What's new

India threatens Pakistan while Pak Army targets political leadership in press conference


May 21, 2006
United States
Indian minister statement is in pubic

Where is our response in public?
mistakenly, they call the press conference against PTI ...otherwise, instead of Imran Khan, they suppose to use the name India. ...sorry for the mistake...
On a serious note, they should have said something. Becaus TheHindu is a very prestigious newspaper in India and the majority of journalists have good standing or reputations.


Feb 19, 2011
United States
We've been over this multiple times, yet you lot insist on regurgitating your dissembling excuses. The basic framework required a tripartite consensus on demilitarization, a process in which India showed its complete lack of sincerity by demanding a unilateral withdrawal by Pakistan first and foremost without any corresponding simultaneous withdrawal by India, a position that was clearly incompatible with the ground realities of two hostiles engaged in controlling said territory through military force.
Except that was the exact Pre-requisites that were laid down in the resolution, For Pakistan to unilaterally de-militarize along with it's fancy dress fighters, as that constituted the original invasion. I had posted a thread on UNSC resolution for a quick link which lived here for about 7 years, but the current admins here are so insecure they had to delete that too

Now for the one who live on a steady diet of balderdash:
The presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation and the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State..
read that a few times till that sinks in.

It was only after India's stalling and unrealistic demands on demilitarization that Pakistan took the actions it did, to force a change to the status quo.
India's stalling led to Pakistan's unilateral invasion of the disputed regions in 65 and 99. and now India needs to act per the UNSC resolution....

And after attempting to change the staus quo, (and failing miserably perhaps), you want us to go back to UNSC resolution.... then fine. Our position as you said per the pre req's of the resolution is still the same: Go ahead and demilitarize and notify the UN. then you can blame us on not doing our part.

The rest of your balderdash, of demographic change and what not, there is no credible evidence supporting this. If India genuinely believed there was any significant demographic change, that would be something that could be raised within the UNSC, calling on the UNSC to initiate independent investigations verifying such claims on BOTH sides of the disputed territories. This is where your disingenuousness becomes clear - any sincere party, had it really wanted to implement the UNSC Resolutions, would have raised these concerns in the UN and called for an independent investigation to verify the authenticity of said claims, but India just continues to lie and deceive to perpetuate its illegal occupation over IIOJK and refusal to abide by the UNSC Resolutions she committed to.

Laughing my *** off here now, a country that perpetuates blatant invasion of the disputed territory and arms trains and perpetuates the most heinous terror acts on the other party, pretty much demolishing the basic framework of "cessation of hostility " says : take it up with the council.

And while we are at it, let's talk about disingenuousness: You, and here I mean specifically you, are the kind that justifies the unilateral aggression of 1965 and 1999, 40 years of terrorism and still expects India to change its position. No wonder your military treats you the way they do. as you sow, so shall you reap.


Apr 18, 2022
India knows going to UN is a slippery slope yet some of you are clutching on straws. Before the modalities of the withdrawal from both sides can be discussed, both parties need to show willingness to abide by the agreement.

The war in 1965 took a good 15 years after the agreement for a plebiscite.

Simla agreement was voided when India invaded Siachen.

The rebellion in J&K is still alive despite a good number of Indian army manning the LoC and urban areas. Yet the rebellion does not die down. Good luck with selling the infiltration story.

There is a reason why there is no rebellion on the Pakistani side of Kashmir and the situation is complete opposite on the other side.

Have been through the argument 100s of times. I’ll end it here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom