Countries not willing to talk about Kashmir because of India's influence: Former Pakistan diplomat

[Brickwall]

Keeping 700k troops stationed in a single state is not cheap for India. In fact it must be fairly humiliating to call yourself a democracy with the sorry state of Kashmir while proudly claiming that a few hundred militants can keep your entire army occupied. But this is trivial, I agree.

The biggest strategic win for Pakistan has been the alignment of Chinese interests right through Kashmir. Once CPEC is generating revenue for its investors and stakeholders, i.e half of Chinese landmass and all of Central Asian economy, including war torn Afghanistan, I am confident it will necessitate a resolution to the Kashmir problem from all quarters.

The more revenue that is involved, the more serious people get about resolving conflicts. We just need to let as many landlocked regions become dependent on our infrastructure and influence will come. No need for war.

You cannot fight the historic silk road.

Whats humiliating is every countries associating the name of your country with terrorism , monster created to fulfill 70 years of dream is turning on master itself, going to IMF for bailing out after regular attempts .

 

[vikata]

just like american had given roti to your army during abottabad raid

Why bullet proof vests. Bring a Roti, give it to Indian border guard and visit Srinagar. lol

 

[scionofPakwattan]

IF you sent two armies to seek diplomacy, they'll end up killing each other....guaranteed.
Send normal citizens if you want peace.

All due respect: we'll send whomever suits us

 

[UnitedPak]

Whats humiliating is every countries associating the name of your country with terrorism , monster created to fulfill 70 years of dream is turning on master itself, going to IMF for bailing out after regular attempts .

Missed that memo. List the countries. Last I checked, they all have relations with Pakistan. They probably teach you something else in Bharat...

 

[prashantazazel]

LOL. Can other countries do any thing about Kashmir?
No other country can do any thing about Kashmir the best strategy is to make it so expensive for India to hold on to Kashmir that it drowns the whole country with it. It is very simple this is Pakistan's war and Pakistan will have to fight it.

In return, we could make it expensive to hold your 4 states together.
Would you like it if india spent all her energy in creating a Somalia or Venezuela out of you?

 

[UnitedPak]

In return, we could make it expensive to hold your 4 states together.
Would you like it if india spent all her energy in creating a Somalia or Venezuela out of you?

I like how you believe that your country just doesn't have it in them to hurt a fly. Must be boring and dull to be this "innocent".

 

[Kuru]

Because we are dealing with a psychotic nation that claims to have accepted an instrument of accession from a genocidal "leader" who at the time had just wiped out 200k of his own people.

I'm quite unsure if he did. Even if he did, you shouldn't have a problem with it because Pakistan had killed thousands of Bengalis in 1971. Why? Because, as Pakistan belived, those Bengalis were fighting against the state for their right to freedom. Please note that I don't wish to talk about 1971 here, I'm just giving you an example that when you go against the state, the state reserves the right to retaliate. Pakistan also did it and so did that "genocidal leader." So let's not complain about it?

Moreover, this psychotic nation values Kashmiri land far more than the Kashmiri people who are considered foreign obstacles and a major inconvenience to their own homeland on the deluded basis that the 800 year old presence of Islam in Kashmir is far too recent when compared to their own 1.2 trillion years of holy mental presence in the region.

Your INCORRECT perception that India having a problem with its Muslim citizens is profoundly disturbing, Sir. The Indian Muslims are literally appeased here, right from having a freedom to ridicule Hindu Culture to getting money for their religious tours to Arabia, no other community is given such preferences (including majority Hindus). In fact, it was the Hindus who were seen as an 'obstecles' and were hence thrown out of the Valley overnight. India never allowed any outsider to settle in the disputed area. YOU DID. Yet you want to blame India somehow? I'm not saying that India is a perfect society but your perception that we're considering our own Muslim citizens as some kinda obstacles is false, misleading and totally uncalled for. I insist that you take that back otherwise it will just show your intellectual dishonesty into this matter.

This is followed by the mental gymnastics used to argue if the problem is a "bilateral dispute", "internal matter", "not a dispute at all" and the routine whinging about "P0K", "C0K" and CPEC at international forums.

It became bilateral issue when you signed Shimla agreement in 1972. Why did you sign it if you didn't want it to be bilateral in the first place? Any explanation on that?

From 1948 to 1972, the issue wasn't bilateral. Why Pakistan didn't complete the pre condition for the Kashmir referendum during that time? In fact, why Pakistan has NEVER done it till now?

We are not exactly dealing with mentally balanced or coherent individuals.

Since you're the one who is 'mentally balanced" here so why not take UN resolution about Kashmir referendum seriously? Go ahead and complete the preconditions of the UN resolution. What's stopping you do that? Are you afraid of the outcome of such referendum?

 

[El Sidd]

In return, we could make it expensive to hold your 4 states together.
Would you like it if india spent all her energy in creating a Somalia or Venezuela out of you?

Lol

That's some cheap trash talk.

 

[oOo]

Because we are dealing with a psychotic nation that claims to have accepted an instrument of accession from a genocidal "leader" who at the time had just wiped out 200k of his own people. Moreover, this psychotic nation values Kashmiri land far more than the Kashmiri people who are considered foreign obstacles and a major inconvenience to their own homeland on the deluded basis that the 800 year old presence of Islam in Kashmir is far too recent when compared to their own 1.2 trillion years of holy mental presence in the region.

This is followed by the mental gymnastics used to argue if the problem is a "bilateral dispute", "internal matter", "not a dispute at all" and the routine whinging about "P0K", "C0K" and CPEC at international forums.

We are not exactly dealing with mentally balanced or coherent individuals.

The number of ad-hominem in your post shows that much a butt hurt that no smiley or cartoon can hide.

 

[prashantazazel]

I like how you believe that your country just doesn't have it in them to hurt a fly. Must be boring and dull to be this "innocent".

Let's see what we can manage with a growing economy. I don't support any religious causes, and Kashmir is one.
Violence will beget violence. .

 

[UnitedPak]

The number of ad-hominem in your post shows that much a butt hurt that no smiley or cartoon can hide.

I don't think you know what ad-hominem means.

 

[oOo]

I don't think you know what ad-hominem means.

Yeah sure, what else you were doing apart from attacking India, hinduism where else you were supposed to respond logically to the other poster polite assertion?

 

[UnitedPak]

Let's see what we can manage with a growing economy. I don't support any religious causes, and Kashmir is one.
Violence will beget violence. .

A good summary right there.

Talk about your holy economy when nobody asked
Mislabel the Kashmir cause
Threaten the people with more violence


How has that worked out so far?

Yeah sure, what else you were doing apart from attacking India, hinduism where else you were supposed to respond logically to the other poster polite assertion?

Up until I responded to you I wasn't attacking the poster making the argument, which is what ad-hominem means, so you really got me there. Looks like you brought me down to your level and beat me with experience.

 

[oOo]

Up until I responded to you I wasn't attacking the poster making the argument, which is what ad-hominem means, so you really got me there. Looks like you brought me down to your level and beat me with experience.

Another one.

The subject is "India". You need not to attack the poster to qualify for ad-hominem but the subject. The poster was not giving his stance but Indian stance. You chose to attack India than countering Indian stance.

Mental that, incoherent this, imbalance minds and between these words some random text.

Have you ever read Indian Independence Act? Does that disqualify genocidal princes?

 

[prashantazazel]

A good summary right there.

Talk about your holy economy when nobody asked
Mislabel the Kashmir cause
Threaten the people with more violence


How has that worked out so far?




Up until I responded to you I wasn't attacking the poster making the argument, which is what ad-hominem means, so you really got me there. Looks like you brought me down to your level and beat me with experience.

What's the Kashmiri cause then?
Why are only some Muslims who want to separate? Why not the Buddhists in leh or the hindus in Jammu?