, which brought thousands of locals out on the streets of Srinagar's Soura district chanting slogans.

Later some of the protesters, chanting "blood for blood" and "Go India, go back", set fire to a police vehicle and a private vehicle parked near a police station, witnesses said.

Police fired live ammunition, teargas and swung batons to disperse the protesters and in the ensuing clashes 12 demonstrators were hurt, police said.

The scenic Kashmir region has been under rolling curfews to contain deadly protests that began with the killing on June 11 of a teenage student in Srinagar by a police tear-gas shell.

India's home minister P. Chidambaram regretted Wednesday that New Delhi was not able to stop the unrest.

"We are concerned that we have not been able to stop the vicious cycle in which that state is caught," he said in an address to police chiefs of all the Indian states in New Delhi, according to Press Trust of India.

"However, it is my hope that, in the next few days, we would be able to find that elusive starting point from where we could reach out to the protestors, reassure them of their rights and dignity."

He said the peace and order would be restored and "the process of dialogue restarted that will lead to a solution."

Separatists opposed to Indian rule have declined to enter into fresh talks until India withdraws troops from civilian areas, repeals tough security laws and releases all the political prisoners.

Immediately after Chidambaram's statement, authorities released senior separatist Yasin Malik who had been detained in early June, police said.

Most parts of Srinagar were under strict curfew on Wednesday after Muslim separatists opposed to Indian rule in the region called on residents to hold protests.

In other Muslim-majority towns where the curfew was not in force, a strike called by separatists to at protests the deaths brought daily life to a standstill, witnesses said.

In Pampore town, 15 kilometres (nine miles), south of Srinagar, a young protester was wounded on Wednesday when security forces opened fire to quell a demonstration, police said.

Anti-India sentiments run deep in Kashmir, where Muslim militants have fought a 20-year insurgency in Indian Kashmir against rule from New Delhi.

The mountainous region, held in part by Pakistan and India but claimed in full by both, has been the cause of two of the three wars the countries have fought since independence from Britain more than half a century ago.


----------



## indiaworldpower

Bezerk said:


> The Future Of Kashmir?
> 
> Scenario 1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> The status quo*
> 
> Kashmir has been a flashpoint between India and Pakistan for more than 60 years. Currently a boundary - the Line of Control - divides the region in two, with one part administered by India and one by Pakistan. India would like to formalise this status quo and make it the accepted international boundary. But Pakistan and Kashmiri activists reject this plan because they both want greater control over the region.
> 
> 
> Scenario 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Kashmir joins Pakistan*
> 
> Pakistan has consistently favoured this as the best solution to the dispute. In view of the state's majority Muslim population, it believes that it would vote to become part of Pakistan. However a single plebiscite held in a region which comprises peoples that are culturally, religiously and ethnically diverse, would create disaffected minorities. The Hindus of Jammu, and the Buddhists of Ladakh have never shown any desire to join Pakistan and would protest at the outcome.
> 
> 
> Scenario 3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Kashmir joins India*
> 
> Such a solution would be unlikely to bring stability to the region as the Muslim inhabitants of Pakistani-administered Jammu and Kashmir, including the Northern Areas, have never shown any desire to become part of India.
> 
> Scenario 4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Independent Kashmir*
> 
> The difficulty of adopting this as a potential solution is that it requires India and Pakistan to give up territory, which they are not willing to do. Any plebiscite or referendum likely to result in a majority vote for independence would therefore probably be opposed by both India and Pakistan. It would also be rejected by the inhabitants of the state who are content with their status as part of the countries to which they already owe allegiance.
> 
> 
> Scenario 5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> A smaller independent Kashmir*
> 
> An independent Kashmir could be created from the Kashmir Valley - currently under Indian administration - and the narrow strip of land which Pakistan calls Azad Jammu and Kashmir. This would leave the strategically important regions of the Northern Areas and Ladakh, bordering China, under the control of Pakistan and India respectively. However both India and Pakistan would be unlikely to enter into discussions which would have this scenario as a possible outcome.
> 
> 
> Scenario 6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Independent Kashmir Valley*
> 
> An independent Kashmir Valley has been considered by some as the best solution because it would address the grievances of those who have been fighting against the Indian Government since the insurgency began in 1989. But critics say that, without external assistance, the region would not be economically viable.
> 
> Scenario 7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> The Chenab formula*
> 
> This plan, first suggested in the 1960s, would see Kashmir divided along the line of the River Chenab. This would give the vast majority of land to Pakistan and, as such, a clear victory in its longstanding dispute with India. The entire valley with its Muslim majority population would be brought within Pakistan's borders, as well as the majority Muslim areas of Jammu.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> *How do YOU see the future of Kashmir?*




So far we have discussed on these 7 options, what do u think which one is winning?

In my view, one more option should also be added here which Parvez Musharraf and Manmohan Singh were discussing, that is autonomy to whole Kashmir (parts currently being governed by both India and Pakistan) and will be governed together by both countries.


----------



## indiaworldpower

toppys said:


> May be pakistan can declare azad kashmir really azad for a start. Then we will be in pressure to reciprocate.



What if that azad kashmir joins India?


----------



## Jackdaws

indiaworldpower said:


> What if that azad kashmir joins India?



There is more likelihood of Bush and Osama being twin brothers lost at the Kumbh Mela than that happening.


----------



## indiaworldpower

xeric said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/world/asia/14kashmir.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
> 
> *Deadly Clashes Continue in Kashmir*
> 
> By LYDIA POLGREEN
> Published: August 13, 2010
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kashmiri protesters run for cover as Indian paramilitary soldiers chase them during a protest in Srinagar, India on Friday.
> 
> 
> NEW DELHI  Kashmiris demanding independence from India flooded the streets in protests across the troubled region Friday[Rolling, your 'suggestion' just went down that drain which empties in Gulf of Mexico], clashing repeatedly with the police and Indian security forces, the
> 
> Four people were killed, bringing the total number of dead to at least 55 since the unrest began in June. Kashmiris have been marching in increasing numbers, and in increasingly bold defiance of strictly enforced curfews, in an effort to force India to withdraw its troops from the disputed region, which is claimed by India and Pakistan. It was the first Friday of the Ramadan fasting month, and many people in the mostly Muslim region tried to visit mosques to offer prayers.
> 
> The clashes dampened hopes that Ramadan, during which Muslims neither drink nor eat from sunrise to sunset, would cool the simmering anger here. The protests, which began when a teenager was killed by a tear gas shell in June, have spiraled into a broad, unarmed popular revolt that Indian authorities have struggled to control.
> 
> Poorly trained and equipped security forces use live ammunition to fend off angry, stone-throwing crowds. The resulting deaths have fed still more protests, and the state government has resorted to calling in still more troops to try to wrest control of the streets.
> 
> On Friday police officers fired on a crowd of protesters in the town of Pattan, and a 58-year-old man died of injuries sustained there. In the separatist stronghold of Sopore a large crowd gathered after Friday Prayers and threw stones at a camp occupied by Indian paramilitaries, who opened fire, killing two people, the police said. In Kupwara, a local official ordered the police to open fire on a crowd of 2,000 people who had gathered in defiance of curfew, police officials said. A 23-year-old man died of a gunshot wound.
> 
> In Srinagar, the regional capital, officials did not impose curfew, and Friday Prayers were held at the historic, pagoda-shaped mosque for the first time in six weeks. Officials had feared violence if they tried to prevent worshipers from visiting the mosque.
> 
> Many Indian paramilitary forces were deployed in Kashmir to fight a brutal, Pakistan-backed insurgency that swept across the Kashmir Valley in the 1990s. They operate under special laws that shield them from prosecution, and many Kashmiris say that this has led to many human rights violations in the region.
> 
> Hari Kumar contributed reporting.



Oh so these handful of people are protesting. What about the normal public. These people can be on the pay of ISI or seperatists who get support from ISI.


----------



## Bhairava

xeric said:


> Bangkok Post : New death sparks protests in Indian Kashmir
> 
> *New death sparks protests in Kashmir*
> 
> * Published: 26/08/2010 at 12:56 AM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Kashmiri women mourn at the funeral of Umar Qayoom, 13, in Srinagar. Thousands of people poured on to the streets of Indian Kashmir summer capital Srinagar on Wednesday after another protester died, taking the toll in two months of violence to 64, police said. _
> 
> Thousands of people poured on to the streets of Indian Kashmir summer capital Srinagar on Wednesday after another protester died, taking the toll in two months of violence to 64, police said.
> 
> The teenager who died in hospital on Wednesday had been admitted on Monday. Witnesses said he had been beaten by federal paramilitary forces during a protest against Indian rule.
> 
> His family said he had also been tortured by police in custody.
> 
> Police said they were investigating the death, which brought thousands of locals out on the streets of Srinagar's Soura district chanting slogans.
> 
> Later some of the protesters, chanting "blood for blood" and "Go India, go back", set fire to a police vehicle and a private vehicle parked near a police station, witnesses said.
> 
> Police fired live ammunition, teargas and swung batons to disperse the protesters and in the ensuing clashes 12 demonstrators were hurt, police said.
> 
> The scenic Kashmir region has been under rolling curfews to contain deadly protests that began with the killing on June 11 of a teenage student in Srinagar by a police tear-gas shell.
> 
> India's home minister P. Chidambaram regretted Wednesday that New Delhi was not able to stop the unrest.
> 
> "We are concerned that we have not been able to stop the vicious cycle in which that state is caught," he said in an address to police chiefs of all the Indian states in New Delhi, according to Press Trust of India.
> 
> "However, it is my hope that, in the next few days, we would be able to find that elusive starting point from where we could reach out to the protestors, reassure them of their rights and dignity."
> 
> He said the peace and order would be restored and "the process of dialogue restarted that will lead to a solution."
> 
> Separatists opposed to Indian rule have declined to enter into fresh talks until India withdraws troops from civilian areas, repeals tough security laws and releases all the political prisoners.
> 
> Immediately after Chidambaram's statement, authorities released senior separatist Yasin Malik who had been detained in early June, police said.
> 
> Most parts of Srinagar were under strict curfew on Wednesday after Muslim separatists opposed to Indian rule in the region called on residents to hold protests.
> 
> In other Muslim-majority towns where the curfew was not in force, a strike called by separatists to at protests the deaths brought daily life to a standstill, witnesses said.
> 
> In Pampore town, 15 kilometres (nine miles), south of Srinagar, a young protester was wounded on Wednesday when security forces opened fire to quell a demonstration, police said.
> 
> Anti-India sentiments run deep in Kashmir, where Muslim militants have fought a 20-year insurgency in Indian Kashmir against rule from New Delhi.
> 
> The mountainous region, held in part by Pakistan and India but claimed in full by both, has been the cause of two of the three wars the countries have fought since independence from Britain more than half a century ago.




Ok where were these "protestors" when two days back a mother daughter were killed in cold blood by the terrorists..?

Oh yes I got it.. only if the sec forces do anything protests will happen because they know the security forces dont shoot back.

But these freedom fighters,they will jus pump two bullets in the forehead of those who dare protest against them.

Like Abu sab when he said He has no sympathy for the Hindu Pundits, my feelings are reciprocated for these separatists.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ejaz007

*New death sparks protests in Held Kashmir*

SRINAGAR: Thousands of people poured on to the streets of Indian-held Kashmir on Wednesday after another protester died, taking the toll of two months violence to 64, said the police. The teenager wounded had been admitted in a Srinagar hospital on Monday and passed away on Wednesday. The witnesses said that the boy had taken a sound beating by the federal paramilitary forces during a protest against the Indian occupation. afp

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## karan.1970

Gounder said:


> Ok where were these "protestors" when two days back a mother daughter were killed in cold blood by the terrorists..?



Dont you know they were killed by the Indian Army as per the Moderators of this forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pride

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i stand by my words, because that's how things really did transpire
> 
> *i have no sympathy at all for those poor ''oppressed'' 'pundits'*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people with honour and pride never abandon their ancestral homelands while their neigbhours, friends & families suffer......they fled for purely economic reasons and are now integrated into hindustany society. More power to them; but they dare not call themselves ''Kashmiris'' anymore since they pledged allegiance to hindustan, the very entity that is oppressing Kashmiris today.
> 
> we can see what this oppression is leading to; a lot of anger and resentment
> 
> 
> for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction



Thanks for showing your true colour... I wish IA has same feelings for "Separatists" and show them the door for Hell or some Azad Nation (same as hell).. down to your statement

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nihat

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Maybe it did only to pundits who ran away on their own will. Not to Kashmiris of Kashmir, who were born in Kashmir, live in Kashmir, and will likely die honourably in Kashmir.



That is frankly speaking disgusting. Kashmir was a secular region where Buddhists , Shia's , Hindus and Sikhs lived in peace and prospertiy for centuries together.

You tell me , what would you have done if a group of 5-6 masked men with guns came and ransacked your house, slapped you around and threatned to kill you and your kids if you did not leave immidiatly. Would you not move to save your family, especially if you live in a region where none of the members of a different community come out to support you.

What we see today is protesting is only Kashmiri Sunni Muslims, a very select band of people who never even raised an eyebrow when ethnic cleansing of the region was ongoing (this was done by Sunni Muslims only). These people don't deserve any sympathy and they should be shown for what they are i.e. Religious extremists. India gives them azadi and they'll go establish a sanctuary of global terrorism which would instigate violence as a legitimate means of pushing a democracy and ethnic cleansing as a way of life.

In the Indian freedom movement , the Hindus' , Muslims , Sikhs and Christians fought together in a non-violent way to get rid of the british. What's happening today in Kashmir is a violent war based on religion and hatred , these people don't recognize unity of faiths , they feed of violence.

Indian army is there only because of a systematic genocide that was happeing under the guise of "Azadi" , if the stone pelters go to school and terrorists lay down arms then there is no reason not to talk. In fact India , Pakistan and leaders of Kashmir were involved in a composite dialouge.

However, as it stands today - I have no sympathy for those who don't respect other faiths and staunchly oppose any freedom for perpatrators of hate, intolerance and violence. 

If they are so desirous of peace , they may leave for Pakistan immidiatly and India would be happy to pay the compensation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

Nihat said:


> That is frankly speaking disgusting. Kashmir was a secular region where Buddhists , Shia's , Hindus and Sikhs lived in peace and prospertiy for centuries together.
> 
> You tell me , what would you have done if a group of 5-6 masked men with guns came and ransacked your house, slapped you around and threatned to kill you and your kids if you did not leave immidiatly. Would you not move to save your family, especially if you live in a region where none of the members of a different community come out to support you.
> 
> What we see today is protesting is only Kashmiri Sunni Muslims, a very select band of people who never even raised an eyebrow when ethnic cleansing of the region was ongoing (this was done by Sunni Muslims only). These people don't deserve any sympathy and they should be shown for what they are i.e. Religious extremists. India gives them azadi and they'll go establish a sanctuary of global terrorism which would instigate violence as a legitimate means of pushing a democracy and ethnic cleansing as a way of life.
> 
> In the Indian freedom movement , the Hindus' , Muslims , Sikhs and Christians fought together in a non-violent way to get rid of the british. What's happening today in Kashmir is a violent war based on religion and hatred , these people don't recognize unity of faiths , they feed of violence.
> 
> Indian army is there only because of a systematic genocide that was happeing under the guise of "Azadi" , if the stone pelters go to school and terrorists lay down arms then there is no reason not to talk. In fact India , Pakistan and leaders of Kashmir were involved in a composite dialouge.
> 
> However, as it stands today - I have no sympathy for those who don't respect other faiths and staunchly oppose any freedom for perpatrators of hate, intolerance and violence.
> 
> If they are so desirous of peace , they may leave for Pakistan immidiatly and India would be happy to pay the compensation.



Wow..!

BTW, care to define "systematic genocide that was happeing under the guise of "Azadi"" and "ethnic cleansing of the region"


----------



## Pride

xeric said:


> Wow..!
> 
> BTW, care to define "systematic genocide that was happeing under the guise of "Azadi"" and "ethnic cleansing of the region"



Dont you know about forceful migration of Kashmir Pundits and killing/threating of Sikhs in Valley by your freedom fighters? Please google it. It has been framed in all Muslims world as opressions of Muslims in Kashmir where before 1987, 40% of Hindus/Sikhs stays.


----------



## Xeric

Pride said:


> Dont you know about forceful migration of Kashmir Pundits and killing/threating of Sikhs in Valley by your freedom fighters? Please google it. It has been framed in all Muslims world as opressions of Muslims in Kashmir where before 1987, 40% of Hindus/Sikhs stays.



How would i know it, i am the only toddler around here...

BTW, my question is still unanswered and also would you please enlighten us that does this ethnic cleansing and systematic genocide also include the heinous crimes by the IA?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pride

xeric said:


> How would i know it, i am the only toddler around here...


Whatsoever your rank here in PDF but if you ask such simple questions then answers will come in the same way.



> BTW, my question is still unanswered and also would you please enlighten us that does this ethnic cleansing and systematic genocide also include the heinous crimes by the IA?



Read following link and see the displaced families and migration of Kashmiri pandits from Kashmir to give Kashmir Independance a religious color.
Panun Kashmir: A Homeland for the Kashmiri Pandits

Nopes, we dont count killing of your Freedom fighters as ethnic cleansing nor we beat our chest saying in world forums for atrocities against Muslims similar to Palestine.


----------



## toppys

xeric said:


> How would i know it, i am the only toddler around here...
> 
> BTW, my question is still unanswered and also would you please enlighten us that does this ethnic cleansing and systematic genocide also include the heinous crimes by the IA?



When we start including everything we start getting good solutions.


----------



## toppys

xeric said:


> Bangkok Post : New death sparks protests in Indian Kashmir
> 
> *New death sparks protests in Kashmir*
> 
> * Published: 26/08/2010 at 12:56 AM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Kashmiri women mourn at the funeral of Umar Qayoom, 13, in Srinagar. Thousands of people poured on to the streets of Indian Kashmir summer capital Srinagar on Wednesday after another protester died, taking the toll in two months of violence to 64, police said. _
> 
> Thousands of people poured on to the streets of Indian Kashmir summer capital Srinagar on Wednesday after another protester died, taking the toll in two months of violence to 64, police said.
> 
> The teenager who died in hospital on Wednesday had been admitted on Monday. Witnesses said he had been beaten by federal paramilitary forces during a protest against Indian rule.
> 
> His family said he had also been tortured by police in custody.
> 
> Police said they were investigating the death, which brought thousands of locals out on the streets of Srinagar's Soura district chanting slogans.
> 
> Later some of the protesters, chanting "blood for blood" and "Go India, go back", set fire to a police vehicle and a private vehicle parked near a police station, witnesses said.
> 
> Police fired live ammunition, teargas and swung batons to disperse the protesters and in the ensuing clashes 12 demonstrators were hurt, police said.
> 
> The scenic Kashmir region has been under rolling curfews to contain deadly protests that began with the killing on June 11 of a teenage student in Srinagar by a police tear-gas shell.
> 
> India's home minister P. Chidambaram regretted Wednesday that New Delhi was not able to stop the unrest.
> 
> "We are concerned that we have not been able to stop the vicious cycle in which that state is caught," he said in an address to police chiefs of all the Indian states in New Delhi, according to Press Trust of India.
> 
> "However, it is my hope that, in the next few days, we would be able to find that elusive starting point from where we could reach out to the protestors, reassure them of their rights and dignity."
> 
> He said the peace and order would be restored and "the process of dialogue restarted that will lead to a solution."
> 
> Separatists opposed to Indian rule have declined to enter into fresh talks until India withdraws troops from civilian areas, repeals tough security laws and releases all the political prisoners.
> 
> Immediately after Chidambaram's statement, authorities released senior separatist Yasin Malik who had been detained in early June, police said.
> 
> Most parts of Srinagar were under strict curfew on Wednesday after Muslim separatists opposed to Indian rule in the region called on residents to hold protests.
> 
> In other Muslim-majority towns where the curfew was not in force, a strike called by separatists to at protests the deaths brought daily life to a standstill, witnesses said.
> 
> In Pampore town, 15 kilometres (nine miles), south of Srinagar, a young protester was wounded on Wednesday when security forces opened fire to quell a demonstration, police said.
> 
> Anti-India sentiments run deep in Kashmir, where Muslim militants have fought a 20-year insurgency in Indian Kashmir against rule from New Delhi.
> 
> The mountainous region, held in part by Pakistan and India but claimed in full by both, has been the cause of two of the three wars the countries have fought since independence from Britain more than half a century ago.



The picture explains why we will never leave kashmir.


----------



## sssss

Can it be simpler than this?;
We illegally occupy Kashmir?okay?
Pakistan wants it?It can try to have it,every one knows the result of the past 4 encounters..


----------



## Nihat

xeric said:


> How would i know it, i am the only toddler around here...
> 
> BTW, my question is still unanswered and also would you please enlighten us that does this ethnic cleansing and systematic genocide also include the heinous crimes by the IA?



Just look up one incident namely "The Wandhama Massacre". One of the most brutal mass murders where women and children were not spared either. 23 hindus were gunned down by "freedom fighters" , then again in 2003 , 24 hindus were shot dead and who was behind it 

surprise , surpire - "FREEDOM FIGHTERS".

and I'm not even starting to quote all the incidents from 1987 onwards.

Now , there are 2 possibilities as to who did this + 1 conspiracy theory.

Possibility 1.) - Indegenious Kashmiri Freedom fighters = Pakistan ofcourse recognizes them as "local kashmiri youth" who fight against the injustices of indian army. I wonder which revenge they were taking back in 1987 and howcome the revenge from Indian army was taken by gunning down entire families of "Kafirs".


Possibility 2.) - Pakistani infiltrators who only believed that a Muslim area i.e. Kashmir is poisined by Hindus living there and that they must be eliminated to make the region "Pak" or "pure". I'm certain though that no pakistani will like to believe this.

Now the conspiracy theory which Pakistan is particularly fond of.

Conspiracy theory --- RAW agents went to Kashmir in 1987-89 and carefully killed the hindu families there so as to ellict anti-muslim feelings in the rest of India, then they urged the Indian army to go there and eliminate the muslim population and conduct human rights violations and neither Kashmiris nor Pakistanis had anythig to do with it. It was all dirty hindu thinking and planning.

*

Bottom line is that the instigator of violence which can be Kashmiri youth or Pakistani infiltrators (take your pick) has absolutly no right to crib about subsequent use of force on them.*


----------



## Xeric

Pride said:


> Whatsoever your rank here in PDF but if you ask such simple questions then answers will come in the same way.


Yeah right!

Let's see what the omni-knowledgeable can teach us today...

Hmmm..



> Read following link and see the displaced families and migration of Kashmiri pandits from Kashmir to give Kashmir Independance a religious color.
> Panun Kashmir: A Homeland for the Kashmiri Pandits
> 
> Nopes, we dont count killing of your Freedom fighters as ethnic cleansing nor we beat our chest saying in world forums for atrocities against Muslims similar to Palestine.



So,

We have the results with us:

A link from a screwed up (indian) biased website.

A rant announcing that they dont feel proud by killing freedom fighters (while forgetting that this very thread is filled with such nonsensical posts).

And forgetting that the same kind of treatment was meted out to the Muslim population of Kashmir.


BTW, Pundits were 'taken care' of as a one time measure and this may not be termed as 'ethnic cleansing' as compared to continued, systematic and deliberate killing of Kashmiris (Muslims) by the occupational forces.

FAIL!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toppys

After considerable thought my brilliant mind came up with an 8th solution. Give all guys to pakistan and we will take all kashmiri girls. what say?


----------



## Xeric

*23 hindus were gunned down by "freedom fighters" , then again in 2003 , 24 hindus were shot dead and who was behind it *

And you still miss out those 64 INNOCENTS that have been killed by your forces since this current protest in Kashmir alone!


----------



## Gucci

xeric said:


> *23 hindus were gunned down by "freedom fighters" , then again in 2003 , 24 hindus were shot dead and who was behind it *
> 
> And you still miss out those 64 INNOCENTS that have been killed by your forces since this current protest in Kashmir alone!



killings r killings.


----------



## Xeric

Gucci said:


> killings r killings.



Well that's what i have been trying to say.

You cannot feel 'bad' about your Pundits and at the same time close your eyes when Muslims are butchered by your forces.


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Well that's what i have been trying to say.
> 
> You cannot feel 'bad' about your Pundits and at the same time close your eyes when Muslims are butchered by your forces.


Except that the Pandits were killed for being Pandits and the 'Muslims' were killed, regrettably, for creating chaos in the Valley through unlawful means. The former comes under the definition of 'genocide' while the later is a law and order situation.

Then again, a toddler is not supposed to know the nuances.


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

Can't we settle this as it is.. Half with you other half with us.


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Except that the Pandits were killed for being Pandits and the 'Muslims' were killed, regrettably, for creating chaos in the Valley through unlawful means. The former comes under the definition of 'genocide' while the later is a law and order situation.
> 
> Then again, a toddler is not supposed to know the nuances.



Yeah, stone peddlers have gone so strong that they are striking terror into the hearts of the mighty indian army which in turn justifies use of lethal force against them.

How noble can this be.

hindus are always killed without any fault and a Muslim how innocent he may be, would always be labeled with the terrorist tag!

Is that what you wanted to say..??

May be Muslims were also massacred in Gujrat as they were creating 'chaos' there.

But why should i blame you, i know i am talking to a numbskull.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RamGorur said:


> Except that the Pandits were killed for being Pandits



baseless indian sensationalist propaganda

a lot of them were brahmin, they went to hindustan knowing they'd have better economic opportunities there....

there was no ''genocide'' of pandits...that's a myth which can be tossed in the dustbin (where it belongs)

i'm more concerned about today, and the condition of Kashmiris being harassed, threatened, beaten and even shot dead by the security forces of the increasingly troublesome neighbour country




> and the 'Muslims' were killed, regrettably, for creating chaos in the Valley through unlawful means.



the act of public protest is very undemocratic! How dare they protest at being occupied and having their neighbours, friends and relatives killed or maimed 



> The former comes under the definition of 'genocide' while the later is a law and order situation.



BULL-SHYTE




> Then again, a toddler is not supposed to know the nuances.



are you the toddler? come back when you are out of your denial....we will guide and help you during this metamorphosisical process

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## EjazR

^^^^If pandits had such great economic oppurtunities, then why are they living in refugee camps as was shown recently in Al Jazeeera?

The myth of Brahmins control everything is just that....a myth

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EjazR

xeric said:


> How would i know it, i am the only toddler around here...
> 
> BTW, my question is still unanswered and also would you please enlighten us that does this ethnic cleansing and systematic genocide also include the heinous crimes by the IA?



Genocide was what the Pakistani army did in bengal. Systematic killing of Bengalis at a mass scale.

While IA has indulged in HR violations no doubt, it would not be ethnic clensing because the valley which was 90% muslim before 89 is now 97% muslim.
In an ethnic clensing the percentage of the targeted population goes down, not up.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

EjazR said:


> ^^^^If pandits had such great economic oppurtunities, then why are they living in refugee camps as was shown recently in Al Jazeeera?
> 
> The myth of Brahmins control everything is just that....a myth



the same Al Jazeera that also reported




> The clashes come a day after a Muslim protester was killed demonstrating against alleged attacks on Muslims by Hindus in the Jammu region of Jammu-Kashmir.
> 
> Sajjad Haider, editor-in-chief of the Kashmir Observer told Al Jazeera that in Jammu, "where the agitation has been alarming, Muslims have been targeted by right-wing Hindu groups".
> 
> "The unfortunate part is that the government of India has been totally caught off guard and the situation has developed into full-scale confrontations.




Al Jazeera English - CENTRAL/S. ASIA - Second day of protests in Kashmir


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> hindus are always killed without any fault and a Muslim how innocent he may be, would always be labeled with the terrorist tag!
> 
> Is that what you wanted to say..??


Nope. The word 'Muslim' in my post was in quotes. What quotes mean in English language is apparently lost on you.

But then, toddlers will be toddlers.


----------



## RamGorur

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> a lot of them were brahmin, they went to hindustan knowing they'd have better economic opportunities there....


Yes, thats why they live in refugee camps.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RamGorur said:


> Nope. But then, toddlers will be toddlers.



we can see based by your avatar!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RamGorur said:


> Yes, thats why they live in refugee camps.



most of those refugee ''camps'' are in delhi 


seems that the people really needing refugee camps are not getting the attention they would require


----------



## RamGorur

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> the same Al Jazeera that also reported
> 
> 
> Al Jazeera English - CENTRAL/S. ASIA - Second day of protests in Kashmir


Yes, that Al Jazeera. How does this report proves the other report, as mentioned by Ejazji, wrong?

It is nice to see that you have successfully inoculated yourself against logic.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RamGorur said:


> Yes, that Al Jazeera. How does this report proves the other report, as mentioned by Ejazji, wrong?
> 
> It is nice to see that you have successfully inoculated yourself against logic.



just trying to broaden the scope of things so they are not artificially ''tilted'' in favour of poor oppressed ''Kashmiri''pundits in new delhi


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Nope. The word 'Muslim' in my post was in quotes. What quotes mean in English language is apparently lost on you.
> 
> But then, toddlers will be toddlers.



Does that really matter?

And your quotes were ignored (rather went for a six) when you used the word regrettably thus showing 'empathy' towards those who were killed.

You either feel bad about Muslims being killed or you justify the killings of 'Muslims' by the IA as they cause 'chaos' - you just ripped Kashmiris of their legitimate right to protest thus spitting over your secularism and democracy (read the 'largest' around here).

So, these two stances cant go together!

But like i said, dimwits can be of confused minds who usually find it difficult to decide upon certain very lucid matters.


----------



## RamGorur

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> just trying to broaden the scope of things so they are not artificially ''tilted'' in favour of poor oppressed ''Kashmiri''pundits in new delhi


Ahh....I see. The same foot-in-mouth syndrome. The communal riot, that you have posted, was actually a reaction to some misguided Muslims' agitation against building temporary shelters for Hindu pilgrim's on their way to Amarnath. Those regrettable killings were a backlash.

Talk of self-goal.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RamGorur said:


> Ahh....I see. The same foot-in-mouth syndrome. The communal riot, that you have posted, was actually a reaction to some misguided Muslims' agitation against building temporary shelters for Hindu pilgrim's on their way to Amarnath. Those regrettable killings were a backlash.
> 
> Talk of self-goal.



what about ongoing regrettable killings --especially in Sri Nagar? Those are a backlash to exercising the very democratic rights you claim to espouse -while reality on the ground is quite different

with regards to that incident, it was misguided hindus who were torching the homes of Muslim Kashmiris; they were of the view that they were entitled to lands that did not belong to them

(sounds familiar)


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Does that really matter?


Hell of a lot. Thats why quotes were invented/introduced. However a toddler may be excused for thinking that quotes are meant for decorating words.


> And your quotes were ignored (rather went for a six) when you used the word regrettably thus showing 'empathy' towards those who were killed.


Those quotes meant that I am using the word for the sake of an argument. 

And feeling empathy for the suffering of any living being is human nature. Any loss of life, for any reason is always regrettable.



> You either feel bad about Muslims being killed or you justify the killings of 'Muslims' by the IA as they cause 'chaos' - you just ripped Kashmiris of their legitimate right to protest thus spitting over your secularism and democracy (read the 'largest' around here).
> 
> So, these two stances cant go together!


Actually there is no contradiction. One can regret a loss of life (whatever be the religious disposition of the deceased) and at the same time be critical of the act of the deceased.

One comes from a feeling of empathy and the other one comes from a sense of right and wrong. 

Since you are a toddler you are yet to learn how an adult thinks. Or may be this provides an insight why a recent Pew poll found majority Pakistani in favour of Talibani style of dispensing law.

PS: If quotes don't matter why are you using them now?



> But like i said, dimwits can be of confused minds who usually find it difficult to decide upon certain very lucid matters.


Good to know that you are self-aware.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> we can see based by your avatar!



Actually it was too subtle for the thickhead to understand that the use of toddler was infact a superlative degree of sarcasm basing on his avatar.

Tsk...tsk...

Damn nincompoops..!!!


----------



## RamGorur

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> what about ongoing regrettable killings --especially in Sri Nagar? Those are a backlash to exercising the very democratic rights you claim to espouse -while reality on the ground is quite different


So now stone pelting, setting government properties on fire, attacking law enforcement officers etc are considered as democratic right in Pakistan. 

It figures.


> with regards to that incident, it was misguided hindus who were torching the homes of Muslim Kashmiris; they were of the view that they were entitled to lands that did not belong to them
> 
> (sounds familiar)


Views don't hurt, my friend.


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Actually it was too subtle for the thickhead to understand that the use of toddler was infact a superlative degree of sarcasm basing on his avatar.
> 
> Tsk...tsk...
> 
> Damn nincompoops..!!!


Oh the wit. It's brutal.


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Hell of a lot. Thats why quotes were invented/introduced. However a toddler may be excused for thinking that quotes are meant for decorating words.
> 
> Those quotes meant that I am using the word for the sake of an argument.
> 
> And feeling empathy for the suffering of any living being is human nature. Any loss of life, for any reason is always regrettable.
> 
> 
> Actually there is no contradiction. One can regret a loss of life (whatever be the religious disposition of the deceased) and at the same time be critical of the act of the deceased.
> 
> One comes from a feeling of empathy and the other one comes from a sense of right and wrong.
> 
> Since you are a toddler you are yet to learn how an adult thinks. Or may be this provides an insight why a recent Pew poll found majority Pakistani in favour of Talibani style of dispensing law.
> 
> PS: If quotes don't matter why are you using them now?
> 
> 
> Good to know that you are self-aware.



And that's it....








N.B. i have been using quotes in 95% of my posts.


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> And that's it....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> N.B. *i have been using quotes in 95% of my posts*.


Why, is there a competition on, to be the forum joker?


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> Why, is there a competition on, to be the forum joker?



Well, your avatar says it more than you does, oh wait.. may be not - both, your avatar and posts says it all.

Ouch..!!


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> Well, your avatar says it more than you does, oh wait.. may be not - both, your avatar and posts says it all.
> 
> Ooch..!!


Oh what a brutal come back. I am bleeding.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RamGorur said:


> So now stone pelting, setting government properties on fire, attacking law enforcement officers etc are considered as democratic right in Pakistan.



Not at all. But it has happened on occasion. But Pakistan is not a disputed territory. People can stand in front of press clubs shouting slogans, people can block streets and protest to their hearts content -even if it is to the inconvenience of motorists & passers-by.

Some will get arrested if things get out of hand, but they wont be shot or maimed; they wont be threatened; and curfews wont be imposed on them. Text messaging services wont be blocked, etc. 

This is a silly example you brought up. Kashmiris do not appreciate the occupation; and they have no avenues or ways to channel their frustration and anger. 

as shallow as this may sound -- hindustan is a large enough country; you have more than enough land on your plate to worry about. Why not just prepare yourselves on HOW to deal with Kashmir when Kashmiris DO inevitably succeed in attaining their existential right to self-determination?

Or do you think status quo is sustainable for the worlds largest secular/democracy



> Views don't hurt, my friend.



Oh, I agree; except when you express them and receive bullets and laathi-charge in return


----------



## Xeric

Ouch, so it did break something...


----------



## Xeric

RamGorur said:


> So now stone pelting, setting government properties on fire, attacking law enforcement officers etc are considered as democratic right in Pakistan.
> 
> It figures.



i wonder why didnt they kill a few when protesters shattered shop windows, windows at police headquarters, torched police cruisers and smashed windows with baseball bats and hammers in Toronto during the G-20 protest.

i dont know why the Turkish Police did not use lethal force against stone pelters who went for the israeli consulate in Turkey against the flotilla massacre.

i dont understand why didnt they meted out the same treatment to the protesters who killed (unwillingly though) three people when they burnt down Athens Bank in Greece during rioting over harsh austerity measures.



Oh wait..i know why...all the above protesters weren't throwing stones on sissies (read indian police /army) who cant do anything except committing acts of cowardice by using live bullets against STONE pelters!!

My foot and half to the 'largest' democracy.....!!!


----------



## karan.1970

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Not at all. But it has happened on occasion. But Pakistan is not a disputed territory. People can stand in front of press clubs shouting slogans, people can block streets and protest to their hearts content -even if it is to the inconvenience of motorists & passers-by.
> 
> Some will get arrested if things get out of hand, but they wont be shot or maimed; they wont be threatened; and curfews wont be imposed on them. Text messaging services wont be blocked, etc.
> 
> This is a silly example you brought up. Kashmiris do not appreciate the occupation; and they have no avenues or ways to channel their frustration and anger.



A lot of difference between people shouting slogans and people attacking security forces and destroying public property. And we all saw what happens, when security forces do not enforce the writ of law. And I do mean Karachi here.. People die then too. Not too much of a difference between people getting killed due to Police action or Police In action...





Abu Zolfiqar said:


> as shallow as this may sound -- hindustan is a large enough country; you have more than enough land on your plate to worry about. Why not just prepare yourselves on HOW to deal with Kashmir when Kashmiris DO inevitably succeed in attaining their existential right to self-determination?


As far as we are concerned, Kashmiris are one group of people in India. And any part of India will be decided on by all the people of India and not only one group. Thats how it works in a democracy. 



Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Or do you think status quo is sustainable for the worlds largest secular/democracy


We are definitely not in a status quo. Check the trends over last 10 years. Have been posted multiple times in this forum.









Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Oh, I agree; except when you express them and receive bullets and laathi-charge in return



Well.. If you express your views by means of attacking security forces in a riot like situation, you are bound to get hurt. Its unfortunate that use of non lethal riot control gear is not very prevelant in India. Hopefully these events will bring about a change in this area..


----------



## RamGorur

xeric said:


> i wonder why didnt they kill a few when protesters shattered shop windows, windows at police headquarters, torched police cruisers and smashed windows with baseball bats and hammers in Toronto during the G-20 protest.
> 
> i dont know why the Turkish Police did not use lethal force against stone pelters who went for the israeli consulate in Turkey against the flotilla massacre.
> 
> i dont understand why didnt they meted out the same treatment to the protesters who killed (unwillingly though) three people when they burnt down Athens Bank in Greece during rioting over harsh austerity measures.


The scale of violence in all the cited cases doesn&#8217;t compare to that perpetrated by those handful Kashmiris. In none of those cases near about 1500 law enforcement personnel were injured. 

On another thought, it's funny that you should mention, of all the countries, Turkey. I guess you have forgotten what General Zia did to the Palestinian settlers in Turkey.


> Oh wait..i know why...all the above protesters weren't throwing stones on sissies (read indian police /army) who cant do anything except committing acts of cowardice by using live bullets against STONE pelters!!


If Indian police/army started using live bullets as charitably as PA did against the Bengalis, Kashmir would have become a Valley of corpse.


> My foot and half to the 'largest' democracy.....!!!


Foot and half, huh? What happened to the other half. Did you step on your own mental excreta, slip and end up inserting it in your rectal orifice? You know, that would explain a whole lot of things.


----------



## Pride

xeric said:


> Yeah right!
> 
> Let's see what the omni-knowledgeable can teach us today...
> 
> Hmmm..


Ohh I see an unnecessary "pride" of a status holder of PDF.. 



> So,
> 
> We have the results with us:
> 
> A link from a screwed up (indian) biased website.
> 
> A rant announcing that they dont feel proud by killing freedom fighters (while forgetting that this very thread is filled with such nonsensical posts).


 Killing protester or rioters is one thing and target killing of Hindu/Sikh minorities by so called "Freedom Fighters" is another thing.. I hope you understand the same.. wait you are Think tank .. how would you not know this 



> And forgetting that the same kind of treatment was meted out to the Muslim population of Kashmir.
> 
> 
> BTW, Pundits were *'taken care' *of as a one time measure and this may not be termed as 'ethnic cleansing' as compared to continued, systematic and deliberate killing of Kashmiris (Muslims) by the occupational forces.
> 
> FAIL!



Here you come up with your dubious thought process and hypocrisy. Kashmiri is Kashmiri and no Muslims and Hindus.. If you are talking about Kashmiri Independance then you have to consider the minorities in that area.. Otherwise you are nothing but behaving on religious bigotry like Geelani.. Go think.. Think tank.....


----------



## wap7

Solution 8: Wipe Pakistan off the map. Split it into several smaller countries. It is already terror infested anyway. We'd be doing everyone in Pakistan and India a huge favour.


----------



## Xeric

Pride said:


> Ohh I see an unnecessary "pride" of a status holder of PDF..


The 'salutation' was directed at the other guy.

But then how would you know, you all are from the same league to which ramgrour belongs to.

Too bad.



> Killing protester or rioters is one thing and target killing of Hindu/Sikh minorities by so called "Freedom Fighters" is another thing.. I hope you understand the same..



Killing whom ever without (justified) cause is regrettable. Hindu Muslims do not figure out in this case. The issue is that you people have been regretting the loss of a Punditian life whereas you shamelessly feel pride over killing of innocents during the riots - i am not taking in consideration the freedom fighters for now. Killing or fighting them is a separate issue, let's just focus on those protesters whose only crime was to throw a few stones on one of the largest military of the world!

And then a genius on this thread claims that the scale of rioting differ in both the case (Kashmir and the West), while forgetting that it was these criminal killings that fueled the protest that it had prolonged out of your control.



> wait you are Think tank .. how would you not know this



Oh, how would you know that..?? Wow...you must have special powers to see that blue tag, right there. Hmmm...muttonheads are growing smarter with the increased post count..!!




> Here you come up with your dubious thought process and hypocrisy. Kashmiri is Kashmiri and no Muslims and Hindus.. If you are talking about Kashmiri Independance then you have to consider the minorities in that area.. Otherwise you are nothing but behaving on religious bigotry like Geelani.. Go think.. Think tank.....



Lolzzz...

An e-warrior belonging to a country where minorities have been butchered in the past and still continue tells me how to deal with minorities!! Ouch, my stomach aches!!

Ok, anywaz, yes Kashmiri is a Kashmiri, no Muslim no hindu. Moreover, i have never exactly longed for an independent Kashmir, i have not even asked for Kashmir joining Pakistan!! The only thing that i want is that the Kashmiris MUST be given the right of self-determination and they LONE should decide their course of life!! Not you, not me!

i have been writing this all over this thread, but alas boneheads would remain boneheads.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pride

xeric said:


> The 'salutation' was directed at the other guy.
> 
> But then how would you know, you all are from the same league to which ramgrour belongs to.
> 
> Too bad.



Lets drop it here as this was due to confusion..



> Killing whom ever without (justified) cause is regrettable. Hindu Muslims do not figure out in this case. The issue is that you people have been regretting the loss of a Punditian life whereas you shamelessly feel pride over killing of innocents during the riots - i am not taking in consideration the freedom fighters for now. Killing or fighting them is a separate issue, let's just focus on those protesters whose only crime was to throw a few stones on one of the largest military of the world!
> 
> And then a genius on this thread claims that the scale of rioting differ in both the case (Kashmir and the West), while forgetting that it was these criminal killings that fueled the protest that it had prolonged out of your control.


Now as you are talking sensibly l must say that we (or specifically I) condemn any kind of killings as loss of human is human irrespective of religion. This is the only reason it frustates me when Kashmir uprising is *'colored'* religiously as killing of Muslims. It is also observed that all sympathisers of Kashmiris deliberatly miss Kashmir Pundits and Sikhs community while they believe whole J&K (Jammu and Laddakh) is on uprising. 
Regarding killing, The only problem is the violent protest and getting in return of favor. many of times these killings are framed by "Freedom fighters" or Separatist to serve their purpose as well.



> Oh, how would you know that..?? Wow...you must have special powers to see that blue tag, right there. Hmmm...muttonheads are growing smarter with the increased post count..!!



Better try to hit me harder as this did not felt an impact.. I am visiting this forum for almost 3-4 years and joined exact 1 year ago to respond stupidity. Hence increasing post counts and getting thanks is not in my agenda..

I have already seen here in this forum reaching on top without using punctuations or posting in logical section.. Dont make me to believe that you are in the same league..



> Lolzzz...
> 
> An e-warrior belonging to a country where minorities have been butchered in the past and still continue tells me how to deal with minorities!! Ouch, my stomach aches!!


Well, we butchered the Minorities and still it grew up to a satisfiable levels while same is vice versa from your side.. Yups you should look back and take some tablets for your stomach aches. 



> *Ok, anywaz, yes Kashmiri is a Kashmiri, no Muslim no hindu. Moreover, i have never exactly longed for an independent Kashmir, i have not even asked for Kashmir joining Pakistan!! The only thing that i want is that the Kashmiris MUST be given the right of self-determination and they LONE should decide their course of life!! Not you, not me!*
> 
> i have been writing this all over this thread, but alas boneheads would remain boneheads.



This is what I expect from a Thinktank (I am serious this time).. Please convey the same to other Elite Member who does care for only one relgion..
I am also up for the cause and hence criticize always stance of GoI and GoP.. No body wants army or terrorist on their ground.. Let them live.. Self determination or Independance is a political matter which can be handled lately but "ATLEAST" let them live...


----------



## Xeric

Pride said:


> Lets drop it here as this was due to confusion..







> Now as you are talking sensibly



Oooooooo...!!! (like the one in that intel i3/5/7 ad), i am flattered..!!



> l must say that we (or specifically I) condemn any kind of killings as loss of human is human irrespective of religion.


That's commendable, but then i dont see your fellow countrymen doing the same.



> This is the only reason it frustates me when Kashmir uprising is *'colored'* religiously as killing of Muslims.


Well that's natural. If only Muslims are being killed presently, the color and flavor would automatically set in.

Ever wonder why only Muslims are throwing stones..?? Only if you people had 'wondered', things would have been much better.

Now what frustrates me is that fact that why would a need arise for these Kashmiris to protest or take stones in their hands? Have you people ever given a thought towards this? No! instead you are busy justifying killings of innocents stone pelters. You know, that's reactive, i wish you people could have been proactive - not giving any reason to the Kashmiris to take law into their hands.



> It is also observed that all sympathisers of Kashmiris deliberatly miss Kashmir Pundits and Sikhs community while they believe whole J&K (Jammu and Laddakh) is on uprising.



Arent we talking of 2010?

Even then Sikhs and Pundits are 'happy' in the present status quo, Muslims are not, so there isnt much concern from that corner. This should give your policy makers some food for though, but then it has failed to do so repeatedly.



> Regarding killing, The only problem is the violent protest and getting in return of favor. many of times these killings are framed by "Freedom fighters" or Separatist to serve their purpose as well.



Again the fault lies with your policies. Banning SMS, FB etc etc would only yield bitterness and a ripened opportunity for your terrorists and our freedom fighters (i use 'ours' loosely) to make the most out of the situation.

How guud it had been if the Kashmiri youth had rejected (the alleged) support from ISI and fighters and instead had listened to your batons. We call it winning hearts and minds, i dont know how it is used in your part of the world.



> Better try to hit me harder as this did not felt an impact..


May be you want that i should start using 'rectal orifice', but then i dont come that low.



> I am visiting this forum for almost 3-4 years and joined exact 1 year ago to respond stupidity. Hence increasing post counts and getting thanks is not in my agenda..
> 
> I have already seen here in this forum reaching on top without using punctuations or posting in logical section.. Dont make me to believe that you are in the same league..



If you have been actually visiting PDF since the last 3-4 years and you still believe what you have told me, then i must say that you are either lieing or are gravely mistaken in your assessment!



> Well, we butchered the Minorities and still it grew up to a satisfiable levels while same is vice versa from your side.. Yups you should look back and take some tablets for your stomach aches.



Seriously, you dont want me turning this thread into one of those threads where we would post so many links (regarding atrocities against minorities) that some indian started to believe that they are no more one, but then you have been visiting this forum since the last 3-4 years, who could know this better than you 




> This is what I expect from a Thinktank (I am serious this time).. Please convey the same to other Elite Member who does care for only one relgion..



See, it's natural for you people that you start praising those who fits in your school of thought. Anywaz, i dont influence people around here, every member has its own opinion and possesses the right to voice the same.



> I am also up for the cause and hence criticize always stance of GoI and GoP.. No body wants army or terrorist on their ground.. Let them live.. Self determination or Independance is a political matter which can be handled lately but "ATLEAST" let them live...



i do agree to an extent, but then these two things are quite interlinked. Life and military dont exactly go together.


----------



## Pride

xeric said:


> Oooooooo...!!! (like the one in that intel i3/5/7 ad), i am flattered..!!






> That's commendable, but then i dont see your fellow countrymen doing the same.


 Same can be said to your fellow countrymen as I never heard coherent voice over this matter. Few say that Kashmir should be part of Pakistan and Few advocates a separate country but all of them supports "Morally" to "Freedom fighters" which in turns are violent to Kashmiris only (Recently one mother and daughter are killed).



> Well that's natural. If only Muslims are being killed presently, the color and flavor would automatically set in.
> 
> Ever wonder why only Muslims are throwing stones..?? Only if you people had 'wondered', things would have been much better.


Here you are wrong with your logic. When you (Loosely for moral supporters of freedom fighters) will threw all minorities from the state and then say only Muslims are dying then both cant go along together.

We already 'wondered' and traced back the link for the same to camps on your side and captured conversations of so called "Azadi" leaders negotiating with some stakeolders of this uprising at your end.
Request you not to generalise every "Muslim" is part of such uprising only few who has suffered from atrocities of IA and unemployed/brainwashed youths are doing such protest. Rest are still struggling for their daily bread and butter.


> Now what frustrates me is that fact that why would a need arise for these Kashmiris to protest or take stones in their hands? Have you people ever given a thought towards this? No! instead you are busy justifying killings of innocents stone pelters. You know, that's reactive, i wish you people could have been proactive - not giving any reason to the Kashmiris to take law into their hands.



The stone pelting is nothing but a new strategy to present it less violent and used to play as victim cards. Whole world was condemning you when young brainwashed youths were holding guns in 90s and were trained in your side of Kashmir. I dont see anything except a new strategy while these poor youths are getting killed again who dont see the bigger picture.



> Arent we talking of 2010?


 Does it matter which year we are talking to? Aren't we talking a 62 year old case? Even going by your logic Protests are there for only 20 years so if you pull out that movement then we can take our army back from the area.


> Even then Sikhs and Pundits are 'happy' in the present status quo, Muslims are not, so there isnt much concern from that corner. This should give your policy makers some food for though, but then it has failed to do so repeatedly.



Are you kidding me? Thousands of Kashmiri pundits who are living in exile are 'happy' with "status quo".. Nopes.. Never.. .. Sikhs are threatened by separatist/freedom fighters and they are happy..

Regarding Muslims are not happy, It is their fault they could not involve Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists in this protest. If they could involve all of them then this case may be seen as political movement otherwise it is nothing but choice of religious biased country, which can never be justified or fullfilled by GoI. 



> Again the fault lies with your policies. Banning SMS, FB etc etc would only yield bitterness and a ripened opportunity for your terrorists and our freedom fighters (i use 'ours' loosely) to make the most out of the situation.


Policies are Policymaker's choice and no one can certain that one Policy will succeed or fail but its intent is always to maintain nation's security and integrity. If few people dont like can't help. When I was in Jammu my Mobile was not working, I was frustated but respect their decision as per situation.


> How guud it had been if the Kashmiri youth had rejected (the alleged) support from ISI and fighters and instead had listened to your batons. We call it winning hearts and minds, i dont know how it is used in your part of the world.


I can present you thousands of case where local Kashmiris either killed or informed such freedom fighters but leave it to you to google it. Even in 1965 war, Local Kashmiri informed IA regarding your movement. Your winning of their (only few) heart is because you are "Morally" (Arms and Finances too) supporting their illegitimate demand and we are not while others are happilly part of Indian stream line (This years civil services topper is Kashmiri ).


> May be you want that i should start using 'rectal orifice', but then i dont come that low.
> 
> 
> 
> If you have been actually visiting PDF since the last 3-4 years and you still believe what you have told me, then i must say that you are either lieing or are gravely mistaken in your assessment!


 No discussion is required on my existence on this Forum.. As I found you were measuring me with low post counts hence that has been brought up.. I drop it here as this is irrelevant to the topic..


> Seriously, you dont want me turning this thread into one of those threads where we would post so many links (regarding atrocities against minorities) that some indian started to believe that they are no more one, but then you have been visiting this forum since the last 3-4 years, who could know this better than you



You set the directions of discussion claiming India's minority oppression.. I didn't.. lets leave it for Kids to fight.. 



> See, it's natural for you people that you start praising those who fits in your school of thought. Anywaz, i dont influence people around here, every member has its own opinion and possesses the right to voice the same.


 Well, I am not the one who just discuss everything with blind patriotism when something is wrong it is wrong.. perspective matters and not flag of a nation. I dont want to impose my ideas/thoughts on anyone but what I want to know to see the things from multidimensional perspective. 


> i do agree to an extent, but then these two things are quite interlinked. Life and military dont exactly go together.


 You know what, I have been to Jammu/Kashmir both area and the worst thing is when you walk among Armed personnels. I have seen aged people are working as carrier of our stuffs or asking for some money. This is the reason I hate stance of GoP and GoI both. Pakistan does not stop sending freedom fighters and India does not retreat their army the only sufferers are normal people. Politics is sad for normal people.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

Pride said:


> Same can be said to your fellow countrymen as I never heard coherent voice over this matter. Few say that Kashmir should be part of Pakistan and Few advocates a separate country but all of them supports "Morally" to "Freedom fighters" which in turns are violent to Kashmiris only (Recently one mother and daughter are killed).


There shouldnt be any doubt in your minds that our support would always be there for the Kashmiris. We support their stance and their freedom struggle. How we do it, is open to all. You yet have to catch a living idiot who would come up and say that he was sent in by us into Kashmir to fight the occupational forces.



> Here you are wrong with your logic. When you (Loosely for moral supporters of freedom fighters) will threw all minorities from the state and then say only Muslims are dying then both cant go along together.


Who controls (IO) Kashmir? You or the freedom fighters? Let's be clear on this first. If it is the former than your forces must feel shame for not providing the Kashmiris (non-Muslims in this case) with protection and if Kashmir is under the control of freedom fighters, then WTF are you people doing in there since the last 6 decades..??!!

Moreover, when was the last time a minority was 'thrown out' of Kashmir by the freedom fighters? And if we go by your definition and understanding then by now J & K would have been a ONLY Muslim state..?


> We already 'wondered' and traced back the link for the same to camps on your side and captured conversations of so called "Azadi" leaders negotiating with some stakeolders of this uprising at your end.



Yeah right!

Give me something better.

You would say and we would accept?

Come on man give us a break. Every second day we see a news piece 'educating' us that some 'terrorists' tried to cross and there was some firing and some went dead and the others vanished..i mean, it has become boring now! Use that ingenuity of yours.



> Request you not to generalise every "Muslim" is part of such uprising only few who has suffered from atrocities of IA and unemployed/brainwashed youths are doing such protest. Rest are still struggling for their daily bread and butter.


Not exactly.

The case infact is the other way round, max youth (unemployed or brainwashed) is making use of those stones and only a few who have found 'peace' are resting at homes.

Had it been the way you have told, then this stone-throwing-business would have stopped by now after 64 people got killed!!

The issue is not programmed but an indigenous movement.




> The stone pelting is nothing but a new strategy to present it less violent and used to play as victim cards.


See, like i said, that day you would stop think like this and strat thinking ABOUT the Kashmiris, things would get better, but with this dictatorial attitude, things can only get worse, as happening currently.



> Whole world was condemning you when young brainwashed youths were holding guns in 90s and were trained in your side of Kashmir. I dont see anything except a new strategy while these poor youths are getting killed again who dont see the bigger picture.


Gone were the days.

You and the world need to prove that we are brainwashing them. Until then, you and your world can keep their beaks shut.

TOI and hindustan times are not exactly the credible sources that could force the world to act against us.



> Are you kidding me? Thousands of Kashmiri pundits who are living in exile are 'happy' with "status quo".. Nopes.. Never.. .. Sikhs are threatened by separatist/freedom fighters and they are happy..


It seems like as if they are happy, or else they would have not stayed there, and most importantly, they wouldnt have even left their place at the first time if they had any love for the problems a general Kashmiri faces.



> Regarding Muslims are not happy, It is their fault they could not involve Hindus/Sikhs/Buddhists in this protest. If they could involve all of them then this case may be seen as political movement otherwise it is nothing but choice of religious biased country, which can never be justified or fullfilled by GoI.


Ahan, see here we differ. Why dont you try to think why it is the Muslims who are not happy?

Arent you a secular country?



> Policies are Policymaker's choice and no one can certain that one Policy will succeed or fail but its intent is always to maintain nation's security and integrity. If few people dont like can't help. When I was in Jammu my Mobile was not working, I was frustated but respect their decision as per situation.



i wish that could happen in Delhi, ill see then how many 'patriotic' hindus you people are then.



> I can present you thousands of case where local Kashmiris either killed or informed such freedom fighters but leave it to you to google it. Even in 1965 war, Local Kashmiri informed IA regarding your movement. Your winning of their (only few) heart is because you are "Morally" (Arms and Finances too) supporting their illegitimate demand and we are not while others are happilly part of Indian stream line (This years civil services topper is Kashmiri ).
> 
> No discussion is required on my existence on this Forum.. As I found you were measuring me with low post counts hence that has been brought up.. I drop it here as this is irrelevant to the topic..
> 
> 
> You set the directions of discussion claiming India's minority oppression.. I didn't.. lets leave it for Kids to fight..
> 
> 
> Well, I am not the one who just discuss everything with blind patriotism when something is wrong it is wrong.. perspective matters and not flag of a nation. I dont want to impose my ideas/thoughts on anyone but what I want to know to see the things from multidimensional perspective.
> 
> You know what, I have been to Jammu/Kashmir both area and the worst thing is when you walk among Armed personnels. I have seen aged people are working as carrier of our stuffs or asking for some money. This is the reason I hate stance of GoP and GoI both. Pakistan does not stop sending freedom fighters and India does not retreat their army the only sufferers are normal people. Politics is sad for normal people.


LATER, dude.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

*Indian Police Thrash Scribe in Srinagar​*


> Srinagar, August 29 (KMS): In occupied Kashmir, despite assurances from the authorities that journalist will be free to perform their professional duties, Indian police beat up a media reporter in Srinagar without any reason.
> 
> Riyaz Malik, a correspondent of a local daily was beaten up while he was on way to office from Raj Bagh when a party from police station Kothi Bagh stopped him near Zero Bridge without any reason.
> 
> *I told the men in uniform that I am a journalist and have a curfew pass. They abused me and thrashed me, said Malik, who received injuries on arms and other body parts.*
> 
> Last month, personnel from the same police station had roughed up a mediaman, Showkat Hamid, near Regal Chowk.
> 
> Meanwhile, the police Saturday restricted movement of journalists around the TRC ground in Srinagar saying that they had *instructions from the authorities not to allow the media-persons to move around the ground*.



http://kmsnews.org/news/indian-polic...cribe-srinagar



largest democracy??


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar




----------



## Patrician

India kabhi kashmir nahin chhodega. 

Kyun?

1. Hamare north India kee kai lifeline rivers kasmir se nikalti hain. Jinnah said "Kashmir is Pakistan's jugular". Well, kashmir is our jugular too. Water alone is a reason strategic enough to make us kill or die for kashmir.

2. Hamne jis din kashmir chhoda, us din har tom, dick and harry will raise a shout for a seperate state. India was founded on the very principle of 'unity in diversity'. That principle will be negated and then it'll be impossible for GoI to suppress voices of silly dissent.

3. Kahmiris are themselves divided about what they want. Jammu and Ladakh have no grudges whatsoever. It's only a few people in the valley who have a problem.

4. In modern world big and powerful nations do not permit redrawing of boundaries so easily. USSR case was different. They broke up from inside. Not as a result of any foreign aggression. 

SO WHAT's THE SOLUTION?

mujhe sirf ek hee realistic solution dikhta hai,

India apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). Pakistan apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). LoC will be made irrelevant permitting people to people contact just like in a single state. In short, kashmir will be united but under firm control of India and Pakistan.

A few modalities of the arrangement (such as seperate flag, constitution, currency etc.) can be worekd out. The three subjects Defence, Foreign Policy and communication will be controlled by India and Pakistan in their respective parts of the state. 

It will be a very complex and detailed solution which will require huge concessions from both India and Pakistan. 

And trust me guys India and Pakistan were willing to accept this very solution during talks between Mushy and MMS.

In the end, 

India: happy because it controls the water, the land validating the 'unity in diversity' principle

Pakistan: happy because it gives them legitimate control of their part of kashmir in an internationally recognised way. Promised better relations with India, access to Indian market and what not. Just think about the economic opportunity it will bring for Pakistan. 

Kashmiris: happy because it will give them the seperate identity they are seeking while getting economic benefits from both India and Pakistan. 

Trust me friends, isse zyada kisi bhi party (India, Pakistan or Kashmiris) ko kuch nahin mil sakta. 

Yahi ek solution bacha hai. Pasand hai toh accept karo. Nahin pasand.....well.....toh 63 saal se toh hum dekh hee rahe hain...........

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

if you think that is a viable or fair solution, then you must be smoking on some really strong shyt.


we aren't a stakeholder in Kashmir b/c we want (or care about) ''access to Indian market'' ''opportunities'' and ''what not.''

i can assure you that......as for ''unity in diversity'' i see that as not really being implemented too well. What ''unity'' are you talking about ---we can see in the news how much unity there is.


there's only one unity i'm hearing about --that is unity against indian oppression


----------



## Patrician

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> if you think that is a viable or fair solution, then you must be smoking on some really strong shyt.
> 
> 
> we aren't a stakeholder in Kashmir b/c we want (or care about) ''access to Indian market'' ''opportunities'' and ''what not.''
> 
> i can assure you that......as for ''unity in diversity'' i see that as not really being implemented too well. What ''unity'' are you talking about ---we can see in the news how much unity there is.
> 
> 
> there's only one unity i'm hearing about --that is unity against indian oppression



Ok tell me my dear friend,

Do you or your govt. or your army or whatever, have a plan of action as to how to 'free' Kashmir from 'Indian Oppression'?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## honour

Note:
1.kashmir is not for sale or donation...
2.we are not going to give pakistan an inch of Kashmir..so forget about your pathetic scenarioos.
3.Kashmir got nothing to do with hindu or muslim...its just a regional dissatisfaction which is due to some idiot leaders on both sides as well as kashmir...like gilani


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

no plan is required, Kashmiris can do it on their own; though we (civilians and those aforementioned) will continue to offer our moral support to all Kashmiris as we always have done and always will do. It is an issue that is ingrained in us, we wont just let it go.


----------



## honour

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> no plan is required, Kashmiris can do it on their own; though we (civilians and those aforementioned) will continue to offer our moral support to all Kashmiris as we always have done and always will do. It is an issue that is ingrained in us, we wont just let it go.



Moral???
i think all the money,weapons,man force come from Pakistan for this terrorism renamed as Freedom struggle...
You just don't got the guts to accept that Kashmir cant be Yours ever and you don't realize that the money you are pushing in kashmir for terrorism is just getting in sever as India wont be affected by this idiotic try.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

maybe you should yap less, and watch the video i posted. A journalist and resident of Sri Nagar (hindustany occupied Kashmir) himself is saying that Pakistan is not providing any support or money to the existentialist freedom fighters. It is a purely Kashmiri phenonmenon.


----------



## karan.1970

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> if you think that is a viable or fair solution, then you must be smoking on some really strong shyt.
> 
> 
> we aren't a stakeholder in Kashmir b/c we want (or care about) ''access to Indian market'' ''opportunities'' and ''what not.''


So the stuff mentioned is not the reason for Pakistan's involvement but the result of an amicable settlement.




Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i can assure you that......as for ''unity in diversity'' i see that as not really being implemented too well. What ''unity'' are you talking about ---we can see in the news how much unity there is.
> 
> 
> there's only one unity i'm hearing about --that is unity against indian oppression



New gets reported in both our countries and while there are issues in India in terms of regional and even religious discord can you even compare them with your own country. Considering we were diverse to begin with and you were united by religion, comparing the state of affairs, I think we have done a pretty good job of preserving that unity. After all, we are what we were at the time of independence. Bickering internally, but still *one * country externally..


----------



## karan.1970

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> maybe you should yap less, and watch the video i posted. A journalist and resident of Sri Nagar (hindustany occupied Kashmir) himself is saying that Pakistan is not providing any support or money to the existentialist freedom fighters. It is a purely Kashmiri phenonmenon.



And if another Indian journalist from Srinagar says that Pakistanys are invovled, will you believe it just like you believed this one?? I thought not.. Case of selective beliefs??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Patrician

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> maybe you should yap less, and watch the video i posted. A journalist and resident of Sri Nagar (hindustany occupied Kashmir) himself is saying that Pakistan is not providing any support or money to the existentialist freedom fighters. It is a purely Kashmiri phenonmenon.



Bhai mere,

Chalo ek baar ko India ne maan liya ke kashmiris want independence. Maan liye ke ye unki apni struggle hai and pakistan is not helping them. Maan liya ke hum terrorists hain. Hum evil hain. Hum mass murderers hain etc. etc.

AB MERA JAWAB DO MERE BHAI,

Agar India ab bhi kahe ke hum kashmir kisi keemat pe nahin chhodenge chaahe hume laashon ke dher bhicchane pade. Chahe hame marna pade ya maarna pade.

Agar India aisa kahe, toh tum ya kashmiri kya karoge?

Cmon, I'm asking you do you have a plan? 

Bina plan ke toh chinti bhi ghar nahin bana paati. How will you free kashmir without a plan?

Yaar let us be sensible. Is ladai jhagde ne 63 saal mein aaj tak kisi ko kuch nahin diya. Let better sense prevail. Read my earlier post again. That is the only practical option other than open war.

Let's be friends yaar. It's in the interst of both of our countries. 

Peace


----------



## honour

Should i trust that journo who plays in the hands of traitors like gilani....moreover Your Gen. nazi said "pakistan has been trying on kashmir for long with all money-man-emotions.......thats what costed us bangladesh.'"..in 1974...shouldent i trust him..........


----------



## honour

Patrician said:


> Bhai mere,
> 
> Chalo ek baar ko India ne maan liya ke kashmiris want independence. Maan liye ke ye unki apni struggle hai and pakistan is not helping them. Maan liya ke hum terrorists hain. Hum evil hain. Hum mass murderers hain etc. etc.
> 
> AB MERA JAWAB DO MERE BHAI,
> 
> Agar India ab bhi kahe ke hum kashmir kisi keemat pe nahin chhodenge chaahe hume laashon ke dher bhicchane pade. Chahe hame marna pade ya maarna pade.
> 
> Agar India aisa kahe, toh tum ya kashmiri kya karoge?
> 
> Cmon, I'm asking you do you have a plan?
> 
> Bina plan ke toh chinti bhi ghar nahin bana paati. How will you free kashmir without a plan?
> 
> Yaar let us be sensible. Is ladai jhagde ne 63 saal mein aaj tak kisi ko kuch nahin diya. Let better sense prevail. Read my earlier post again. That is the only practical option other than open war.
> 
> Let's be friends yaar. It's in the interest of both of our countries.
> 
> Peace



bhai we don't need a Kashmir of blood but a paradise as we are trying for last 63 years and this Pakistani hindrance wont work out


----------



## Xeric

Patrician said:


> India kabhi kashmir nahin chhodega.
> 
> Kyun?
> 
> 1. Hamare north India kee kai lifeline rivers kasmir se nikalti hain. Jinnah said "Kashmir is Pakistan's jugular". Well, kashmir is our jugular too. Water alone is a reason strategic enough to make us kill or die for kashmir.
> 
> 2. Hamne jis din kashmir chhoda, us din har tom, dick and harry will raise a shout for a seperate state. India was founded on the very principle of 'unity in diversity'. That principle will be negated and then it'll be impossible for GoI to suppress voices of silly dissent.
> 
> 3. Kahmiris are themselves divided about what they want. Jammu and Ladakh have no grudges whatsoever. It's only a few people in the valley who have a problem.


Sorry, i didnt get you? Though we know of every bit of the _angraiji_ that you have written, but then did you write it to justify your (illegal) hold over Kashmir or did you just tell us the cover story (and the indian weakness) behind your blatant, unprecedented and ruthless killing of Kashmiri population?



> 4. In modern world big and powerful nations do not permit redrawing of boundaries so easily. USSR case was different. They broke up from inside. Not as a result of any foreign aggression.



Yeah they do not, but then as you yourself pointed out that it may be possible if the movement is indigenous, you people need to fear it dearly!


> SO WHAT's THE SOLUTION?
> 
> mujhe sirf ek hee realistic solution dikhta hai,
> 
> India apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). Pakistan apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). LoC will be made irrelevant permitting people to people contact just like in a single state. In short, kashmir will be united but under firm control of India and Pakistan.
> 
> A few modalities of the arrangement (such as seperate flag, constitution, currency etc.) can be worekd out. The three subjects Defence, Foreign Policy and communication will be controlled by India and Pakistan in their respective parts of the state.
> 
> It will be a very complex and detailed solution which will require huge concessions from both India and Pakistan.
> 
> And trust me guys India and Pakistan were willing to accept this very solution during talks between Mushy and MMS.
> 
> In the end,
> 
> India: happy because it controls the water, the land validating the 'unity in diversity' principle
> 
> Pakistan: happy because it gives them legitimate control of their part of kashmir in an internationally recognised way. Promised better relations with India, access to Indian market and what not. Just think about the economic opportunity it will bring for Pakistan.
> 
> Kashmiris: happy because it will give them the seperate identity they are seeking while getting economic benefits from both India and Pakistan.
> 
> Trust me friends, isse zyada kisi bhi party (India, Pakistan or Kashmiris) ko kuch nahin mil sakta.
> 
> Yahi ek solution bacha hai. Pasand hai toh accept karo. Nahin pasand.....well.....toh 63 saal se toh hum dekh hee rahe hain...........



i think you didnt go through this thread at all.

The same 'ol crap, but this time with a hindi flavor to it!!


----------



## Xeric

Patrician said:


> Ok tell me my dear friend,
> 
> Do you or your govt. or your army or whatever, have a plan of action as to how to 'free' Kashmir from 'Indian Oppression'?


i am in no mood of continuing arguing with you as rant more and talk less logic, over and above, you ask silly questions.

Still, to soothe you, the only thing (or plan as you like to call it - though there isnt any need for a Plan as the case is quite simple) that can work out is; a decision based on the will of Kashmiris, that's it. Nothing less, nothing more!


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

karan.1970 said:


> And if another Indian journalist from Srinagar says that Pakistanys are invovled, will you believe it just like you believed this one?? I thought not.. Case of selective beliefs??



just watch the damn video


----------



## DV RULES

Patrician said:


> 4. In modern world big and powerful nations do not permit redrawing of boundaries so easily. USSR case was different. They broke up from inside. Not as a result of any foreign aggression.




I am sure that you will break more than 20 parts and your situation will be worst than USSR. Your T*ARMY could not face the freedom movement of Pakistani Kashmiries in disputed J&K. So i will not mind your dreams. 

Reality; which i wrote above AND THIS IS FACT.


----------



## DV RULES

honour said:


> bhai we don't need a Kashmir of blood but a paradise as we are trying for last 63 years and this Pakistani hindrance wont work out





There is no paradise in presence of Indian Army and what are you talking about "KASHMIR OF BLOOD" so what you did in 63 years in Kashmir???? Made a bloodshed of 100 000 Kashmiries, made slaughter of man, women, children???? This is your secular and human government? 
Economical murder of whole Kashmir! and than you are requiring peace and paradise instead all of your evil activities????? ARE YOU OK MAN?

I remember a phrase for you and for your government:

KUCH LOG BICHA KAR KANTO KO
GULSHAN KI TAVAKKOO RAKHTEY HEIN

SHOLON KO HAVAEIN DE DE KAR 
SAWAN KI TAWAKKO RAKHTE HEIN
(Saghar Saddiqui)

This is perfect on you,


----------



## toppys

DV RULES said:


> There is no paradise in presence of Indian Army and what are you talking about "KASHMIR OF BLOOD" so what you did in 63 years in Kashmir???? Made a bloodshed of 100 000 Kashmiries, made slaughter of man, women, children???? This is your secular and human government?
> Economical murder of whole Kashmir! and than you are requiring peace and paradise instead all of your evil activities????? ARE YOU OK MAN?
> 
> I remember a phrase for you and for your government:
> 
> KUCH LOG BICHA KAR KANTO KO
> GULSHAN KI TAVAKKOO RAKHTEY HEIN
> 
> SHALON KO HAVAEIN DE DE KAR
> SAWAN KI TAWAKKO RAKHTE HEIN
> (Saghar Saddiqui)
> 
> This is perfect on you,



what did pakistan do with kashmir it has . sold it off to china at best rates.


----------



## DV RULES

We have no solution of Kashmir but only *KASHMIR BANEY GA PAKISTAN *

So no compromise over there & no conversation.


----------



## toppys

DV RULES said:


> We have no solution of Kashmir but only *KASHMIR BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
> 
> So no compromise over there & no conversation.


and we are trying for pakistan baney ga kashmir..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## EjazR

*@DV Rules*
There was no army presence before '89 in KAshmir civilian areas

And the 100 000 figures is overa twenty year period and include those killed by militants as well as extremists fighters. So this is an overall casualty rate, not just civilian killed by Indian forces.

And do I need to remind the casualty rate of Begalis or East Pakistanis in 1971 over just a* three year period. *


----------



## Patrician

DV RULES said:


> We have no solution of Kashmir but only *KASHMIR BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
> 
> So no compromise over there & no conversation.



Pehle Pakistan ko sambhalo


----------



## honour

DV RULES said:


> There is no paradise in presence of Indian Army and what are you talking about "KASHMIR OF BLOOD" so what you did in 63 years in Kashmir???? Made a bloodshed of 100 000 Kashmiries, made slaughter of man, women, children???? This is your secular and human government?
> Economical murder of whole Kashmir! and than you are requiring peace and paradise instead all of your evil activities????? ARE YOU OK MAN?
> 
> I remember a phrase for you and for your government:
> 
> KUCH LOG BICHA KAR KANTO KO
> GULSHAN KI TAVAKKOO RAKHTEY HEIN
> 
> SHOLON KO HAVAEIN DE DE KAR
> SAWAN KI TAWAKKO RAKHTE HEIN
> (Saghar Saddiqui)
> 
> This is perfect on you,



we are doing every bit to save our country from militants from your country....most of those who died in kashmir were nothing but militants sponsored from your land...just one thing....stay away from kashmir...dont force us to do a bangladesh to you again...

few lines for u........

apne ghar ki na aag bujhi....
auron ka ghar ye chale jalane....
apna jakham to abhi tbhara nahin
gair rahon pe chale kante beechhane
bangladesh to luta chuke ye
ab chale karachi lahore lutane


----------



## indiaworldpower

Patrician said:


> India kabhi kashmir nahin chhodega.
> 
> Kyun?
> 
> 1. Hamare north India kee kai lifeline rivers kasmir se nikalti hain. Jinnah said "Kashmir is Pakistan's jugular". Well, kashmir is our jugular too. Water alone is a reason strategic enough to make us kill or die for kashmir.
> 
> 2. Hamne jis din kashmir chhoda, us din har tom, dick and harry will raise a shout for a seperate state. India was founded on the very principle of 'unity in diversity'. That principle will be negated and then it'll be impossible for GoI to suppress voices of silly dissent.
> 
> 3. Kahmiris are themselves divided about what they want. Jammu and Ladakh have no grudges whatsoever. It's only a few people in the valley who have a problem.
> 
> 4. In modern world big and powerful nations do not permit redrawing of boundaries so easily. USSR case was different. They broke up from inside. Not as a result of any foreign aggression.
> 
> SO WHAT's THE SOLUTION?
> 
> mujhe sirf ek hee realistic solution dikhta hai,
> 
> India apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). Pakistan apna kashmir rakhega (militarily). LoC will be made irrelevant permitting people to people contact just like in a single state. In short, kashmir will be united but under firm control of India and Pakistan.
> 
> A few modalities of the arrangement (such as seperate flag, constitution, currency etc.) can be worekd out. The three subjects Defence, Foreign Policy and communication will be controlled by India and Pakistan in their respective parts of the state.
> 
> It will be a very complex and detailed solution which will require huge concessions from both India and Pakistan.
> 
> And trust me guys India and Pakistan were willing to accept this very solution during talks between Mushy and MMS.
> 
> In the end,
> 
> India: happy because it controls the water, the land validating the 'unity in diversity' principle
> 
> Pakistan: happy because it gives them legitimate control of their part of kashmir in an internationally recognised way. Promised better relations with India, access to Indian market and what not. Just think about the economic opportunity it will bring for Pakistan.
> 
> Kashmiris: happy because it will give them the seperate identity they are seeking while getting economic benefits from both India and Pakistan.
> 
> Trust me friends, isse zyada kisi bhi party (India, Pakistan or Kashmiris) ko kuch nahin mil sakta.
> 
> Yahi ek solution bacha hai. Pasand hai toh accept karo. Nahin pasand.....well.....toh 63 saal se toh hum dekh hee rahe hain...........



I 100% agree with you.
What about the employment for kashmiri youths? Will they be allowed to work both in India and Pakistan? Pakistan can use this to send some more terrorists to India...


----------



## Neutral

DV RULES said:


> We have no solution of Kashmir but only *KASHMIR BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
> 
> So no compromise over there & no conversation.



Are bhai Gappae marni hai to khul maro..

ISS trah

*AMRICA BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
*MOON BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
*JUPITAR BANEY GA PAKISTAN *

Sharmaya mat karo

But instead of wasting time in these dreams you may also consider these...below

War on terror 

Getting Economy back on track

Floods...

Infrastucture


----------



## chander_011

let us be practical. india cannot leave an inch of the kashmir and similarly pakistan cannot rest till it gets whole of kashmir. so the problem doesnot have any solution except status quo. no country or group of countries can force India to withdraw from kashmir and similarly no country can force pakistan to abandon kashmir. even war cannot decide as both are nuclear nations. so only option available with both countries is to accept whatever is there in the present situation.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

or why not hold a referendum?

are you scared about having your ''hypothesis'' refuted --inevitably as it may be


----------



## Patrician

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> or why not hold a referendum?
> 
> are you scared about having your ''hypothesis'' refuted --inevitably as it may be



Jiski laathi uski bhains. 

I cannot put it in a simpler way. Currently India is the one in a position of strength very much unlike Pakistan. Obviously, India will dictate terms. If you want your position to be considered, then become powerful, pose a challenge to us and we will see!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Patrician

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> or why not hold a referendum?
> 
> are you scared about having your ''hypothesis'' refuted --inevitably as it may be



Jiski laathi uski bhains. 

I cannot put it in a simpler way. Currently India is the one in a position of strength very much unlike Pakistan. Obviously, India will dictate terms. If you want your position to be considered, then become powerful, pose a challenge to us and we will see!

As of now, pakistan is in no position whatsoever (either internally or externally) to enforce its will on India.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Patrician said:


> Jiski laathi uski bhains.
> 
> I cannot put it in a simpler way. Currently India is the one in a position of strength very much unlike Pakistan. Obviously, India will dictate terms. If you want your position to be considered, then become powerful, pose a challenge to us and we will see!



likewise! if you feel hindustan is powerful enough to ''re-claim'' Pakistan ''occupied'' Kashmir then what is stopping you?


by the way, the bhains are lashing out against the laathi holders and im enjoying every moment of it

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Patrician

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> likewise! if you feel hindustan is powerful enough to ''re-claim'' Pakistan ''occupied'' Kashmir then what is stopping you?
> 
> 
> by the way, the bhains are lashing out against the laathi holders and im enjoying every moment of it



LOL who says India wants *** back? *** is a bargaining chip. Whenever u raise Indian kashmir, we'll raise Pakistan Occupied Kashmir!

The part of kashmir that is strategically most important is firmly under India's control and isn't going anywhere.

As for the fun part, you are fully entitled to have your views my friend.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## toppys

A study i found on this : www.peacepolls.org/documents/peacepolls/000648.pdf

I think they have not considered the pak innovative solution of selling kashmir piece by piece to china.. 
Going by current scenario they might sell the whole thing off to china just to bring chinese in and then we have to deal with china starting next war between india and china. 
Already china is showing of its furs on kashmir. Wonder why! I think it is the real plan.


----------



## lalluyadav

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> likewise! if you feel hindustan is powerful enough to ''re-claim'' Pakistan ''occupied'' Kashmir then what is stopping you?
> 
> 
> by the way, the bhains are lashing out against the laathi holders and im enjoying every moment of it



every thing has it's own time,it's not necessary to waste the ammunition.there r lot of other ways also.india have learnt many things frm u.



> by the way, the bhains are lashing out against the laathi holders and im enjoying every moment of it



really,i thought u were with kashmiri separatist.


----------



## ps80

toppys said:


> A study i found on this : www.peacepolls.org/documents/peacepolls/000648.pdf
> 
> I think they have not considered the pak innovative solution of *selling kashmir piece by piece to china*..
> Going by current scenario they might sell the whole thing off to china just to bring chinese in and then we have to deal with china starting next war between india and china.
> Already china is showing of its furs on kashmir. Wonder why! I think it is the real plan.



This is very very unlikely to happen.

Even if it happens, I don't think it would affect the "status quo".


----------



## big_mac

Patrician said:


> Jiski laathi uski bhains.
> 
> I cannot put it in a simpler way. Currently India is the one in a position of strength very much unlike Pakistan. Obviously, India will dictate terms. If you want your position to be considered, then become powerful, pose a challenge to us and we will see!



So basically you are saying that to hell with refrendum or will of Kashmiri people because at this moment India is in a better position to exploit this issue in their favour ? 

Why not refrendum ? If you guys are right then what are you scared of ? Where are your democratic values gone now ? 

Let the world know that what does Kashmiris want . You guys may be able to opress Kashmiris of their right now, magar kab tak ?


----------



## lalluyadav

big_mac said:


> So basically you are saying that to hell with refrendum or will of Kashmiri people because at this moment India is in a better position to exploit this issue in their favour ?
> 
> Why not refrendum ? If you guys are right then what are you scared of ? Where are your democratic values gone now ?
> 
> Let the world know that what does Kashmiris want . You guys may be able to opress Kashmiris of their right now, magar kab tak ?



simple answer is *"" india will never give freedom,this is critical region.if it is given freedom.india will loose bcoz of china n pak.india is in best position by now.""*


----------



## toppys

ps80 said:


> This is very very unlikely to happen.
> 
> Even if it happens, I don't think it would affect the "status quo".


When war happens higly unlikely happens. Remember kargil.


----------



## big_mac

lalluyadav said:


> simple answer is *"" india will never give freedom,this is critical region.if it is given freedom.india will loose bcoz of china n pak.india is in best position by now.""*



so your point is that if refrendum is done then people of Kashmir will go definitely against India and that you guys dont want to see this happening. 

So basically screw Kashmiris ,screw their rights and screw refrendum.

Thanks Lallu, I have got my answer


----------



## toppys

Please read it as screw kashmiri muslims only.


----------



## ps80

big_mac said:


> So basically you are saying that to hell with refrendum or will of Kashmiri people because at this moment India is in a better position to exploit this issue in their favour ?
> 
> Why not refrendum ? If you guys are right then what are you scared of ? *Where are your democratic values gone now* ?
> 
> Let the world know that what does Kashmiris want . You guys may be able to opress Kashmiris of their right now, magar kab tak ?



Gone with Kashmiri Pandits who were forcefully driven out of the Valley....

Politicians, military rulers and 'non-state actors' have complicated this issue to such an extent that it has become too difficult to even think of a plausible solution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## big_mac

toppys said:


> Please read it as screw kashmiri muslims only.



Of course it was obvious , but anyways thanks for the correction


----------



## lalluyadav

big_mac said:


> so your point is that if refrendum is done then people of Kashmir will go definitely against India and that you guys dont want to see this happening.
> 
> So basically screw Kashmiris ,screw their rights and screw refrendum.
> 
> Thanks Lallu, I have got my answer



btw i wanna tell u,this problem exist in kashmir region only,due to some provoked ppl.btw whole freedom is possible if china,pak,india leaves there portion.which is impossible.so u will have to start first.u have lot of problems bigger than this.


----------



## Patrician

big_mac said:


> So basically you are saying that to hell with refrendum or will of Kashmiri people because at this moment India is in a better position to exploit this issue in their favour ?
> 
> Why not refrendum ? If you guys are right then what are you scared of ? Where are your democratic values gone now ?
> 
> Let the world know that what does Kashmiris want . You guys may be able to opress Kashmiris of their right now, magar kab tak ?



Let me elaborate my point

first and foremost, I accept, that India has made mistakes when it comes to kashmir. We're all humans, we are not infallible. We made mistakes.

1. We should never have taken it to UNSC
2. We should have given kashmiris full autonomy they were promised at the time of accession to India

Apart from these two we made small mistakes here and here but mostly matters were beyond our control since after 1989, Pakistan involved itself into kashmir by supporting the insurgency etc. (we all know what followed). What GoI did after that was an after effect and not a proactive policy.

We HAD TO deploy army after 1989. There was none earlier

And my dear friend, let's accept it, an army is a very lethal weapon and when employed to control populations or revolts, there are bound to be human rights violations. A case in point being the Pakistan army whose genocide in east pakistan is well documented. (please use google, I could post genuine videos from CBS, NBC etc. but this is not the thread)

So there have been human rights violations. Now after 1989, seperatists also arose and hence became another angle of the problem. 

Years went by and things continued like this. Slowly and slowly, people got fed up with all this violence which ruined their lives and what stone pelters you are seeing now are those youth who are disgruntled because all their lives they have seen only violence and bloodshed.

In the meantime, India started becoming economically stronger. This increased our influence in world affairs and now we are heard all over the world.

To cut long story short, there will be two aspects of solution as far as India is concerned.

1. External aspect:- This will be vis a vis Pakistan and for this solution you can refer to my earlier post.

2. Internal aspect:- This will be direct fallout of the external settlement with pakistan. India will grant autonomy (bordering azaadi) and kashmiris will have to be content with the prospects of being associated with a rising star called India.

One very important part which people often don't talk about is the will of the kashmiris is itself very divided.

In short, 

Jammu and ladakh don't want to have anything to do with any prospect that alienates them with india. They are integral parts of india in true sense of the word. They will never...never ever agree to leaving India neither for joining pakistan nor for independence.

That leaves us with people in and around kashmir valley. Like I said, they will have to tone down somewhere as will India and Pakistan.

All three, India, Pakistan and Kashmiris of the valley will have to make concessions.

A referendum is not possible for two reasons:

1. It goes directly against our interest.
2. jammu and ladakh wil never...never ever...want to leave India. So a referendum will leave kashmiris divided which they themselves do not want.

"Kisi ko mukammal jahan nahin milta, kisi ko zameen toh kisi ko asmaan nahin milta"

All of us will have to make concessions. That's the only way forward.

Trust me, none of us can go beyond this. So let's move forward.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

well there are many Kashmiri dissidents living in Western countries who are doing something --and should do more -to highlight the atrocities waged against them


mumbai-like incidents take place then they wonder why somebody would want to do such a thing.....Kashmir will always be a mumbai-like incident except the guns/''laathis'' etc. are in real sissy hands this time


----------



## lalluyadav

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> well there are many Kashmiri dissidents living in Western countries who are doing something --and should do more -to highlight the atrocities waged against them
> 
> 
> mumbai-like incidents take place then they wonder why somebody would want to do such a thing.....Kashmir will always be a mumbai-like incident except the guns/''laathis'' etc. are in real sissy hands this time


u also mean to say baloch's in the different countries shud protest n do it hard,then y such incidents happen in pakistan *except the guns/''laathis'' etc. are in real sissy hands this time*.
mr x,just think abt this.can u give freedom.advice is better for others not for self.


----------



## big_mac

ps80 said:


> Gone with Kashmiri Pandits who were forcefully driven out of the Valley....



A country looking to catch up with the world powers has such a fragile democracy that it will expose itself by the actions of few ? 

There is definitely something seriously wrong with Indias democratic values then. 

Let people of Kashmir decide what they want. Until when you guys will supress their *FREE WILL* with bullets .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Patrician

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> well there are many Kashmiri dissidents living in Western countries who are doing something --and should do more -to highlight the atrocities waged against them
> 
> 
> mumbai-like incidents take place then they wonder why somebody would want to do such a thing.....Kashmir will always be a mumbai-like incident except the guns/''laathis'' etc. are in real sissy hands this time



It won't remain so for long. GoI has realised that this is the only possible solution. At one time, Musharraf had also realised this and trust me, we were very close to a solution then. 

The new Pak army establishment has taken a harder line as compared to Musharraf. Now, to be frank, India is simply buying time. Once the realisation that dawned upon Mushy, makes its way to the current PA establishment, the issue will be resolved in days. MMS is very very eager to bury this issue before leaving office. Trust me on this!


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

lalluyadav said:


> u also mean to say baloch's in the different countries shud protest n do it hard,then y such incidents happen in pakistan *except the guns/''laathis'' etc. are in real sissy hands this time*.
> mr x,just think abt this.can u give freedom.advice is better for others not for self.



we're talking about Kashmir, a disputed territory. 

people like you keep bringing up Baluchistan.


out of things to say it seems, troll?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## lalluyadav

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> we're talking about Kashmir, a disputed territory.
> 
> people like you keep bringing up Baluchistan.
> 
> 
> out of things to say it seems, troll?



kashmir is a disputed territory for pak not for india.it's our integral part.i thought u were intersted in the human right violation, n hard protest,i just showed u.first line gives the answer of any ur queston


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

not so integral nowdays, is it


----------



## lalluyadav

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> not so integral nowdays, is it



who cares


----------



## toppys

big_mac said:


> A country looking to catch up with the world powers has such a fragile democracy that it will expose itself by the actions of few ?
> 
> There is definitely something seriously wrong with Indias democratic values then.
> 
> Let people of Kashmir decide what they want. Until when you guys will supress their *FREE WILL* with bullets .



Already you have half the country under free will. Let talibs decide what they want.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ps80

big_mac said:


> A country looking to catch up with the world powers has such a fragile democracy that it will expose itself by the actions of few ?
> 
> There is definitely something seriously wrong with Indias democratic values then.
> 
> Let people of Kashmir decide what they want. Until when you guys will supress their *FREE WILL* with bullets .




In the Indian administered Kashmir area, many Kashmiri people vote and elect their leaders. 

FREE WILL is a very loose term. If 'free will' is allowed across the world, there will be too many problems.


----------



## ejaz007

*India offers dialogue to Kashmiris*

** Amendments to Armed Forces Special Powers Act being drafted 

* Forces relocation, employment package to be discussed at high-level meeting*

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: Responding to unabated anti-India protests in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), Indian Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram on Wednesday said that the government would reach out to protesters and expressed willingness to hold talks with any group that wished to engage in a dialogue.

Expressing concern that the government has not been able to stop the vicious cycle of violence in IHK, Chidambaram reiterated the need for a political solution to the situation. He said, A starting point would be found in the next few days to reach out to protesters to reassure them of their rights. The home minister also expressed the willingness to hold talks with any group wishing to come forward and willing to talk.

Amends to AFSPA: Sources in the government indicated a flurry of activity to devise measures to arrest spiraling violence in the region. Officials in the home and defence ministries had been discussing amendments to the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and redeployment of forces. The Defence Ministry had rejected the draft of amendments proposed by the Home Ministry, but, on the intervention of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the two ministries have agreed to work together to propose changes to the law. 

Meeting: Sources also indicated that a high-level meeting has been scheduled in the next few days, during which the government will come out with specific measures to reach out to the protesters. This includes relocation of security forces, employment and rehabilitation package as well as a fresh surrender policy, they said.

IHK Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, who is in New Delhi, met the home minister to discuss the situation in the state. He said that the violent protests should not be seen in the law and order situation context only, political initiatives should also be take at the earliest. He urged for an early amendment to the AFSPA and called for an employment package for IHKs half a million unemployed youth. Abdullah asserted that the time was ripe for the Indian government to take a political approach on Kashmir, the sources said.

Responding to a question about his statement at a conference of police chiefs in which he had said that dialogue would be started in a few days, Chidambaram said, I cant give a date. Few days means few days. Government hopes that it will be able to re-start the process of dialogue in the near future, he added.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Coltsfan

big_mac said:


> A country looking to catch up with the world powers has such a fragile democracy that it will expose itself by the actions of few ?
> 
> There is definitely something seriously wrong with Indias democratic values then.
> 
> Let people of Kashmir decide what they want. Until when you guys will supress their *FREE WILL* with bullets .



West Pakistan was too eager to suppress the *FREE WILL* of East Pakistanis with bullets........

How come this love for "free will" all of a sudden????

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## big_mac

Coltsfan said:


> West Pakistan was too eager to suppress the *FREE WILL* of East Pakistanis with bullets........
> 
> How come this love for "free will" all of a sudden????



At that time Pakistan was under military dictatorship that only knew the language of bullets.

OTOH, India has been a democracy ever since 47 and always advocated FREE WILL. Hence my remarks.

Anyway your post is off topic. the last time I checked, this thread was about Kashmir and not about E Pak or Balochistan or anything else. 

Please dont derail the thread by off track posts

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

Ya army rule ! Nice excuse to make.


----------



## Patrician

I tried to reply with much maturity and frankness. Sadly, people are busy here playing volcabulary games than discussing the issue at hand!


----------



## Patrician

big_mac said:


> A country looking to catch up with the world powers has such a fragile democracy that it will expose itself by the actions of few ?
> 
> There is definitely something seriously wrong with Indias democratic values then.
> 
> Let people of Kashmir decide what they want. Until when you guys will supress their *FREE WILL* with bullets .



And what about the free will of over a billion Indians?

Let's accept it. No body is a saint here. Neither am I, nor are you.

There's no such thing as free will when it comes to nations protecting their interests. The stand of pakistan "AWWWW...Poor Kahmiris, look Cruel India is killing them, suppressing them." is utter bullshit.

It's a game of chess, a game of cold-hearted interplay of interests and interests only. Here governments are the players and common man is the pawn. Like it always happens everywhere.

Pakistan has no more affinity to kashmiri people than it had towards east pakistanis. That's solely the reason why Pakistan actually insisted that independence be excluded as an option if and when a referendum occurs. DO answer my question, why did pakistan insist that independence not be made an option? Where did this free will go then?

100 baaton kee ek baat. Pakistan wants kashmir for it's own interest. India wants kashmir for its own interest. We have reached a deadlock. Dialogue is the only solution and that too of only one kind is possible. For that, you may refer to my earlier posts.

Problems are not solved by being emotional my friend. An emotional doctor only kills the patient!

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## chander_011

To all pakistani friends please understand that India is democratic country and central govt has to seek vote after every five years. We are multi cultural society and even our muslim population doesnot want kashmir to go to pakistan. so no central govt can survive in india if any inch of kashmir land is given to anybody. if this is reality than we can spend our whole bugdet to protect our kashmir. If central govt doesnot protect kashmir it will loose elections and right to govern india. so no central govt can think of any other solution but to accept the status quo.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## DV RULES

Patrician said:


> Pehle Pakistan ko sambhalo



Pehle India ko sambhalo:


----------



## DV RULES

honour said:


> we are doing every bit to save our country from militants from your country....most of those who died in kashmir were nothing but militants sponsored from your land...just one thing....stay away from kashmir...dont force us to do a bangladesh to you again...
> 
> few lines for u........
> 
> apne ghar ki na aag bujhi....
> auron ka ghar ye chale jalane....
> apna jakham to abhi tbhara nahin
> gair rahon pe chale kante beechhane
> bangladesh to luta chuke ye
> ab chale karachi lahore lutane




You cant say them militant because they are fighting for our cause and freedom from Secular India. So try not to ignore historic truth because before 1947 English also called militants to those who fight for freedom, (LEARN HISTORY FIRST).

You have no base to called them M* OR T*.


----------



## DV RULES

Neutral said:


> Are bhai Gappae marni hai to khul maro..
> 
> ISS trah
> 
> *AMRICA BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
> *MOON BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
> *JUPITAR BANEY GA PAKISTAN *
> 
> Sharmaya mat karo
> 
> But instead of wasting time in these dreams you may also consider these...below
> 
> War on terror
> 
> Getting Economy back on track
> 
> Floods...
> 
> Infrastucture


Great nations ever faced problems & difficulties so we will face them but we are not like you who sits on the shoulder of US & Russia and firing behind these countries toward us. We are still standing and facing problems but not like you who's motto only to destabilize neighbors and smiling when there sth happened 

Who smiles will weep (Remember it)


----------



## DV RULES

chander_011 said:


> let us be practical. india cannot leave an inch of the kashmir.




You are talking abouy inch of the kashmir!!!? well you will leave whole Kashmir, Gujrat & Punjab to us.


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

DV RULES said:


> You are talking abouy inch of the kashmir!!!? well you will leave whole Kashmir, Gujrat & Punjab to us.


what are you waiting for take a gun and come.


----------



## Patrician

DV RULES said:


> You are talking abouy inch of the kashmir!!!? well you will leave whole Kashmir, Gujrat & Punjab to us.



Thanks for the sanity displayed.


----------



## Xeric

Patrician said:


> Jiski laathi uski bhains.
> 
> I cannot put it in a simpler way. Currently India is the one in a position of strength very much unlike Pakistan. Obviously, India will dictate terms. If you want your position to be considered, then become powerful, pose a challenge to us and we will see!
> 
> As of now, pakistan is in no position whatsoever (either internally or externally) to enforce its will on India.



Excellent!

No wonder the bhains shyts a Mumbai attack every 5 years now...


----------



## magg

> No wonder the bhains shyts a Mumbai attack every 5 years now...[\quote]
> 
> Shows your pathetic mentality !!!


----------



## Patrician

xeric said:


> Excellent!
> 
> No wonder the bhains shyts a Mumbai attack every 5 years now...



I will not reply to that.


----------



## Xeric

magg said:


> No wonder the bhains shyts a Mumbai attack every 5 years now...[\quote]
> 
> Shows your pathetic mentality !!!



Haha..!!

See, we can go down that drain too..!!


Dont you people dare think that you can go on 'celebrating' the atrocities in Kashmri by your military and we will not reciprocate.

If you can claim openly that you would not hold a referendum (a kashmiri right) just because it doesnt suite you, if you can shamelessly claim that human right violations are a 'norm' when military is employed, when you can claim that india can dictate itself to us and do things even if they are internationally accepted as wrong, then dude you dont have the face to tell us about our 'pathetic' mentality!!

----

P.S. Sorry guys, change of mode


----------



## Xeric

Patrician said:


> I will not reply to that.



Ooooo..!

It did touch that nerve deep somewhere.

Hey Pat, behave! Stop your bee ess and rants as you have been spewing around since the last two pages

This is not BR.com!


----------



## magg

> Dont you people dare think that you can go on 'celebrating' the atrocities in Kashmri by your military and we will not reciprocate.



Was expecting this from you. When did the Indians celebrated gross human right violations in Kashmir. We have always regretted that and continue to appeal for upholding the rights of kashmir. We want this vicious cycle of violence to stop too but in this psychological warfare being forced on the people of Kashmiris by "another nation", these people can't see what they are upto.




> If you can claim openly that you would not hold a referendum (a kashmiri right) just because it doesnt suite you, if you can shamelessly claim that human right violations are a 'norm' when military is employed, when you can claim that india can dictate itself to us and do things even if they are internationally accepted as wrong, then dude you dont have the face to tell us about our 'pathetic' mentality!!



Wow !!! This coming from a SSG personnel who has witnessed what is going on in Baluchistan !!! I am amazed. Just tell me how much human rights are upholded in Balochistan where recently a 13 year old boy Baluch student Mohammad Jan Marri was killed ??? Man you know it more than me what happens when the army is forced to uphold territorial integrity.

As far as upholding the referendum is considered, Pak lost it when it started using terrorists to reach it's objective and thus violated the agreement that any solution will be arrived at by peaceful means. Moreover in P_O_K there is no autonomy given to people and the Iron clad rule of Pak army is enforced where even the CM of GB is a retired army man. Moreover Pak has changed the demography of the region from being predominantly Shias to sunnis so as shun the basic rights of people of Kashmir. Violence is seen frequently in Gilgit and Shias are the victims. As also the ethnic cleansing of Kashmir by forcing the Pandits to move away has shattered any chance of a plebiscite as the demography has been changed by Pak in both Indian Kashmir as also P_O_K.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Xeric

magg said:


> Was expecting this from you. When did the Indians celebrated gross human right violations in Kashmir. We have always regretted that and continue to appeal for upholding the rights of kashmir. We want this vicious cycle of violence to stop too but in this psychological warfare being forced on the people of Kashmiris by "another nation", these people can't see what they are upto.


Read the previous few pages of this thread. i am sure those alone would soothe your 'quest'





> Wow !!! This coming from a SSG personnel who has witnessed what is going on in Baluchistan !!!


SSG personnel...!!
Lolz..





> I am amazed. Just tell me how much human rights are upholded in Balochistan where recently a 13 year old boy Baluch student Mohammad Jan Marri was killed ??? Man you know it more than me what happens when the army is forced to uphold territorial integrity.



One, Balochistan has NOTHING to do with Kashmir AT ALL!

Two, Balochistan is NOT a despiuted territory, Kashmir is.

Three, just by ONE side (india in this case) claiming Kashmir as it's 'integral part' would automatically imply that it is india's _atut aang_ indeed - THE WORLD RECOGNIZE KASHMIR AS A DEPUTED TERRITORY WITH INDIA AND PAKISTAN BEING THE TWO STAKE HOLDER IN THE ISSUE!!

Four, you need to bring forth some credible proof as regards to Pak Army committing HR abuse in Balochistan. We dont but the BLA/BRA crap. Also, stories like the **** of that doc and 'missing' persons would fall on a deaf ear as it lacks anything but credibility. On the other hand international news sources like the CNN, BBC, and your own media has provided us with a million proofs regarding the abuse being committed by your military in Kashmir.

Five, you are nothing but a troll with multiple IDs



> As far as upholding the referendum is considered, Pak lost it when it started using terrorists to reach it's objective and thus violated the agreement that any solution will be arrived at by peaceful means.



Pakistan has stopped doing so since long now, so are we back on the agreement now, we are na..say yes, phuleas..!



> Moreover in P_O_K there is no autonomy given to people and the Iron clad rule of Pak army is enforced where even the CM of GB is a retired army man.



That's none of your concern. The world recognize it as Azad Kashmir. It has its own Constitution and things ti that effect. Only india uses the acronym and nobody. On the other hand if even Pakistan stop using IOK for Kashmir, still the world would not stop recognizing Kashmir as a DISPUTED and OCCUPIED territory. 



> Moreover Pak has changed the demography of the region from being predominantly Shias to sunnis so as shun the basic rights of people of Kashmir. Violence is seen frequently in Gilgit and Shias are the victims. As also the ethnic cleansing of Kashmir by forcing the Pandits to move away has shattered any chance of a plebiscite as the demography has been changed by Pak in both Indian Kashmir as also P_O_K.



Off topic rant.

i could have shut you like a nip on this, but then that would not serve the purpose.


----------



## chander_011

after reading the replies, only one feeling comes to mind "are we debating seriously or threatening each other!"


----------



## Xeric

Thaks God that you realized that. 





But then isnt it a bit late now....


----------



## foxbat

xeric said:


> Haha..!!
> 
> See, we can go down that drain too..!!
> 
> 
> Dont you people dare think that you can go on 'celebrating' the atrocities in Kashmri by your military and we will not reciprocate.
> 
> If you can claim openly that you would not hold a referendum (a kashmiri right) just because it doesnt suite you, if you can shamelessly claim that human right violations are a 'norm' when military is employed, when you can claim that india can dictate itself to us and do things even if they are internationally accepted as wrong, then dude you dont have the face to tell us about our 'pathetic' mentality!!
> 
> ----
> 
> P.S. Sorry guys, change of mode



I agree.. Why get into false pretences of ethically right thing to do and so on.. India's stand in Kashmir (unilateral declaration of UNSC resolution becoming Irrelevant) and its ability to force that stand has led to planning and implementation of armed militancy in Kashmir and off and on incidents like 26/11 and earlier Mumbai and Delhi blasts.

On the similar lines, the implementation of armed insurgency in Kashmir by Pakistan (and earlier in Afghanistan) has led to increased extremism in Pakistan that is now being manifested in the form of sectarian violence and terrorist attacks. Even though it can be argued that America's WOT has been the trigger point for the spate of violence in Pakistan in last 3-4 years, the Ingredients for this cocktail of violence were mixed together long before the WOT started.

Now both India and Pakistan are getting hurt. Pakistan encourages insurgency and political unrest in J&K which also at times spills over in other parts of India.

And if I believe most of the Pakistani members here, India fuels every possible insurgency and unrest in areas like Balochistan, KP, Sindh etc.

And thats what the ground reality may be. So might as well accept it start from there. 

Garv se kaho ki hum ladh rahe hain..

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Patrician

xeric said:


> Ooooo..!
> 
> It did touch that nerve deep somewhere.
> 
> Hey Pat, behave! Stop your bee ess and rants as you have been spewing around since the last two pages
> 
> This is not BR.com!



*You see the man in my avatar?

Just like him, I do not reply to bullshit.* I challenge you, provoke me as much as you can and at the end of every one of your posts addressed to me, do not forget to see my signature.

You are talking to an honest and confident Indian who knows every word he's talking.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## magg

> One, Balochistan has NOTHING to do with Kashmir AT ALL!
> Two, Balochistan is NOT a despiuted territory, Kashmir is.
> 
> Three, just by ONE side (india in this case) claiming Kashmir as it's 'integral part' would automatically imply that it is india's atut aang indeed - THE WORLD RECOGNIZE KASHMIR AS A DEPUTED TERRITORY WITH INDIA AND PAKISTAN BEING THE TWO STAKE HOLDER IN THE ISSUE!!



May be even East Pakistan had nothing to do with Kashmir but is now recognized as Bangladesh because it was oppressed and neglected like Baluchistan. It was not recognized as disputed by International Countries before 71'. Now at this point Mods and you would say that Balochistan has nothing to do with Kashmir and thus should not be discussed here but then is any such thread on Baluchistan allowed to run as smoothly as the threads on Kashmir. As soon as people point to HR violations in Baloch land the comments are moderated and members banned.



> Four, you need to bring forth some credible proof as regards to Pak Army committing HR abuse in Balochistan. We dont but the BLA/BRA crap. Also, stories like the **** of that doc and 'missing' persons would fall on a deaf ear as it lacks anything but credibility. On the other hand international news sources like the CNN, BBC, and your own media has provided us with a million proofs regarding the abuse being committed by your military in Kashmir.



This is a proof of how much we love our Kashmiri Brothers that we put any HR violation against them on the front papers and headlines of our media. Unlike China and Pak which put pressure on it's media not to report any such stories and censors it's media, India is a free country where even the HR violations of it's forces are discussed in details. The only source of true information about Balochistan are some Europe based Baloch newspapers and sites.



> Five, you are nothing but a troll with multiple IDs



This is a serious allegation. Prove it or take back your claim. Or may be you are using the tactics of if you can beat them intimidate them.



> Pakistan has stopped doing so since long now, so are we back on the agreement now



When did PAk stopped exporting Terrorism in the Valley ?? Last time I checked they increased the monthly stipend of the Terrorists and are visting their camps to pressurize them to attack Kashmir more vigorously. 



> That's none of your concern. The world recognize it as Azad Kashmir. It has its own Constitution and things ti that effect. Only india uses the acronym and nobody. On the other hand if even Pakistan stop using IOK for Kashmir, still the world would not stop recognizing Kashmir as a DISPUTED and OCCUPIED territory.



Last time I checked no country recognize it as Azad Kashmir but rather Pak held Kashmir over which Pak is in dispute with India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Patrician

foxbat said:


> I agree.. Why get into false pretences of ethically right thing to do and so on.. India's stand in Kashmir (unilateral declaration of UNSC resolution becoming Irrelevant) and its ability to force that stand has led to planning and implementation of armed militancy in Kashmir and off and on incidents like 26/11 and earlier Mumbai and Delhi blasts.
> 
> On the similar lines, the implementation of armed insurgency in Kashmir by Pakistan (and earlier in Afghanistan) has led to increased extremism in Pakistan that is now being manifested in the form of sectarian violence and terrorist attacks. Even though it can be argued that America's WOT has been the trigger point for the spate of violence in Pakistan in last 3-4 years, the Ingredients for this cocktail of violence were mixed together long before the WOT started.
> 
> Now both India and Pakistan are getting hurt. Pakistan encourages insurgency and political unrest in J&K which also at times spills over in other parts of India.
> 
> And if I believe most of the Pakistani members here, India fuels every possible insurgency and unrest in areas like Balochistan, KP, Sindh etc.
> 
> And thats what the ground reality may be. So might as well accept it start from there.
> 
> Garv se kaho ki hum ladh rahe hain..



Hell yeah baby!


----------



## Xeric

*And thats what the ground reality may be. So might as well accept it start from there.

Garv se kaho ki hum ladh rahe hain..*

Then why the convulsion..??



P.S. You people have again FAILED!


----------



## Patrician

xeric said:


> *And thats what the ground reality may be. So might as well accept it start from there.
> 
> Garv se kaho ki hum ladh rahe hain..*
> 
> *Then why the convulsion..??*
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. You people have again FAILED!



You want to know why? Because I belong to India. Hum dushmani mein bhi ek sharafat rakhte hain.

I do not know about your sharafat. But my sharafat doesn't permit me to drag innocent victims of terrorism into internet forum wars. You will never see me do that because I do not do that.


----------



## foxbat

xeric said:


> *And thats what the ground reality may be. So might as well accept it start from there.
> 
> Garv se kaho ki hum ladh rahe hain..*
> 
> Then why the convulsion..??
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. You people have again FAILED!



I am sorry.. Didnt understand your response.. What convulsion?


----------



## magg

> You people have again FAILED!



Yes the winner is PAk army and ISI both of whom are earning billions thanks to the Kashmir problem. They are real winner and are controlling the whole of Pak by sidelining the politicians due to Kashmir only.


----------



## Xeric

magg said:


> May be even East Pakistan had nothing to do with Kashmir but is now recognized as Bangladesh because it was oppressed and neglected like Baluchistan. It was not recognized as disputed by International Countries before 71'. Now at this point Mods and you would say that Balochistan has nothing to do with Kashmir and thus should not be discussed here but then is any such thread on Baluchistan allowed to run as smoothly as the threads on Kashmir. As soon as people point to HR violations in Baloch land the comments are moderated and members banned.



Rant!

Ignored.



> This is a proof of how much we love our Kashmiri Brothers that we put any HR violation against them on the front papers and headlines of our media. Unlike China and Pak which put pressure on it's media not to report any such stories and censors it's media, India is a free country where even the HR violations of it's forces are discussed in details.



i never knew we were able to influnce the western media to such an extent!! Thanks for the credit, BTW.



> The only source of true information about Balochistan are some Europe based Baloch newspapers and sites.



Ahan!
So now i know your source of income, oh i mean sources of 'credible' knowledge 




> This is a serious allegation. Prove it or take back your claim. Or may be you are using the tactics of if you can beat them intimidate them.



It speaks of itself.




> When did PAk stopped exporting Terrorism in the Valley ?? Last time I checked they increased the monthly stipend of the Terrorists and are visting their camps to pressurize them to attack Kashmir more vigorously.



Proof dude, proofs.

Less, you are just a shyter. So carry on.




> Last time I checked no country recognize it as Azad Kashmir but rather Pak held Kashmir over which Pak is in dispute with India.



That didnt answer my question of comparing Baluchistan with IOK.

Moreover, no the world do not recognize AK as a point to be discussed as a parallel to IOK. We have already wasted a few pages on this, i would suggest you go back and read them (again, if you have ever read this thread at the first place).


----------



## foxbat

xeric said:


> Moreover, no the world do not recognize AK as a point to be discussed as a parallel to IOK. We have already wasted a few pages on this, i would suggest you go back and read them (again, if you have ever read this thread at the first place).



BTW what part of the world recognizes J&K as a discussion point exclusive of Pakistan administered Kashmir? Wasnt aware of that...


----------



## Xeric

magg said:


> Yes the winner is PAk army and ISI both of whom are earning billions thanks to the Kashmir problem. They are real winner and are controlling the whole of Pak by sidelining the politicians due to Kashmir only.



No wrong again.

The winner is india whose forces 'enjoy' killing innocents which in turn also looses its men in a fight which has no justification whatsoever. Also these men in uniform are the real winners who faces problems like PTSD and commit suicide and kill each other either out of frustration or just because his senior has killed an innocent in another fake encounter.


----------



## magg

> i never knew we were able to influnce the western media to such an extent!! Thanks for the credit, BTW.



May be you need to clean your specs as I have never mentioned western media.
Read this:
Redirect Notice

Or this

148 Balochistan women, 168 kids disappeared by force, U.N. told - Baltimore Foreign Policy | Examiner.com



> So now i know your source of income, oh i mean sources of 'credible' knowledge



Cheap gimmick.



> It speaks of itself.


Rant !!!



> That didnt answer my question of comparing Baluchistan with IOK.



You are right Baloch land doesn't compare with Kashmir. Never in history of Kashmir have women's and Children's been killed indiscriminately to force their mens to come to protect them from a brutal force as happened during the 74-77 war in Balochistan when 15000 people were killed in the attack on womens and childrens to force the mens to come down from their positions on mountains.


----------



## Xeric

foxbat said:


> BTW what part of the world recognizes J&K as a discussion point exclusive of Pakistan administered Kashmir? Wasnt aware of that...



No no you are wrong again. That part of the world also includes GB in the discussion, right?


----------



## magg

> The winner is india whose forces 'enjoy' killing innocents which in turn also looses its men in a fight which has no justification whatsoever. Also these men in uniform are the real winners who faces problems like PTSD and commit suicide and kill each other either out of frustration or just because his senior has killed an innocent in another fake encounter.



Defies logic, however replace India with PAk and putting BD, Balochistan, P_O_K into perspective all seems logical.
Off topic !!!


----------



## Xeric

magg said:


> May be you need to clean your specs as I have never mentioned western media.
> Read this:
> Redirect Notice
> 
> Or this
> 
> 148 Balochistan women, 168 kids disappeared by force, U.N. told - Baltimore Foreign Policy | Examiner.com



 

That's what happen when you use google for expansion of your knowledge!!

You seriously need to work harder!

BTW, let me give our readers just a little insight; did it ever occurred to you that why does the news links provided by you make use of the words like ALLEGED, REPORTEDLY and other words to that effect so such an extent..??!!


----------



## Xeric

Ok guys, ciao for now, have other important things to do other than coming down to your level every now and then.


----------



## magg

> You seriously need to work harder!



At what ???
Changing your views ??? No that ain't gonna happen as you belong to the military and they are indoctrinated to such an extent that they wont change their views while even under torture. So I don't expect you to change your views. But you haven't proved to be able to make a clear case. Most of your views just reflect your bias and dismissive attitude. You have not put any proofs as to the fact that IA oppresses people more than PA/ISI.


----------



## ejaz007

*Humane methods be used to control IHK protests: Singh*

** Indian premier tells New Delhi editors issue 63 years old, still groping for solution 

* Favours shifting more powers to Jammu and Kashmir police 

* No quick fix to Naxalite issue *

By Iftikhar Gilani

NEW DELHI: No lethal weapons but more humane methods should be used to deal with crowds, Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh said while talking on the current unrest in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) to a group of New Delhi editors at his residence.

Singh has also called a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) later this week for a threadbare discussion on the situation in the held state. 

Singh said that the Maoist problem, and the IHK situation and the forthcoming judgement on Babri Mosque land ownership, as some of the top issues could have a bearing on how India would shape in the years to come. Even as New Delhi is reportedly mulling steps to break the cycle of violence in IHK, Singh told the editors to wait until the CCS meeting. I cannot promise you that I will produce a rabbit out of my hat... the country must learn to be patient, he said. Pointing out that the Kashmir problem had existed for 63 years and former Indian prime ministers Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi had all attempted to

tackle it, Singh said, We are still groping for a solution.

The internal dimension of the militancy has gone down but other issues remained, he said. 

More power: Singh said he favoured more and more powers to be shifted to the Jammu and Kashmir police. Sometime it will work, sometimes it will not work, he added. Asked to comment on the remark of IHK Chief Minister Omar Abdullahs that the status quo was not an option, Singh said they were in touch... and he would not wish to engage in a public discussion on this. 

Quick fix: On the Naxalite issue, he said, he had no quick fix solution but was in favour of a two-pronged approach, which at the same time addressed the valid economic and social reasons behind the problem, while enforcing the law. 

He also made it clear that he was not thinking in terms of an early retirement and indicated that a cabinet reshuffle was on the cards, before the Indian parliament meets on November 7. 

I would like to reduce the average age of my cabinet, he said. Singh said that he has full faith in Indian Home Minister P Chidambaram, adding that Chidambaram is doing an exceedingly good job and he has my full confidence and support. 

He denied reports of any disconnect between the government and his Congress party, saying expression of different views was not necessarily a bad thing and allowing people to express their views was not necessarily a sign of a drift.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## ejaz007

*Three killed as troops fire on protesters in IHK*

SRINAGAR: Indian police opened fire on hundreds of stone-throwing protesters on Monday demonstrating against New Delhis rule, killing three people and wounding at least 17 other demonstrators in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), police and witnesses said. The fresh violence comes when New Delhi was trying to respond to the biggest anti-India demonstrations that have killed 66 people in the disputed region. Three people, including a 17-year-old boy, were killed when government forces fired live ammunition to disperse protesters in Palhalan, a village north of IHKs capital Srinagar, said a police officer on condition of anonymity. Local residents said there was no clash with the troops, but soldiers fired when the protesters refused to disperse. The state government has ordered a probe into the shooting incident. A clash had occurred near a highway in the morning and much after that we were peacefully protesting in the village, said resident Merajuddin. Later, as news of the shooting spread, thousands of people from Palhalan and neighbouring villages, chanting Go India, go back and We want freedom, marched to a nearby highway and blocked it. agencies

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## Neutral

DV RULES said:


> Great nations ever faced problems & difficulties so we will face them but we are not like you who sits on the shoulder of US & Russia and firing behind these countries toward us. We are still standing and facing problems but not like you who's motto only to destabilize neighbors and smiling when there sth happened
> 
> Who smiles will weep (Remember it)



Yes true....but there is no relation between Great Nation and Pakistan!! _Till now_*(Keep that in mind that just saying that we are great nation doesn't makes you one)*

And about Us and Russia 

You are only nation on whole earth which is being slapped and Kissed by the Us at same time 

And You are blindly sleeping on the shoulders of China...? so whats the point

and about Who smiles will weep (Remember it) ....ahh same boring old pet-line of your nation...which we are hearing since 1950s..from you with a Smiling face


----------



## Xeric

I am being hunted by Indian intelligence for telling the truth on Kashmir The Comment Factory

*I am being hunted by Indian intelligence for telling the truth on Kashmir*

By Giorgiana Violante

*
People need to cling to something. It is hard to live without hope. India has never given Kashmiris any. No hope, no dignity and no respect. They have been pushed into a corner which is beginning to look like Pakistan. Thanks to India&#8217;s policy on Kashmir over the past twenty years, Kashmiris hate Indians, mistaking them for their government, and Indians think Kashmiris are just troublesome, stone pelters instead of seeing them simply as their brothers, in trouble.*

_&#8220;Dear Giorgiana,

I think your article has created ripples and has not gone well with the Intelligence Agencies of the Govt. So they are looking for you. C.I.D. department wants all your particulars. I am apprehensive they might frame you in some case or something. So it would be advisable to delay your visit. You don&#8217;t know the ways and the paths our police works on.&#8221;
_
I have received this email, amongst others, after an article appeared in the printed press and online (India&#8217;s brutality has turned Kashmir into a living hell The Comment Factory), in which I wrote about the unlawful brutality of Indian Army troops in Kashmir. How interesting that I am being hounded like a criminal for reporting upon the criminal behaviour of the troops lording it over the Kashmir Valley. If the Indian Government had been instructing their troops to behave in accordance with moral standards of law enforcement then why have they sent their government monkeys out in search of me for reporting upon the reality of the situation?

I have been advised to lie low and not board any internal flights or do anything else that would involve showing my documents as I can expect to have drugs planted on my person at the airport or in my hotel room or some other such cheap trick characteristic of uncivilized countries. But I am staying in a hotel, and they do, of course, have a copy of my passport. As I lay in bed last night staring at the ceiling at 3 am with a head full of paranoid CID sleeplessness I vaguely considered procuring myself a dog or a husband or some other smelly aggressive entity as a protective measure. But I am not sure which option disgusted me more. Not normally given to fear, possibly the most repulsive realization is that I fell prey to it. *After all, if the CID were clever enough to find me and stupid enough to do anything to me then they would have a few foreign embassies on their back given my multiple nationality status.**Thank God I am not Kashmiri, and am therefore, probably, relatively safe.*

*But if the government has nothing to hide why have I had to go into hiding?*

Ironically, I am presently living in an army cantonment area somewhere in India. It was my intention to try and speak to army officers here, in order to understand why the troops in Kashmir behave the way they do. However after having met a number of men with family histories of government army employment, I am even more shocked and perplexed. The army officers I have encountered here are amongst the most upright, morally laudable gentlemen I have ever met in my life. I have rarely, if ever, met men and boys of such upstanding manners and honourable comportment. When they talk to me they don&#8217;t even dare raise their eyes to look at me.

*Whereas in Kashmir I was often prone to being followed by army officers hissing and clucking at me as if it were I who was the farm animal, rather than they. They&#8217;d often call repellently after me as I walked by, things like &#8216;Hey sexy, you are looking so hot in Indian dress. Hey sexy, Hey! Come back.&#8217; If it was a group of them instead of just one, they would all start laughing thereafter. In Europe a man in uniform would get hauled before the courts for accosting a female in the street without just legal cause. But in Kashmir on many occasions over the past year I have been stopped in the street in a very formal manner by Indian army officers who start by asking for my name and passport, then my place of residence in Kashmir and invariably the questioning ends in queries as to my marital status. It becomes suddenly clear to me at this point that the reason I have been stopped is purely due to sexual motivation. A few times I have then found the same man lingering around outside my hotel for a few days. I had to change hotels twice last year before I learnt to simply keep walking when men in army uniform asked me to stop.*

*However here I am, being helped by Indian Army employees, instructing me as to how to avoid the trouble that I am facing from the government they work for but do not trust.* I am receiving this kind treatment from army officers following an article , which they know I wrote, about what &#8216;pigs&#8217; the Indian Army forces in Kashmir are. Clearly there is a vast schism between the bestial thugs sent to lord it over Kashmir and these decent individuals I find myself amongst here. One of them is trying to procure false documents for me as, apparently, if I am tracked down by the CID I can expect to be subjected to a nice dose of imprisonment full of **** and AIDS, after having some false crime hung around my neck.

The manager of my hotel keeps asking me if I want my sheets cleaned. Now I have never ever heard of anyone in India asking if you want clean sheets. Mostly they don&#8217;t use sheets and the ones you find on the beds of even the expensive hotels are usually dubiously littered with pubic hairs and a vague scent of vulgar perfume which you can assume to be the remnants of some rich businessman and his whore. Expensive hotels look cleaner but feel dirtier beneath the surface. This hotel I am staying in is relatively cheap and the manager&#8217;s insistence about coming into my room to change the sheets is making me increasingly paranoid. I keep wondering if I would find clean sheets (finally!) but also find something vaguely drug-like hidden under them. His peculiar sheet persistence keeps tempting/scaring me but I am not sure I am willing to risk my freedom for a couple of clean sheets.

Last night some English girl came up to me and asked if I wanted to go to a Sheesha bar with her and some friends. &#8220;Oh thank you,&#8221; I replied, &#8220;but I&#8217;m vegetarian&#8221;. She looked very perplexed and then explained that Sheesha bars are places where people smoke big pipes full of drugs. I had thought it was an abbreviation of sheesh kebab. I waited until she turned back to her friends and then quickly scuttled out of the restaurant. *I am beginning to think that one of my professors back in Kashmir was right when, every time I got into trouble for saying or doing the wrong thing, he would tell me that he was not angry because it was just but because I was too innocent. I rather expect he will be feeling less indulgent now. My &#8216;innocence&#8217; denotes that I never considered the trouble my previous article would cause the people who had housed me back in Kashmir and helped with my research project concerning a comparative study of Kashmir Mysticism, Shaivism, Buddhism, and Sufism.*

*If I am an innocent (albeit of idiot stock) then I would definitely say that some of the young army cadets I am meeting here exceed me in innocence (of the noble breed) by a long stretch. I cannot fathom a single one of these boys ever behaving in the way the troops do in Kashmir. Not even in ten years. I consider it a strict impossibility. I therefore finally understand at least one thing, that being the fact that Indians are always so unwilling to accept the possibility that their armed forces might be violating their rights of power in Kashmir. When the army is composed of boys like the ones I am presently meeting, and if I had never been to Kashmir, I too would have assumed that all the reports of unprovoked violence and **** by the forces was pure Kashmiri fabrication.*

***

Strangely enough it was one of the young army cadets who raised the subject of **** with me here. Even more strange was the fact that he has Pandits in his family and yet he was still capable of viewing the Kashmir situation with equilateral appraisal. I asked him, the same as I ask all of them, how it is possible that the troops behave in that way in Kashmir when all the individuals I was meeting from army families here in this cantonement seem so very decent. *I asked whether the forces sent to Kashmir were a totally separate breed, separately trained and instructed&#8230; I imagined them being the rejects, too mentally deficient to make it into the army proper, of intellect so low and bestial that it would be considered hazardous to their own health to be left alone in a room with a plastic fork, let alone let loose on an Indian State with batons and guns. *Where in Hell are the Indian Government dredging up the thugs that they send off to Kashmir? *Are they separately trained in the basics of moral codes of order in the line of law enforcement?*

*&#8220;No No, I don&#8217;t know actually. But you know it&#8217;s not that the men are different to us. It&#8217;s just the atmosphere in Kashmir that makes them act like that. If I have the freedom to go into peoples&#8217; houses raping women &#8216;n all and not get in trouble for it of course I will do it, he na?* It is the atmosphere. They can do what they want. Do you know how many women have been raped in Kashmir?&#8221;

&#8220;I know how many have been reported over the past twenty years,&#8221; I replied. &#8220;And I also know that in this part of the world that signifies that the actual number is probably twenty times higher. That makes for an awful lot of noughts.&#8221;

*I am incapable of believing this boy&#8217;s opinion. I do not believe that it is possible for normal boys to turn rotten enough to **** women in villages, beat children in the streets, simply because of the prevalent conditions in Kashmir permitting them such bestial largesse. Truly I am utterly confused.*

*All I understand now is the reason why Indians are so unwilling to believe the truth about what their government is doing to Kashmir. They are incapable of believing it for the same reason that I am incapable of believing that the army men I am meeting here would ever be posted in Kashmir, or are even trained at the same base camps. The forces in Kashmir are clearly being allowed/instructed to behave in total contravention to all honourable codes of law enforcement.* I will never begin to understand the reasons behind this because fortunately my brain is not sufficiently ****** to get to grips with the inner machinations of politics.* But how can Kashmiris be expected to feel as if they are a part of India when they have never been treated as such? Is it any wonder that a growing number of Kashmir&#8217;s desperate and hopeless youth is being seduced by the dubious pro-Pakistan preachings of bearded wahabis veiling their politics beneath the mantle of religion?*

*People need to cling to something. It is hard to live without hope. India has never given Kashmiris any. No hope, no dignity and no respect. They have been pushed into a corner which is beginning to look like Pakistan. Thanks to India&#8217;s policy on Kashmir over the past twenty years, Kashmiris hate Indians, mistaking them for their government, and Indians think Kashmiris are just troublesome, stone pelters instead of seeing them simply as their brothers, in trouble.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tiaverma

future of kashmir is nothing but due to kashmir war is held many times boths countries will destroy but kashmir prob remain still.....million billion will die but kashmir problem remain same... 
acc to me sol is seprate only kashmir not jammu and ladak 

or drop a nuclear bomb on to kashmir


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

i have said it before, i'll say it again....

such a basic phenomenon


dont drop ******* bombs on Kashmiris.....let them determine their future. 


BAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## magg

> let them determine their future.



This has been discussed several times before and has proven to be a non-solution. Thus the only solution is either remain happy with current boundaries or if applied in letter and spirit then Musharaf's autonomy formula.


----------



## RollingStones

magg said:


> This has been discussed several times before and has proven to be a non-solution. Thus the only solution is either remain happy with current boundaries or if applied in letter and spirit then Musharaf's autonomy formula.



It is pretty clear that the Kashmir valley is devolving into yet another place corrupted by Islamic fundamentalism and is regressing backwards. Kashmir valley is definitely the FATA of India and I am not sure how the Indian government will deal with it. But I can tell you that the the CIA is telling the US president that this area will be home to more of what America has been fighting over if it becomes an independent, ungoverned area much like the areas in Pakistan in Afghanistan that have become the breeding grounds for terrorists for years to come. I am still not clear as to how Kashmiris in the valley are addressing issues such as modern education, jobs for youth, lowering the influence of Islamic fundamentalists et al. Maybe a bunch of Kashmiris can be made to travel under Pakistani passports throughout the world for them to realize what a disastrous position that would be...getting screened in world's airports for 3 hours (even for a Pakistani tennis player who finished runner up in the US open this year). Kashmiris can ONLY get the US' support if they can assure that it wont become yet another fundamentalist haven, which is how it is looking now due to all these preachings from mosques, which is what is inciting cries for freedom and not calls from academics, doctors and legal luminaries. This to me is a dangerous proposition. In Bosnia and Serbia, calls for freedom came from well respected individuals and society stalwarts. In Kashmir it is coming from fundamentalist forces...if India succumbs to these forces, it will see more attacks on its soil and would have created an area that would become yet another headache for the world. I think India should propose:

- provide choice to Kashmiris in India to move to Pakistan or their part of Kashmir upon payment of a certain sum of money and a title to a home or business in Pakistani kashmir. 
- make it into a SAR of India much like Hong Kong and give it a 20 year time frame to prove that it will not become fundamentalist like the rest of Pakistan and if they behave, ultimately grant independence. 
- sign agreements stating that if Kashmiris were found to be involved in terrorist activities in India or around the world, they revert back to SAR status under Indian rule. 

See, the world simply does not believe that Pakistan is able to govern territories and prevent the use of its territories for launching global jihads. I, for one, will never support a call for freedom when it is coming from fundamentalist Islamic forces. It is another story when respected Kashmiris especially University level educators/doctors etc. want it. No more religious divisions and destructions because of that. The world has seen enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Patrician

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> dont drop ******* bombs on Kashmiris.....*let them determine their future.*



It is not about only Kashmir's future, it is as much about India's future as well.

And when it comes to India's future, a billion+ Indians will decide.


----------



## Jungibaaz

tiaverma said:


> future of kashmir is nothing but due to kashmir war is held many times boths countries will destroy but kashmir prob remain still.....million billion will die but kashmir problem remain same...
> acc to me sol is seprate only kashmir not jammu and ladak
> 
> or drop a nuclear bomb on to kashmir



are you insane! 
"If you can't find the solution, NUKE IT!"
could you really live with the blood of millions of innocents on your hands???


----------



## tiaverma

> are you insane!
> "If you can't find the solution, NUKE IT!"
> could you really live with the blood of millions of innocents on your hands???



yes this is the only sol...because both jammu and ladakh want to remain with india...only vallay hav a prob....if now india frees the kashmir. In future again jammu may become another kashmir.... soo best sol is no kashmir no tension 
no terror
well rest of india wont bother about kashmir
wat happened in kashmir is their internal prob......
wat is going on is bad they stuck Axe onto their foot....
bussiness dead 
school closed
unemployeement spreading
loook where jammu region is now every where is developemt
there is more tourist in jammu than kashmir 
kashmir is survived only due to jammu economy
neither any firm nor forgiener firm want to do bussiness
now jammu become the most attraccting place for FDI in india......

ADVICE TO INDIAN GOVT

STOP LOVED LANG....NOW USE STICK
We support u watever the world say we dont give it dammm..............


----------



## tiaverma

Hindustan Times

CLICK ABOVE LINK -------->then on left side coloum (Main Page) ---------->12) THE BIG STORY (READ N SEE)

See the latest survery what kashmiri, JAMMU & Ladakh WANT................

in this survey u will find see the truth.............................


----------



## tiaverma




----------



## RollingStones

tiaverma said:


> yes this is the only sol...because both jammu and ladakh want to remain with india...only vallay hav a prob....if now india frees the kashmir. In future again jammu may become another kashmir.... soo best sol is no kashmir no tension
> no terror
> well rest of india wont bother about kashmir
> wat happened in kashmir is their internal prob......
> wat is going on is bad they stuck Axe onto their foot....
> bussiness dead
> school closed
> unemployeement spreading
> loook where jammu region is now every where is developemt
> there is more tourist in jammu than kashmir
> kashmir is survived only due to jammu economy
> neither any firm nor forgiener firm want to do bussiness
> now jammu become the most attraccting place for FDI in india......
> 
> ADVICE TO INDIAN GOVT
> 
> STOP LOVED LANG....NOW USE STICK
> We support u watever the world say we dont give it dammm..............



you dont have to drop a nuke bomb. Right now, the pictures are full of green flag holders asking for this "freedom". In a way, the Kashmiris are nuking their freedom movements themselves. Americans, Russians, Chinese and Western European citizens abhor such green flag movements. We in America are smart enough to know that this means that they want the valley to be Islamic. There is no chance that they will receive any global support for this. Even a liberal city like NY City is against building mosques near Ground Zero. Kashmiris foolishly are expecting global support when no one wants to support fundamentalistic Islamic concept. If they had any brains, they would immediately drop their green Islamic flags and adopt more secular colored flags and get their doctors, engineers, and civil society stalwarts to speak in favor of freedom - even get a few Hindu pandits to ask for freedom to make it a viable secular freedom movement. No chance in 2000 years of the world agreeing to another ungovernable Islamic territory. I dont think the stone pelters get it. World simply does not support Islamic green (for that matter Saffron) flag holders.


----------



## SekrutYakhni

Think logically not emotionally. Do a free and fair referendum under international community (unbiased) in Kashmir and act according to the results. It is that simple!

However, morons, fanatics, lunatics, bigots etc from both sides are delaying this issue. Musharaf took a positive initiative and limited the support for Kashmiri Mujahids to support the cause but India back stabbed us through Afghanistan. This is ridiculous, pathetic and an aggressive measure taken by India. 

Organize an unbiased referendum and if Indians cannot support it than so be it. I am telling you guys to solve this issue not because I am a patriotic Pakistani but because there is a deep misery waiting for Indians across the hill, trust me. Last time I said something out of emotions but this time I am presenting the 'future facts' You might not wanna listen to this but at the end you will loose, defeat.

Kashmir issue is getting my eyes lately.


----------



## Jade

saad445566 said:


> Think logically not emotionally. Do a free and fair referendum under international community (unbiased) in Kashmir and act according to the results. It is that simple!
> 
> However, morons, fanatics, lunatics, bigots etc from both sides are delaying this issue. Musharaf took a positive initiative and limited the support for Kashmiri Mujahids to support the cause but India back stabbed us through Afghanistan. This is ridiculous, pathetic and an aggressive measure taken by India.
> 
> Organize an unbiased referendum and if Indians cannot support it than so be it. I am telling you guys to solve this issue not because I am a patriotic Pakistani but because there is a deep misery waiting for Indians across the hill, trust me. Last time I said something out of emotions but this time I am presenting the 'future facts' You might not wanna listen to this but at the end you will loose, defeat.
> 
> Kashmir issue is getting my eyes lately.



Simply, it is not that simple.


----------



## RollingStones

saad445566 said:


> Think logically not emotionally. Do a free and fair referendum under international community (unbiased) in Kashmir and act according to the results. It is that simple!
> 
> However, morons, fanatics, lunatics, bigots etc from both sides are delaying this issue. Musharaf took a positive initiative and limited the support for Kashmiri Mujahids to support the cause but India back stabbed us through Afghanistan. This is ridiculous, pathetic and an aggressive measure taken by India.
> 
> Organize an unbiased referendum and if Indians cannot support it than so be it. I am telling you guys to solve this issue not because I am a patriotic Pakistani but because there is a deep misery waiting for Indians across the hill, trust me. Last time I said something out of emotions but this time I am presenting the 'future facts' You might not wanna listen to this but at the end you will loose, defeat.
> 
> Kashmir issue is getting my eyes lately.



For kashmiris to gain freedom, they need to portray a secular movement in the eyes of the world and not some green flag waving fundamentalist type fanatical stone pelting, which will make them monsters in the eyes of the world. First thing to do to gain freedom: start using a Kashmir national flag or something secular like that. Images and pictures are everything. Right now, I can tell that Kashmiris unwittingly are portraying themselves as dangerous people, at least here in America.


----------



## tiaverma

if you think use gun against kashmiri is bad then wat about china was it good.. ?against tibetians
even china use guns against tibetian that y condition r there are normal......


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> Kashmir valley is definitely the FATA of India and I am not sure how the Indian government will deal with it.



Either, you are an idiot or i bet you dont even know what F.A.T.A (the acronym) unfolds into!


N.B. The remaining post of yours in IGNORED as my eyes ache after reading the same BS (though paraphrased each time) by you, that is spread over the last few pages of this thread.

Gosh! i never knew the yanks lack ingenuity to such an extent! i can assure you those Americans (Westerners to generalize) whom i have met in person were much versatile!


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> Either, you are an idiot or i bet you dont even know what F.A.T.A (the acronym) unfolds into!
> 
> 
> N.B. The remaining post of yours in IGNORED as my eyes ache after reading the same BS (though paraphrased each time) by you, that is spread over the last few pages of this thread.
> 
> Gosh! i never knew the yanks lack ingenuity to such an extent! i can assure you those Americans (Westerners to generalize) whom i have met in person were much versatile!



I am sure the Americans you met have pretty much the same thoughts as I have. We and the western world are pretty much an image driven country. And we all hate fundamentalistic forces. If Kashmiris are seeking freedom because of their fundamentalistic beliefs - hmm, nada, no support from us.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

RollingStones said:


> It is pretty clear that the Kashmir valley is devolving into yet another place corrupted by Islamic fundamentalism and is regressing backwards. Kashmir valley is definitely the FATA of India and I am not sure how the Indian government will deal with it.




Xeric rightly prescribed that you figure out the acronyms before yapping and wailing away. The fact that you would equate FATA to occupied Kashmir is alarming. 

By the way, being a disputed territory where (CLEARLY) the masses are against the occupation it is a delusional approach to consider it part of hindustan to begin with! In FATA, there is cooperation between local tribes and the security forces.

You will pretty much never see anti-Pakistan or anti-Army graffiti or other such sentiment in FATA. Not what I can say about occupied Kashmir. Pictures do indeed speak thousands of words.






























> But I can tell you that the the CIA is telling the US president that this area will be home to more of what America has been fighting over if it becomes an independent, ungoverned area much like the areas in Pakistan in Afghanistan that have become the breeding grounds for terrorists for years to come.




How convenient..what about Bosnia or Kosovo? There were HUGE array of Islamics (some whom you could label fundamentalist) who were pro freedom and pro independence. If you look at Kosovo today, they hang the U.S. flag almost as much as they hang their own national flag. Very pro-American (independent) country

Countries do not cause breeding grounds for terrorism.conditions can cause people to become angry. And in all honesty, people who ARE angry at hindustan for its inhumane treatment of Kashmiris are very much justified in being so. So as a hindustany who is scared of further terrorist attacks, perhaps you should instead introspect and ask WHY




> I am still not clear as to how Kashmiris in the valley are addressing issues such as modern education, jobs for youth, lowering the influence of Islamic fundamentalists et al.




Al Jazeera had a report last month about how a huge number of the younger generation of anti-hindustan protestors are actually college students, some even pursuing graduate studies. It is an existentialist issue, not one in which poverty or poor economic conditions are manifesting themselves (for better or for worse)




> Maybe a bunch of Kashmiris can be made to travel under Pakistani passports throughout the world for them to realize what a disastrous position that would be...getting screened in world's airports for 3 hours (even for a Pakistani tennis player who finished runner up in the US open this year). Kashmiris can ONLY get the US' support if they can assure that it wont become yet another fundamentalist haven, which is how it is looking now due to all these preachings from mosques



See, now you are just trollingno need to analye or comment on dust-bin-worthy garbage.




> - provide choice to Kashmiris in India to move to Pakistan or their part of Kashmir upon payment of a certain sum of money and a title to a home or business in Pakistani kashmir.



They are free to move anywhere under Pakistani control/influence that they desire. However, keep in mind that Kashmir is their home. Their land is there, their friends/family, their livelihoods. On one hand you call them your citizens (derived from hindustans delusional notion that Kashmir is an integral part) and on the other hand you are contemplating giving them this generous choice you proposed. Basically, you are saying you dont care at all for the people of Kashmir whom you are occupying

This phenomenon seems to be mirrored by the callous recklessness and total unprofessionalism being exhibited by the occupational sissy forces who seem to have wanton disregard for human life in the valley. I am of the opinion that the stakeholders of this occupation are digging themselves in even deeper cow dung.





> - make it into a SAR of India much like Hong Kong and give it a 20 year time frame to prove that it will not become fundamentalist like the rest of Pakistan and if they behave, ultimately grant independence.
> 
> - sign agreements stating that if Kashmiris were found to be involved in terrorist activities in India or around the world, they revert back to SAR status under Indian rule.




And if they dont behave, continue to occupy it?? 

What are you, a pre-school teacher??? 


(Or perhaps pre-school student) 





> See, the world simply does not believe that Pakistan is able to govern territories and prevent the use of its territories for launching global jihads.



You are merely implying that, based on the statements of a fewmany of whom hail from your own country it implies that it gives a true picture on the ground. Yes there are areas in Pakistan that could do with more state presence (more to do with effective governance). Using the same logic, why cant the Karzai administration along with ISAF fully govern or establish writ in Afghanistan? You would think that with all the resources spent in the past 9+ years would have made the country governed and prevented the scourge of drugs, weapons-pushing, smuggling, and terrorism from spreading across the border into Pakistan.

Of course you would leave that aspect out. You would also (again) forget that the Kashmiri struggle is not necessarily a religious one per se. Though Kashmir is a majority Muslim region; one that is loath to ever accept hindustani occupation





> I, for one, will never support a call for freedom when it is coming from fundamentalist Islamic forces. It is another story when respected Kashmiris especially University level educators/doctors etc. want it. No more religious divisions and destructions because of that. The world has seen enough.



You, for one, seem blindly fixated on fundamental Islamic forces and you fail to simply just point out that any religious fundamentalism is wrong if and when it leads to hatred incitement and violence. 

Most of the violence in Kashmir is due to frustrated youth who express their anger at an occupation they do not (and will never) accept; as a result, they protest (which is perfectly within their right) and they get shot with (live) ammunitions.

This is no new news. This has been going on for decades. With media taking a more dominant role in this ever-globalizing world - I, for one, would advise Kashmiris to continue to cover and document the atrocities being committed against them. 

It is interesting to note that the world's so-called 'largest democracy banned SMS services; banned facebook in the valley (protestors were uploading pictures of the protests and creating pro-Kashmir groups on the networking site); and even place political leaders such as APHC chief under constant house arrest.


A FAILED strategy for failing occupational force that have no idea what to do next; no direction at all, due to their own oblivion.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

to all Pakistani comrades:

click here

India forces battle Kashmiri protesters; 15 killed - Yahoo! News


and comment on it; a lot of the commenters have a distorted view of Islam; and of Pakistan's stance on Kashmir. Even small measures like this can make a difference. I saw many interesting comments on there actually.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

right!!!!!! whatever you say chuck


----------



## RollingStones

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> Xeric rightly prescribed that you figure out the acronyms before yapping and wailing away. The fact that you would equate FATA to occupied Kashmir is alarming.
> 
> By the way, being a disputed territory where (CLEARLY) the masses are against the occupation it is a delusional approach to consider it part of hindustan to begin with! In FATA, there is cooperation between local tribes and the security forces.
> 
> You will pretty much never see anti-Pakistan or anti-Army graffiti or other such sentiment in FATA. Not what I can say about occupied Kashmir. Pictures do indeed speak thousands of words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How convenient..what about Bosnia or Kosovo? There were HUGE array of Islamics (some whom you could label fundamentalist) who were pro freedom and pro independence. If you look at Kosovo today, they hang the U.S. flag almost as much as they hang their own national flag. Very pro-American (independent) country
> 
> Countries do not cause breeding grounds for terrorism.conditions can cause people to become angry. And in all honesty, people who ARE angry at hindustan for its inhumane treatment of Kashmiris are very much justified in being so. So as a hindustany who is scared of further terrorist attacks, perhaps you should instead introspect and ask WHY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Al Jazeera had a report last month about how a huge number of the younger generation of anti-hindustan protestors are actually college students, some even pursuing graduate studies. It is an existentialist issue, not one in which poverty or poor economic conditions are manifesting themselves (for better or for worse)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See, now you are just trollingno need to analye or comment on dust-bin-worthy garbage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are free to move anywhere under Pakistani control/influence that they desire. However, keep in mind that Kashmir is their home. Their land is there, their friends/family, their livelihoods. On one hand you call them your citizens (derived from hindustans delusional notion that Kashmir is an integral part) and on the other hand you are contemplating giving them this generous choice you proposed. Basically, you are saying you dont care at all for the people of Kashmir whom you are occupying
> 
> This phenomenon seems to be mirrored by the callous recklessness and total unprofessionalism being exhibited by the occupational sissy forces who seem to have wanton disregard for human life in the valley. I am of the opinion that the stakeholders of this occupation are digging themselves in even deeper cow dung.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if they dont behave, continue to occupy it??
> 
> What are you, a pre-school teacher???
> 
> 
> (Or perhaps pre-school student)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are merely implying that, based on the statements of a fewmany of whom hail from your own country it implies that it gives a true picture on the ground. Yes there are areas in Pakistan that could do with more state presence (more to do with effective governance). Using the same logic, why cant the Karzai administration along with ISAF fully govern or establish writ in Afghanistan? You would think that with all the resources spent in the past 9+ years would have made the country governed and prevented the scourge of drugs, weapons-pushing, smuggling, and terrorism from spreading across the border into Pakistan.
> 
> Of course you would leave that aspect out. You would also (again) forget that the Kashmiri struggle is not necessarily a religious one per se. Though Kashmir is a majority Muslim region; one that is loath to ever accept hindustani occupation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You, for one, seem blindly fixated on fundamental Islamic forces and you fail to simply just point out that any religious fundamentalism is wrong if and when it leads to hatred incitement and violence.
> 
> Most of the violence in Kashmir is due to frustrated youth who express their anger at an occupation they do not (and will never) accept; as a result, they protest (which is perfectly within their right) and they get shot with (live) ammunitions.
> 
> This is no new news. This has been going on for decades. With media taking a more dominant role in this ever-globalizing world - I, for one, would advise Kashmiris to continue to cover and document the atrocities being committed against them.
> 
> It is interesting to note that the world's so-called 'largest democracy banned SMS services; banned facebook in the valley (protestors were uploading pictures of the protests and creating pro-Kashmir groups on the networking site); and even place political leaders such as APHC chief under constant house arrest.
> 
> 
> A FAILED strategy for failing occupational force that have no idea what to do next; no direction at all, due to their own oblivion.



You cannot convince us about most of your arguments. The state department is clear. There are working papers in the policy institutions that talk about the issues very much the same way as I do. We Americans are pretty clear as to what we dont want Kashmir to become - another afghanistan or pakistan. There is a reason we have put pakistan on a group of nations that we consider with extreme caution. In today's world, there is about as much chance as Pakistan becoming a secular state that the US would support or recognize kashmir's freedom movement. 

According to the US State Policy, Pakistan does not have governance and is broke to have resources to effectively collect taxes and govern. All this is there in policy documents. Maybe you should read and analyze better. 

We did not want Kuwait to become part of Iraq and we would not want Kashmir to become part of Pakistan. India governs much better than Pakistan. That is a given. You just cannot keep countering that. We just dont believe in that. 

Again, Kosovo's independence calls came from the top echelons of their society including doctors, successful business folks and even American Kosovars. The fundamentalistic Islamic forces' calls over there we marginal - also rans. If you want to convince us over here, the more successful American Kashmiris have to play a huge role. If they cant get that message to us, despite living here, then our policy does not change much. 

By the way, is it me, or did I get called Indian? (I am assuming Hindustany - place where Hindus reside - means India - wouldnt that be technically Nepal - as per CIA Factbook, the only Hindu country in the world?)

We do have Hindustani music here at Cooper Union in NYC. But some of the musicians from other countries - a turkish guy was part of the group - so is Hindustani Indian or something else? I guess it is wikipedia time.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Xeric

RollingStones said:


> I am sure the Americans you met have pretty much the same thoughts as I have. We and the western world are pretty much an image driven country. And we all hate fundamentalistic forces. If Kashmiris are seeking freedom because of their fundamentalistic beliefs - hmm, nada, no support from us.



Buddy, you know what, you are not at all sure.

You are Wrong!

May be i should give you the names of some yanks (also some serving US personnel especially the USAF) who say israel (the US support to it, precisely) is the cause of all ills.

And oh yes, they also supported Kashmir - their right to self determinate!

FAIL!


----------



## Patrician

RollingStones said:


> You cannot convince us about most of your arguments. The state department is clear. There are working papers in the policy institutions that talk about the issues very much the same way as I do. We Americans are pretty clear as to what we dont want Kashmir to become - another afghanistan or pakistan. There is a reason we have put pakistan on a group of nations that we consider with extreme caution. In today's world, there is about as much chance as Pakistan becoming a secular state that the US would support or recognize kashmir's freedom movement.
> 
> According to the US State Policy, Pakistan does not have governance and is broke to have resources to effectively collect taxes and govern. All this is there in policy documents. Maybe you should read and analyze better.
> 
> We did not want Kuwait to become part of Iraq and we would not want Kashmir to become part of Pakistan. India governs much better than Pakistan. That is a given. You just cannot keep countering that. We just dont believe in that.
> 
> Again, Kosovo's independence calls came from the top echelons of their society including doctors, successful business folks and even American Kosovars. The fundamentalistic Islamic forces' calls over there we marginal - also rans. If you want to convince us over here, the more successful American Kashmiris have to play a huge role. If they cant get that message to us, despite living here, then our policy does not change much.
> 
> By the way, is it me, or did I get called Indian? (I am assuming Hindustany - place where Hindus reside - means India - wouldnt that be technically Nepal - as per CIA Factbook, the only Hindu country in the world?)
> 
> We do have Hindustani music here at Cooper Union in NYC. But some of the musicians from other countries - a turkish guy was part of the group - so is Hindustani Indian or something else? I guess it is wikipedia time.



Thank you sir for injecting a dose of sanity in


----------



## Patrician

xeric said:


> Buddy, you know what, you are not at all sure.
> 
> You are Wrong!
> 
> May be i should give you the names of some yanks (also some serving US personnel especially the USAF) who say israel (the US support to it, precisely) is the cause of all ills.
> 
> And oh yes, they also supported Kashmir - their right to self determinate!
> 
> FAIL!



My friend, nothing is happening unless India supports it. Why is it so difficult to understand?


----------



## RollingStones

xeric said:


> Buddy, you know what, you are not at all sure.
> 
> You are Wrong!
> 
> May be i should give you the names of some yanks (also some serving US personnel especially the USAF) who say israel (the US support to it, precisely) is the cause of all ills.
> 
> And oh yes, they also supported Kashmir - their right to self determinate!
> 
> FAIL!



Sure...there are divergent views. There are conspiracy theory nuts here beginning with the Roswell UFO incident in the 1920s (and I am sure even before that). But what does our government think? What do the majority of our people think? On what planks are our foreign policy staged on? Have you researched all that? Have you gotten a pulse on that? This is a nice forum. Lets be objective here. It is not like we are unfavorable toward Pakistanis (remember despite all this top pakistanis are eligible for hire for some of the top jobs here; we still go by merit and talent) for no reason. We have been driven to that point. The misuse of our flight schools by pakistani students who later used that training to crash into these buildings...all that rankles us and 9/11 will never fade from our memories as witnessed by the memorial service this year. Ten years ago, a lot of cabs in NYC had Pakistani drivers. Today most of them are not. Why do you think that is? You all need to get a pulse on our nation. Anywho I have typed too many posts than I wanted to. But 9/11 memorial service got the soft side ut of me, I guess. What a terrible tragedy for this nation. I hope Indian and Pakistani members will sympathize with us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## TextMiner

RollingStones said:


> You cannot convince us about most of your arguments. The state department is clear. There are working papers in the policy institutions that talk about the issues very much the same way as I do. *We Americans are pretty clear as to what we dont want Kashmir to become - another afghanistan or pakistan. There is a reason we have put pakistan on a group of nations that we consider with extreme caution. In today's world, there is about as much chance as Pakistan becoming a secular state that the US would support or recognize kashmir's freedom movement.*
> 
> According to the US State Policy, Pakistan does not have governance and is broke to have resources to effectively collect taxes and govern. All this is there in policy documents. Maybe you should read and analyze better.
> 
> We did not want Kuwait to become part of Iraq and we would not want Kashmir to become part of Pakistan. India governs much better than Pakistan. That is a given. You just cannot keep countering that. We just dont believe in that.
> 
> *Again, Kosovo's independence calls came from the top echelons of their society including doctors, successful business folks and even American Kosovars. The fundamentalistic Islamic forces' calls over there we marginal - also rans. If you want to convince us over here, the more successful American Kashmiris have to play a huge role. If they cant get that message to us, despite living here, then our policy does not change much.*


This is precisely what i have been writing about here regarding a root-cause analysis of why the Kashmir-freedom movement has a higher chance of failure ; The movement is *NOT* pan-Kashmiri ; It is only dominated in the Sunni-majority Kashmir valley which incidentally is dominated by the pro-Pakistani separatists, who even reject a greater Autonomy option. And given the history of Pakistan as being in the bad books of the West, is again a major concern for them supporting the Kashmir Independence movement. The only glimmer of hope that the Kashmir movement can have is making a major case of Human-rights oppression across the Entire valley which Kashmiris (one and all, including parties like NC, PDP, plus counting the Kashmiri pandits) make against the GoI ; which again is not the ground situation. Finally, arson, pillage and violence all but makes the case even worse against the Independence movement.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ejaz007

*India heading to surrender to Pakistan in IHK: Advani*

NEW DELHI: Opposition Bharatiya Janata Party veteran Lal Krishna Advani expressed concern on Tuesday over what he termed Indias impending surrender to Pakistans proxy war in Indian-held Kashmir, adding, Each passing day strengthens our apprehension that the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government is about to capitulate before Pakistan-supported secessionists. I would like to warn the UPA government that if they decide to bow before the secessionists designs in IHK, the country will not pardon them... in the name of autonomy we cannot allow the process of Kashmirs integration to be reversed, he said in his valedictory address at a two-day training course attended by 116 party spokespersons from 24 Indian states. There is talk of a political solution to the Kashmir issue. Instead of giving a fitting reply to the secessionists, the government has been demonising the security forces. There is continuing talk of diluting the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), and withdrawal of the forces! This is nothing but a surrender before Islamabads strategy of breaking Indias post-1947 unity, Advani said He added that it was exactly what the military rulers of Pakistan had been dreaming of ever since their defeat in Bangladesh War of Liberation in 1971, adding, the situation in IHK was indeed alarming. There is no government worth to name in Jammu and Kashmir. It has completely collapsed, ceding the ground to secessionists. The mess in Kashmir is not the making of only the government in Srinagar. In New Delhi, the UPA government is totally clueless and spineless, Advani added. There is talk of granting maximum autonomy to Kashmir. Decoded, it means giving it its pre-1953 status. Far from repealing Article 370, the UPA government looks all set to repeal years and decades of our collective gains in Kashmir, all because of its lack of will, vision, commitment and competence, Advani said. He went on to remind the Indian prime minister and Congress leader Sonia Gandhi what former Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru said to parliament on November 27, 1963, that Article 370, which granted special status to IHK was  a purely temporary provision. iftikhar gilani

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan


----------



## rockstarIN

A good article to read about Indo-Pak relations

DAWN.COM | Op-Ed Contributor | Time to rethink India policy


----------



## Patrician

ejaz007 said:


> *India heading to surrender to Pakistan in IHK: Advani*
> 
> NEW DELHI: Opposition Bharatiya Janata Party veteran Lal Krishna Advani expressed concern on Tuesday over what he termed Indias impending surrender to Pakistans proxy war in Indian-held Kashmir, adding, Each passing day strengthens our apprehension that the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government is about to capitulate before Pakistan-supported secessionists. I would like to warn the UPA government that if they decide to bow before the secessionists designs in IHK, the country will not pardon them... in the name of autonomy we cannot allow the process of Kashmirs integration to be reversed, he said in his valedictory address at a two-day training course attended by 116 party spokespersons from 24 Indian states. There is talk of a political solution to the Kashmir issue. Instead of giving a fitting reply to the secessionists, the government has been demonising the security forces. There is continuing talk of diluting the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), and withdrawal of the forces! This is nothing but a surrender before Islamabads strategy of breaking Indias post-1947 unity, Advani said He added that it was exactly what the military rulers of Pakistan had been dreaming of ever since their defeat in Bangladesh War of Liberation in 1971, adding, the situation in IHK was indeed alarming. There is no government worth to name in Jammu and Kashmir. It has completely collapsed, ceding the ground to secessionists. The mess in Kashmir is not the making of only the government in Srinagar. In New Delhi, the UPA government is totally clueless and spineless, Advani added. There is talk of granting maximum autonomy to Kashmir. Decoded, it means giving it its pre-1953 status. Far from repealing Article 370, the UPA government looks all set to repeal years and decades of our collective gains in Kashmir, all because of its lack of will, vision, commitment and competence, Advani said. He went on to remind the Indian prime minister and Congress leader Sonia Gandhi what former Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru said to parliament on November 27, 1963, that Article 370, which granted special status to IHK was  a purely temporary provision. iftikhar gilani
> 
> Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan



Congratulation

So I guess this thread must be heading for closure


----------



## Skies

I thought Kashmiries will not want for freedom/separation if India will develop more and more economically and technologically. I thought they would compromise with mighty India and their demonstration will diminish in future. But now it seems there is no correlation with India&#8217;s development. Actually, Freedom is freedom, nothing can be its complementary. 

This time we are hoping for success and freedom for Kashmiries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Patrician

Skies said:


> I thought Kashmiries will not want for freedom/separation if India will develop more and more economically and technologically. I thought they would compromise with mighty India and their demonstration will diminish in future. But now it seems there is no correlation with Indias development. Actually, Freedom is freedom, nothing can be its complementary.
> 
> This time we are hoping for success and freedom for Kashmiries.



ALL THE BEST


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

Patrician said:


> Congratulation
> 
> So I guess this thread must be heading for closure



nope, still going strong 

a lot of ''news'' going on, if anything expect it to become more active.


----------



## bc040400065

*India and Pakistan were close to a Kashmir solution: Musharraf* to 
NDTV Correspondent, Updated: October 09, 2010 19:30 IST 


London: After the launch of his new political party, All Pakistan Muslim League (APML), this week, Pakistan's former military ruler Pervez Musharraf continues to attract global headlines.

India, has closely watched his recent statements on Kashmir, wherein he admitted to Pakistan training underground militant groups to operate in the Kashmir Valley. But today, speaking in London exclusively to NDTV, Musharraf said these groups - groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) - were not raised during his tenure, but much earlier.

While he denied the involvement of the security establishment in sending them across the Line of Control (LOC), he did concede that from Pakistan's point of view, the Lashkar was what he called a Mujahideen group, fighting for the rights of the Kashmiri people.

"From our point of view, LeT is fighting for the rights of Kashmiris and there is great public support in Pakistan for groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba," said Musharraf.


Asked about how close India and Pakistan came during his Presidency, in signing onto Kashmir solution, he said, "We were as close as drafting a final pact for a solution. Final drafts were exchanged through the back channel and Manmohan Singh agreed with my four-point formula."

India and Pakistan were close to a Kashmir solution: Musharraf to NDTV


----------



## MYSTIC

^^^ i have always thought that Musharuff is the best leader for Pakistan as long as India is concerned. Sure he had his Kargil adventure but he also dismantled most of the terrorist camps in ***.


----------



## rockstarIN

Trust me, the Pakistan leader who solves the problems with India will be the Best visionary leader for Pakistan for all time...and will be accepted by the people of sub continent.


----------



## usmangujjar

well all major changes in world boundaries have occurred after world wars.So as to say the UN has been inept with dealing with kashmir dispute.so in the case a war does happen 2012 or 2026 whatever the predictions say.it will definitely result in major changes in the boundaries and kashmir dispute will be grand focus of this war.


----------



## Subramanian

I highly doubt we ll have another world war.Capitalism has already taken over the world and nobody wants to give up his/her life for any cause apart from the extremely poor and brain washed.what one hopes to gain by war,territory/resources will all be lost due to the utter destruction it brings about.At best it can be a confrontation on the border but not a full fledged war.


----------



## desiman

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> i have said it before, i'll say it again....
> 
> such a basic phenomenon
> 
> 
> dont drop ******* bombs on Kashmiris.....let them determine their future.
> 
> 
> BAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



i have said it before, i'll say it again....

such a basic phenomenon


dont drop ******* bombs on the tribals of the North West.....let them determine their future. 


BAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


*Does that work also ?*


----------



## Last Hope

Scenario 7,
The chehab solution.

If the Indian side thinks that it is unfair, then let me explain.
During the time of Partition, Muslims (Pakistanis) were promised 7 provinces, but the deal was that it would be runned by the Britishers.

However, our great leader, Quaid-e-Azam opposed the proposal and told that Muslims (Pakistanis) want a totally free country.

The Britishers agreed, rather coldly. The day finally arrived, but it was announced that Muslims will have 4 provinces _because they cannot handle such a large country _ . 

Before the proposal, all the provinces were asked which country to join. Kashmir was a Muslim majority but had a Hindu ruler.

The muslims wanted to join Pakistan but the ruler (Hindu) wanted India.

The dispute couldnt be come over and it is countined until now!

So I think that scenario 7 would be Fair for Pakistanis as well as Indians!!


----------



## captonjohn

Omar1984 said:


> hahaha we give the people of Azad Kashmir their freedom, no one sends troops into Azad Kashmir and forces them to do anything. Pakistan is not like India, and I'm glad the people of Azad Kashmir are making Indians worry



ha ha ha ha you are right! you gave freedom to Kashmir right? and you don't send your forces to this region because you can't do this officially. The so called "azad kashmir" is an illegally occupied area by Pakistan in 1948 and since then you are there. 

You are right Pakistan is not like india and it sounds it don't want to learn something from India. Whole Pakistani public will support that Kashmir should join them then why not Indian public should do same?

See the international reports from neutral source and then tell something here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## captonjohn

Bezerk said:


> Frankly, India would never agree to such a Solution. That would result in loosing massive amounts of land for her. But at the end of the day, "Someone" has to sacrifice their interests for the sake of stability and peace in the region.



So if this is the case then why don't Pakistan sacrifice his interest in the region? This post has provided no solution at all, do you know that whatever option you choose you'll end the possibility of peace and would head for a war. 

Pak want option 7 and India want option 3 but their is 8th option which might be more terrible if both nation get engaged in war. 

And by the way any issue can be solved on table only when you come with your views NOT with AK-47 and terrorists.


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

captonjohn said:


> ha ha ha ha you are right! you gave freedom to Kashmir right? and you don't send your forces to this region because you can't do this officially. The so called "azad kashmir" is an illegally occupied area by Pakistan in 1948 and since then you are there.
> 
> You are right Pakistan is not like india and it sounds it don't want to learn something from India. Whole Pakistani public will support that Kashmir should join them then why not Indian public should do same?
> 
> See the international reports from neutral source and then tell something here.



so, what lessons should we take from the great largest democracy? Which of many draconian laws and practices should we enact, to make our inhumane barbaric illegal occupation of Kashmir more legitimate? It seems that even though the locals in Azad Kashmir are calm, and not involved in freedom-seeking demonstrations and protests on daily basis, we are doing something wrong (at least according to you)

so, what advice do you have for Azad Kashmir? Considering your country hindustan is such a ''role model'' with its rebel movements and subjugation and harassment of occupied Kashmiris

i look forward to your full analysis

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Muhammad-Bin-Qasim

MYSTIC said:


> ^^^ i have always thought that Musharuff is the best leader for Pakistan as long as India is concerned. Sure he had his Kargil adventure but he also dismantled most of the terrorist camps in ***.



Well said... Musharaf is good for India and not for Pakistan...

The solution to the problems in the Sub Continent is to setup a political regime that "looks after and cares for its people" regardless of religion, ethnicity etc in Pakistan... After this most Indians would want to join such a system also... and if not, they can stay happy where they are... but if they hurt the Muslim population of India again, just once be it Kashmir or Gujrat... We should move in and take over India... once and for all...


----------



## Gandhi G in da house

Muhammad-Bin-Qasim said:


> Well said... Musharaf is good for India and not for Pakistan...
> 
> The solution to the problems in the Sub Continent is to setup a political regime that "looks after and cares for its people" regardless of religion, ethnicity etc in Pakistan... After this most Indians would want to join such a system also... and if not, they can stay happy where they are... but if they hurt the Muslim population of India again, just once be it Kashmir or Gujrat... We should move in and take over India... once and for all...



Take over India ? hmm ... Its not the 12th century buddy . Wake up the numbers have interchanged positions , its the 21st now . Neways besta luck for real life Mission Impossible buddy.


----------



## karan.1970

Muhammad-Bin-Qasim said:


> Well said... Musharaf is good for India and not for Pakistan...
> 
> The solution to the problems in the Sub Continent is to setup a political regime that "looks after and cares for its people" regardless of religion, ethnicity etc in Pakistan... After this most Indians would want to join such a system also... and if not, they can stay happy where they are... but if they hurt the Muslim population of India again, just once be it Kashmir or Gujrat... *We should move in and take over India... once and for all*...



OMG.. It seems, we have Zaid Hamid with a pseudo name here. What will you do if Pakistanis hurt Pakistan's muslim population.. Like in the incident today?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## captonjohn

Abu Zolfiqar said:


> so, what lessons should we take from the great largest democracy? Which of many draconian laws and practices should we enact, to make our inhumane barbaric illegal occupation of Kashmir more legitimate? It seems that even though the locals in Azad Kashmir are calm, and not involved in freedom-seeking demonstrations and protests on daily basis, we are doing something wrong (at least according to you)
> 
> so, what advice do you have for Azad Kashmir? Considering your country hindustan is such a ''role model'' with its rebel movements and subjugation and harassment of occupied Kashmiris
> 
> i look forward to your full analysis



The locals in *** neither has that much awareness nor power to stand against terrorists who are sprayed in whole ***. You want to learn something then listen.

1. At least establish a democracy in your country so that not again any musharraf can rule like dictator. The main reason for maximum problems are army's unnecessary influence in politics. Tell army that you are just a part of country NOT the rulers. In india word's second largest army has no any political interests nor it has engaged in any political activity which stable india more than any other country where army plays politics.

2. And what are you talking about laws? 26/11 only live terrorist has also punished by complete judicial process, if he were in any other country even in US then he must be killed within one month. Now what are you looking for? If justice system has some problem then it may be solved rather then pointing out each other's weakness. 

And by the way just seen a news that Pak PM visit to china to prevent india to get permanent seat in UNSC. Do you have any idea when India will become permanent member of UNSC (which she will get soon)then how would you raise kashmir issue?


----------



## Abu Zolfiqar

captonjohn said:


> The locals in *** neither has that much awareness nor power to stand against terrorists who are sprayed in whole ***. You want to learn something then listen.



shallow analysis, i asked for proper anaylsis



> 1. At least establish a democracy in your country so that not again any musharraf can rule like dictator. The main reason for maximum problems are army's unnecessary influence in politics. Tell army that you are just a part of country NOT the rulers. In india word's second largest army has no any political interests nor it has engaged in any political activity which stable india more than any other country where army plays politics.



the discussion is Kashmir; which incidentally is one area where india does not grant democratic rights to the people. 

basically what im saying is, Kashmir is NOT an integral part of hindustan and never was. It is shown even in the way you treat Kashmiris differently, your forces seem to be treating them all like suspects, animals.

indias Kashmir strategy is a FAILED one, though the diplomacy has kept you afloat. For now at least.




> 2. And what are you talking about laws? 26/11 only live terrorist has also punished by complete judicial process, if he were in any other country even in US then he must be killed within one month. Now what are you looking for? If justice system has some problem then it may be solved rather then pointing out each other's weakness.



not sure about US; but in hindustan's case, they will want to keep Kasab alive for as long as they want. Why? 

so they can keep the old, aging 26/11 issue alive......and TRY to keep Kashmir issue 'dead' and buried --away from world radar screen.

I think Pakistanis and Kashmiris should do more to share with the world the atrocities being committed against them since it is Kashmiris who are quite non-violent -but being met with violence by the occupational forces (sissies)



> And by the way just seen a news that Pak PM visit to china to prevent india to get permanent seat in UNSC. Do you have any idea when India will become permanent member of UNSC (which she will get soon)then how would you raise kashmir issue?




in this very hypothetical situation, maybe it will convince your occupational forces in Kashmir to stop wearing UN helmets and pretending to be something they arent --in order to frame the UN

this was quite an issue which upset the UN......as is the Kashmir issue

and the visit to China wasnt to ''prevent'' india......only your media will report such nonsense. Pakistan's ambassador to the UN, Hussain Haroon, even endorsed india


----------



## Agnostic_Indian

Kashmir is integral part of india..our diplomasy as well as military so far is been successful in defending kashmir. 
as far as atrocities are concerned pak army are no saints either if you look at the past.


----------



## AsianLion

Kashmiris are not going to sit idle.

Kashmir independence framework has to start now.

Kashmir never merged with India...and never will.


----------

