Search results

The issue of maps in magazines and claims came in 1984 when Indian occupied Siachen illegally. If there was any problem with the demarcation issue, how do you think the area beyond Pt N 9842 was having no military presence and was being accepted as it is by both sides? The positions as of 27...

Right :D Matlab, tusi khota khu wich sut dita... i mean, what next? You ask @WebMaster about the exact details and minutes if his meetings and exact wordings when he conceived and activated this forum? On a serious note, this 'official demarcation in detail' is laying exactly in the...

Yes it did happen. So what's the fuss about? Oh, this: Which primary source are you referring to? It's a simple question. Try answering it without taking a puff of that cig.

So you want to say that the following documents do not exist: - Karachi Agreement - Simla Agreement - Papers holding record of BPs demarcating the LoC formally known as CFL countered check by India, Pakistan and the UN Observers Right! Now i really need that stuff you have been smoking...

May be i am missing something here. What exactly are you asking for? As mentioned earlier, the explanation of CFL/LoC are amply available in the text of Karachi and Simla Agreements which are universally accepted documents. Second, as for your query if the demarcation actually took place on...

Everything is quite clear, only if one wants to understand. The sole purpose of posting this presentation was to nullify the following stance: LOC beyond NJ 9842 will be extended to “North” or “Northwards”. The slides explains this amply. They even elaborate the statements of Karachi and...

Wrong! i am amused by your ignorance and stubbornness. Here's why: KARACHI AGREEMENT Chapter 1. In Sec 1 (which describes the Karachi Agreement and its interpretation), Sub Sec II, Sub Sub Sec B describes the gen alignment of CFL in para 2(d), defining the CFL from Khor to NJ - 9842 by fol...

Precisely: Operation Meghdoot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ;)

Thankyou genius for exactly repeating what the slides have already said: The only logical reason why area beyond NJ-9842 was neither delineated / demarcated nor even ref to as CFL or LOC at any place in the docus of Karachi and Simla Agreements is because terms Cease Fire Line (CFL) or Line of...

Are you smoking something, sir? The CFL/LoC was demarcated on ground by both the forces. The BPs are recorded and present on ground, details of which are held by both sides. i am sorry if you didnt get a memo of the same from the either side. The only major difference between LoC and...

How else do you think the CFL aka the LoC was demarcated then? If you are asking for a 'stamp paper' signed by those NCOs who demarcated this line, i am sorry that would be difficult to procure.

Did you read Slide # 13?

Idiot, these slides are the brief which were once delivered by our foreign office to diplomats. Just found them from somewhere. Why dont you counter the facts, even a blog would do if it's authentic ;)

Various old (independent) maps showing Siachen as part of Pakistan: Slide20 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide21 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide22 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide23 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide24 by Khakiate, on Flickr

:agree:

Slide11 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide12 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide13 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide14 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide15 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide16 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide17 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide18 by Khakiate, on Flickr Slide19 by Khakiate, on Flickr

Some clarity over the Siachen issue perhaps is required: Truth/Facts About Pakistani Claim Over Siachen Glacier

Xeric's Primer: Truth/Facts About Pakistani Claim Over Siachen Glacier It is usually said or quoted that the LOC beyond NJ 9842 will be extended to “North” or “Northwards”. Any stance based on such a statement is incorrect, here's why: (These slides are the brief which were once delivered by...

After failing in maths, do you now require coaching in English too?