ARMY VETERAN’S ‘SPLIT PAK INTO 4’ TALK SPARKS OUTRAGE

[Dubious]

first be calm and read what i said, then react. i said if all news thats suits your stance form Indian news paper are true as per your thinking or logic, the same way we also CAN think all news which suits our stand from pakistan news agencies are also true?

I never said all news...How many news have I published from your media?

2ndly, I used your sources COZ it is from your land....2ndly the fact that someone reacted and felt disgusted shows there is hope in your country! Good luck!

then you come here and say its RAW,Massod/CIA/Mi5 funded paper, else its directly come from gods mouth.

Well, the fact that someone of "indian" blood reacted and didnt like it and complained about and hence the news, I dont see any reason for you to jump to RAW, MOSSAD, CIA, Mi5 and so on....

PS: dont drag other things. answer directly without examples if you can? else leave it as-usual...!

You are the ONLY one dragging other things... Like our paper and now
You are the one who gave the examples of RAW, MOSSAD, CIA, Mi5

PS assuming massod is MOSSAD...one should at least know their friends

At least we shoot only those who break curfew (law and order) and cause disruptions that to after several warnings, you people air bomb the civilians without any warning.

Stick to the topic there are plenty of threads where indians are crying about Pakistanis....Try to talk about you "at least shooting" the future (youth) of a people you claim are indians but still shoot them for voicing out their opinions

Curfew? For what? Democratic freedom?

We had highest voting in Kashmir in recent election where as 2013 Balochistan election had the lowest. And were most of you media said that Balochs have bycoted the elections. Remember PB-41, Awaran where just 1.18% people turned out for voting.

Again stick to the topic if you cant, then leave...

As for highest voting in Kashmir...they thought their voice would be heard and now after voting their are shot...I am sure they got the msg

Unfortunately you think there is Pakistan and there is India on this entire planet, so if something was not written in praise of pakistan then it was written by Indians. Cant help you in that case, I feel sorry and pity, i hope internet helps you to learn more.

Again attempts to derail the thread...Cant stick to the topic kindly leave

Err one persons opinion becomes outrage. Instigating violence against what ?

Unlike you he did attend the lecture and maybe reading further into it would help you understand

Please highlight that part in article.
He said split Pak in to four .
How does that influence our youths to incite violence in India?

I already said to one of you indians : go write to the author....Oh wait, you might kill him for voicing out

Who is going to split Pakistan into 4? And how? You think its going to split by your smile? Apparently you arent the smartest in the lot to understand polite writings ....Carry on denying that is also prob what the army guy "ordered you"

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"SPARKS OUTRAGE" where??? i dont see any thing like that here in Tamil Nadu or in Chennai(Madras).. it happens only to our neighbours who get outrage.!!

Preaching the dismemberment of a sovereign State, supporting brutal and violent tactics against protesters in internationally recognized disputed territory - why wouldn't Pakistanis, or any rational individual for that matter, be outraged over such comments?

 

[Indika]

Unlike you he did attend the lecture and maybe reading further into it would help you understand

please stop perpetrating violent acts on our mind through your posts. I suggest nice chai & good story to calm down. The student well might be having with general.

 

[Viny]

Stick to the topic there are plenty of threads where indians are crying about Pakistanis....Try to talk about you "at least shooting" the future (youth) of a people you claim are indians but still shoot them for voicing out their opinions

Curfew? For what? Democratic freedom?

Again stick to the topic if you cant, then leave...

As for highest voting in Kashmir...they thought their voice would be heard and now after voting their are shot...I am sure they got the msg

Again attempts to derail the thread...Cant stick to the topic kindly leave

Unlike you he did attend the lecture and maybe reading further into it would help you understand

Stick to the topic there are plenty of threads where indians are crying about Pakistanis....Try to talk about you "at least shooting" the future (youth) of a people you claim are indians but still shoot them for voicing out their opinions

Curfew? For what? Democratic freedom?

Curfew is there for ensuring miscarents that our friendly neighbours keep pushing in dont cause trouble to peace in valley. When its rains heavily you keep kids at home not to cutail there freedom but to safe guard them against disasters.

Again stick to the topic if you cant, then leave...

As for highest voting in Kashmir...they thought their voice would be heard and now after voting their are shot...I am sure they got the msg

Well every society has a fraction of oppositions and so does in democratic setup. Majority of got there voice heard and are working for solutions. Those who are burned hard because they could not get power and ruling are doing tantrums nothing more than that.

Again attempts to derail the thread...Cant stick to the topic kindly leave

Please find something to discuss on matter which you raise rather than asking others to stick to topic, if you are going to point index finger on others remember other 4 fingers will point back at you.

 

[Trichy]

Preaching the dismemberment of a sovereign State, supporting brutal and violent tactics against protesters in internationally recognized disputed territory - why wouldn't Pakistanis, or any rational individual for that matter, be outraged over such comments?

this is not the reply for my question, I except direct answer for it.


Kashmir is international dispute till you sign Simla treaty in 1972, now even UN don't consider for it.

try better to answer my questions directly rather thn changing the goal post always

 

[SrNair]

I never said all news...How many news have I published from your media?

2ndly, I used your sources COZ it is from your land....2ndly the fact that someone reacted and felt disgusted shows there is hope in your country! Good luck!

Well, the fact that someone of "indian" blood reacted and didnt like it and complained about and hence the news, I dont see any reason for you to jump to RAW, MOSSAD, CIA, Mi5 and so on....

You are the ONLY one dragging other things... Like our paper and now
You are the one who gave the examples of RAW, MOSSAD, CIA, Mi5

PS assuming massod is MOSSAD...one should at least know their friends


Stick to the topic there are plenty of threads where indians are crying about Pakistanis....Try to talk about you "at least shooting" the future (youth) of a people you claim are indians but still shoot them for voicing out their opinions

Curfew? For what? Democratic freedom?


Again stick to the topic if you cant, then leave...

As for highest voting in Kashmir...they thought their voice would be heard and now after voting their are shot...I am sure they got the msg


Again attempts to derail the thread...Cant stick to the topic kindly leave


Unlike you he did attend the lecture and maybe reading further into it would help you understand


I already said to one of you indians : go write to the author....Oh wait, you might kill him for voicing out

Who is going to split Pakistan into 4? And how? You think its going to split by your smile? Apparently you arent the smartest in the lot to understand polite writings ....Carry on denying that is also prob what the army guy "ordered you"

Oh really ?
Thats nice, even coming from a swiss , with full spectrum of press freedom

What is actually you trying to say ?

 

[-xXx-]

Somebody should remind this turd that our grandfathers split India in two in 1947 .... So the score is even now.

And we did not need to "ride" the Mukhti's to do it .......

And did it cross your little mind that you divided your own country in which you were living, and India broke your country.

In 47, Indians partitioned India. That's called split .

In 71, Indians broke Pakistan. That's called breaking.

Please stick to your racist comments, atleast they have fun quotient, rest is not your cup of tea.

 

[somebozo]

Not much different between modi and hitler talent.,,,,

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

this is not the reply for my question, I except direct answer for it.


Kashmir is international dispute till you sign Simla treaty in 1972, now even UN don't consider for it.

try better to answer my questions directly rather thn changing the goal post always

Read the text of Simla - it does not in anyway override or negate the UNSC Resolutions, in fact, Simla reiterates the commitment of both States to the UN Charter:

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:

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

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.​

The UNSC Resolutions come under the ambit of "mutually agreed upon peaceful means" - nothing in Simla supersedes the UNSC Resolutions.

 

[Nicky G]

Read the text of Simla - it does not in anyway override or negate the UNSC Resolutions, in fact, Simla reiterates the commitment of both States to the UN Charter:

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:

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

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.​

The UNSC Resolutions come under the ambit of "mutually agreed upon peaceful means" - nothing in Simla supersedes the UNSC Resolutions.

Read again - mutually agreed. If India objects to a third party, its not obligated to any third party arbitration. You guys essentially signed away the opportunity to force a third party, such a the UN into the dispute. A mistake of epic proportions from your point of view.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Read again - mutually agreed. If India objects to a third party, its not obligated to any third party arbitration. You guys essentially signed away the opportunity to force a third party, such a the UN into the dispute. A mistake of epic proportions from your point of view.

The Indian government committed to and agreed to the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir multiple times, as did Pakistan. Nehru's speeches and statements as Indian Prime Minister committing to the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir are a matter of public record.

Now if you want to renege on the commitment and violate India's commitment to the UN Charter, then have the Indian government specifically and officially state exactly that in the UN.

 

[Nicky G]

The Indian government committed to and agreed to the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir multiple times, as did Pakistan. Nehru's speeches and statements as Indian Prime Minister committing to the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir are a matter of public record.

Now if you want to renege on the commitment and violate India's commitment to the UN Charter, then have the Indian government specifically and officially state exactly that in the UN.

There is no violation precisely because of the bilateral agreement. You guys signed away the right to demand India stick to anything else.

As for a bilateral agreement not superceding the UN, I have heard that a million times but where is the justification for that? Any ruling you can cite? Any precedent?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There is no violation precisely because of the bilateral agreement. You guys signed away the right to demand India stick to anything else.

Pakistan signed away nothing - I just quoted the actual text of Simla highlighting my point, to which you have not responded.

As for a bilateral agreement not superceding the UN, I have heard that a million times but where is the justification for that? Any ruling you can cite? Any precedent?

It's not that a bilateral agreement can't supersede the UN, it is the fact that the Simla Agreement does not contain any language that supersedes the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir. Indian negotiators should have been more careful and specific about the language of Simla if they want it to supersede the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir.

 

[Trichy]

Read the text of Simla - it does not in anyway override or negate the UNSC Resolutions, in fact, Simla reiterates the commitment of both States to the UN Charter:

In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows:

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

(ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them.​

The UNSC Resolutions come under the ambit of "mutually agreed upon peaceful means" - nothing in Simla supersedes the UNSC Resolutions.

ok then when you going to vacate the P o K and G&B...? we discuss after you did that. till them 100 or 1000 or even a trillion threads dont get any solutions. if you dont believe try yourself in your lifetime....

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

ok then when you going to vacate the P o K and G&B...? we discuss after you did that. till them 100 or 1000 or even a trillion threads dont get any solutions. if you dont believe try yourself in your lifetime....

The UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir (there are quite a few, not just one) set up a framework within which India, Pakistan and UN mediators are to enter into negotiations on the nature and timing of any military withdrawal. Pakistan agreed to multiple proposals presented by UN Mediators/commissions tasked to reach such an agreement, and India rejected almost all of them. There is no requirement for a unilateral or unconditional withdrawal upon Pakistan.