Gen Raheel Sharif calls Kashmir as "jugular vein of Pakistan"

[illusion8]

Siachin was the first major violation by India..... Even fencing the LOC by India is a violation of the spirit of Simla Agreement

Siachen was a no man's land not claimed by any side so - no, it was not.

Fencing the LOC doesn't have anything to do with the shimla accord.

 

[chhota bheem]

All that cr@p that you write; does not change anything at all:
1. the status of Jammu and Kashmir
2. the historical Fact of 1971 AD
3. the Simla Agreement
4. which allowed 93,000 POWs to go out of captivity to their homes
5. the fact that the afore-said Simla Agreement still stands binding
6. and that afore-said "jugular vein" to quote Gernail Shareef is still in somebody else's hands

Anything else?

Good to see you again,if i am right i dint see your post for a long time,welcome capt.

 

[illusion8]

Go to the occupied kashmir and see with your own eyes how much those loons love your bharat mata.

No one cares and you should google kashmir toursim and how many thousands of Indians go there every year, not to forget the millions who travel to Ambarnath.

 

[chhota bheem]

Thanks for the laughter)

And we will show you from time to time.

Do you know what a jugular vein does ?

 

[kaykay]

Thanks for the laughter)

And we will show you from time to time.

Well Casualties in whole Kashmir is around 20 times 'less' than casualties in Karachi alone. It says everything about 'stronger insurgency' LOLs.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

Sure? He's a Canadian national?

don't know for sure, heard in some talk show

 

[Battle Axe]

don't know for sure, heard in some talk show

I see...

 

[VCheng]

It has been violated by India and Pakistan both in the past ...... Like UN resolutions , it is outdated

That may be, but other countries, like USA, or even the UN, regard it as a valid treaty and will not agree to mediate unless asked by both Pakistan and India. Previous UNSC resolutions have been superseded by the Simla Agreement, but nothing has superseded the Simla Agreement yet. It remains in full force.

 

[INDIC]

Well Casualties in whole Kashmir is around 20 times 'less' than casualties in Karachi alone. It says everything about 'stronger insurgency' LOLs.

Srinagar is even safer than Pakistan's Islamabad.

 

[M. Sarmad]

That may be, but other countries, like USA, or even the UN, regard it as a valid treaty and will not agree to mediate unless asked by both Pakistan and India. Previous UNSC resolutions have been superseded by the Simla Agreement, but nothing has superseded the Simla Agreement yet. It remains in full force.

India's stand that the Simla Agreement of 1972 supersedes earlier UN resolutions on Kashmir is not legally tenable even as it sought "serious negotiations" on all outstanding disputes.

How one country can decide that UN Security Council resolutions are no more valid ?



How a bilateral agreement, which does not state it intends to override the UN resolutions, could "override UN Security Council resolutions".??

The legal process is that if "Pakistan, India and Kashmiris reach an agreement on the settlement of the Kashmir dispute, they would have to go back to the UN Security Council to get another resolution to endorse that procedure",

"So this argument has no legal basis"

 

[INDIC]

How one country can decide that UN Security Council resolutions are no more valid ?

Bilateral between Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

 

[nair]

India's stand that the Simla Agreement of 1972 supersedes earlier UN resolutions on Kashmir is not legally tenable even as it sought "serious negotiations" on all outstanding disputes.
"

That is where Indira made the mistake.... she should have negotiated for final settlement in 72, and finished the matter once for all....

 

[M. Sarmad]

Bilateral between Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

Yes ... That is the point ... India can not "unilaterally" declare that UN resolutions are no longer valid and Simla agreement has superseded them ...

 

[genmirajborgza786]

That is where Indira made the mistake.... she should have negotiated for final settlement in 72, and finished the matter once for all....

nair common yaar
in this @ least give some credit to our leader Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, I mean from such weak position on ground, he actually managed to get the most & some more out of a very desperate situation, like him or hate but one can't deny his political brilliance, wish he had ruled Pakistan for more

 

[VCheng]

India's stand that the Simla Agreement of 1972 supersedes earlier UN resolutions on Kashmir is not legally tenable even as it sought "serious negotiations" on all outstanding disputes.

How one country can decide that UN Security Council resolutions are no more valid ?



How a bilateral agreement, which does not state it intends to override the UN resolutions, could "override UN Security Council resolutions".??

The legal process is that if "Pakistan, India and Kashmiris reach an agreement on the settlement of the Kashmir dispute, they would have to go back to the UN Security Council to get another resolution to endorse that procedure",

"So this argument has no legal basis"

Both Pakistan and India agreed to resolve ALL disputes between them bilaterally when they signed the Simla Agreement. Legally, that is a binding and pretty robust argument:

"(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. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peace and harmonious relations."