What's new

Baloch secessionism is regarded as unethical but Kashmiri secessionism is regarded as ethical. Why?

Status
Not open for further replies.
On topic: Balochistan is not disputed territory according to the United Nations.

But Kashmir is disputed territory according to the United Nations.

Thats why the Kashmiri freedom struggle is valid.

Wow super hypocrisy........ if you honor UN so much then put Hafiz Saeed behind bars / or had him over to India

Like Balochistan, East Pakistan was not disputed before 1971, everyone saw what happened, BD is reality.
Kashmir was disputed in 48, after 23 years in 71 BD happened Kashmir was disputed, in 99 Kargil happened Kashmir remained disputed, today more than 70 years it is still disputed
 
On topic: Balochistan is not disputed territory according to the United Nations.

But Kashmir is disputed territory according to the United Nations.

Thats why the Kashmiri freedom struggle is valid.
Who is United Nations? What is United Nations? An organisation that excludes great countries like Japan, Germany and Iran. An organisation that is so autocratic that certain five members are regarded as special. This arrangement implies the notion that rest of the world is inferior. Although powerful, UN is an institution whose prime objective is to serve the interests of 5 countries.
 
Baloch secessionism is regarded as unethical but Kashmiri secessionism is regarded as ethical. Why this double standards?

Now don't tell that there is no secessionism in Balochistan. There are at least pockets of genuine secessionism there.

Don't tell that atrocities and human rights violations legitimise Kashmiri secessionism. The armed forces weren't there in Kashmir before the militancy broke out in 1989.

So what's the correct reason for this double speak?
Couple points.

Balochistan is not considered a disputed territory.

Baloch separatists are quite unpopular; there is little support for separatism.

There is no widespread unrest; there are no curfews, people pelting stones at security forces, riots on the streets and etc...

About 40% of the global Baloch population reside in Sindh, about a half of the population of Balochistan is Pashtun.

Overall people of Balochistan reject separatism.

There is no country in the world that currently supports Balochistan separatism.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Jammu_and_Kashmir

Accession of Jammu and Kashmir is based off a Raja of a foreign dynasty that has been long infamous for persecuting the Kashmiri people for centuries. Hari Singh himself was responsible for the Jammu massacre, a state-sponsored ethnic cleansing campaign that reduced the Muslim-majority of Jammu to 36% of the total population and replaced them with refugees from Punjab.

Kashmiri separatism is very popular among the people.

Indian Occupied Kashmir is the most militarized region in the world for a reason.
 
Baloch secessionism is regarded as unethical but Kashmiri secessionism is regarded as ethical. Why this double standards?

Now don't tell that there is no secessionism in Balochistan. There are at least pockets of genuine secessionism there.

Don't tell that atrocities and human rights violations legitimise Kashmiri secessionism. The armed forces weren't there in Kashmir before the militancy broke out in 1989.

So what's the correct reason for this double speak?
O mere aqal k anday padosi...Baluchistan is a part of Pakistan while Kashmir is a unfinished agenda of partition.
Baat samaj mien aayi ya kisi aor taraha se samjhaoun.
 
Indians trying their hard for something in balochistan but reality is there is no such movement in balochistan. Dont know what their media which is top 5 worse media why they follow. I think they have no ans to what is happening in kashmir.
 
UN decision on illegally Indian occupied Kashmir is very clear

Balcohistan is a different situation as its a terrorist movement stoked up by India which spreads systematic terrorism inside Pak.

And Indians claiming what is UN? This is the same UN that all Indian PM's beg to let them join the UNSC for the last 3 decades. Only for China to slap Indians in the face for the last 30 years :omghaha:
 
Wow super hypocrisy........ if you honor UN so much then put Hafiz Saeed behind bars / or had him over to India

Like Balochistan, East Pakistan was not disputed before 1971, everyone saw what happened, BD is reality.
Kashmir was disputed in 48, after 23 years in 71 BD happened Kashmir was disputed, in 99 Kargil happened Kashmir remained disputed, today more than 70 years it is still disputed
Thats because the Bengalis formed a majority in their province.

Balochis are a minority in Pakistan.

As for Hafiz Saeed, India does not have hard proof or anything.
So your idiotic posts have been answered.

Who is United Nations? What is United Nations? An organisation that excludes great countries like Japan, Germany and Iran. An organisation that is so autocratic that certain five members are regarded as special. This arrangement implies the notion that rest of the world is inferior. Although powerful, UN is an institution whose prime objective is to serve the interests of 5 countries.
Then leave the United Nations then. :lol:
 
If a Muslim fights a Muslim nation then he terrorism and if the same Muslim fights a non Muslim nation he becomes freedom fighters for some twisted minds
 
Thats because the Bengalis formed a majority in their province.

Balochis are a minority in Pakistan.

As for Hafiz Saeed, India does not have hard proof or anything.
So your idiotic posts have been answered.


Then leave the United Nations then. :lol:

UN named him as a terrorist, why is he not behind bars treated like APS attackers or killed by the military as TTP members,
When it comes to disputed territory (Kashmir) then you believe in UN and for Hafiz Saeed stance changes ...double standards..hypocrisy...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom