How Kashmir was stolen from Pakistan by Mountbatten

[SamantK]

You guys don't agree with your leaders and abuse them.

You guys do not agree to the facts and trash them.

Read Post# 537

 

[Black Widow]

What Subash's, Sardar's and others couldn't achieve then - what can they achieve now. You are welcome to bring them back. And, their reincarnation may also not be in the same form!

WHAT ARE u talking bout???? You asked me to pay grace to ppl like Nehru, I said I don't like him rather I will pay grace to ppl like Subhash and Sardar.

"grace/grās/
Noun:
Simple elegance or refinement of movement.
"

Am I not understandable??? Ok I will use very simple english now...

In ur post you mentioned Nehru and his plebiscite , I asked you "Do you know what is written in the UN reolustion on Kashmir?"? You started talking sensless issue...

DO you have any answer?/ Do you know what is precondition for plebiscite???

What did Sardar & Subash not achieve?

Don't feed him, he doesn't know what he is talking bout, He is skewing the topic here and there. Finally he will come to banned topics of PDF. Reply to those posts will lead one to bann... Its Honey trap...

 

[Nassr]

Dude, India is a country not under a dictator.. decisions are seldom taken alone..

Even dictators seldom take their decisions alone. As in Democracy, they also have cronies around them.

Kashmir was the result of some more too, one important guy named VP Menon

VP Menon was a good Indian. He did what he was asked to do. But he failed in his mission. You don't have all of Kashmir and it is still up in flames as it was in 1947, even after over 60 years. So, what has changed, if at all !

We are not blind that we do not point out the mistakes done by some whether they be our leaders, its not to discredit them but to make sure those mistakes are not repeated.

Then why did you kill Gandhi? Was this done to avoid him being discredited.

I know that concept is difficult for you to understand, but then that is how things stand.

Oh no. We do understand you concepts very well here. It is just that we don't want to follow your concepts, which invariably lead to disasters.

 

[bronxbull]

Thank you. That is what I wanted to highlight - Just Plain Facts.



You guys don't agree with your leaders and abuse them.

You guys do not agree to the facts and trash them.

When the reality would squarely face you, hide your face in the sand and call yourself Ostrich.

Dont get over dramatic now, you decide who respects facts and who dont.

I find it hilarious,that you think kabzaa is done by other people and stop crying.

 

[Nassr]

Self deleted.

 

[kumarkumar1867]

Hey @Black Widow
You guys abuse Nehru for being for one thing and Gandhi for another thing and other leaders for many other things. There is nothing new in it.

When you don't even show grace for those who helped and fought for creation of India, your own country, I got nothing more to tell you.

You guys don't agree with your leaders and abuse them.

You guys do not agree to the facts and trash them.

When the reality would squarely face you, hide your face in the sand and call yourself Ostrich.

Please dont be so sympathetic towards Indian leaders. It was your ancestors too who didnt trusted same Nehrus & Gandhis & hence they created Pakistan.We Indians are not blind believers, we adore our leaders for good deeds & also condemn/abuse them for their mistakes equally.

Here you can see we disagreeing with Nehru on some points on contrary you can see we are still running the nation with very same constitution with respect which was dreamt by him. We have regards for some of his good deeds but we are not sheeps to follow every thing our leaders do. Same is about Gandhi or any other leader.

On contrary, Pakistanis love Jinnah they never think he was wrong anywhere but see what Jinnah's Secular Democratic Idealistic Dream called Pakistan has become?? You raped his concept with in mere 25 years of his death, threw out the constitution he wanted you to follow.

Jinnah & Liyakat Ali Khan needs more sympathy from you than Nehru & Gandhi do.

 

[Nassr]

Self deleted.

 

[SamantK]

Even dictators seldom take their decisions alone. As in Democracy, they also have cronies around them.

In dictatorship the cronies are chosen by the dictators as well, in democracy it is at-least a larger collective wisdom.

VP Menon was a good Indian. He did what he was asked to do. But he failed in his mission. You don't have all of Kashmir and it is still up in flames as it was in 1947, even after over 60 years. So, what has changed, if at all !

Pakistan is always about black or white, we would not have had even that part of Kashmir but thanks to your Quaid and his tribals..

Then why did you kill Gandhi? Was this done to avoid him being discredited.

It certainly was not me! Neither that guy took permission from all the Indians.. we still have some who hate him, it is not an uncommon phenomenon if you know what I mean... But how will you know what I mean, you are far from facts and reasoning..

 

[Nassr]

Dont get over dramatic now, you decide who respects facts and who dont.

I find it hilarious,that you think kabzaa is done by other people and stop crying.

Laugh yourself all the way to death sir - that is your choice. Just check whether Euthanasia is legal where you seek it.

 

[kumarkumar1867]

Pakistan is always about black or white, we would not have had even that part of Kashmir but thanks to your Quaid and his tribals..

Sau baat ki ek baat...
We are also grateful to Jinnah Sahab he locked & took all the radicals from India to other side of present day Indian borders !

 

[INDIC]

Pakistan is always about black or white, we would not have had even that part of Kashmir but thanks to your Quaid and his tribals.

Their move went so wrong in Kashmir and the people whom they claimed to be liberating turned against them. One Kashmiri friend told me that people turned too much anti-Pakistan in 1948.

Sau baat ki ek baat...
We are also grateful to Jinnah Sahab he locked & took all the radicals from India to other side of present day Indian borders !

One of them was Maulana Maududi who was from "princely state of Hyderabad" who pioneered radicalization of Pakistan. Then Ziaul Haq was also from Indian side of Punjab.

 

[Black Widow]

Self deleted.

Leave all this delete aside, I just want to know your view on UN resolution . As you mention in one of your story, I want to know what do yo know about it??? What is the preconditions for plebiscite???

 

[SamantK]

Their move went so wrong in Kashmir and the people whom they claimed to be liberating turned against them. One Kashmiri friend told me that people turned too much anti-Pakistan in 1948.

They had to, the tribals which were supposed to seize control started raping and pillaging.. The Kashmiris knew where these tribals were from.. also we have a member here who belongs to one of those tribals and is proud of what they did in Kashmir.. go figure!

One of them was Maulana Maududi who was from "princely state of Hyderabad" who pioneered radicalization of Pakistan. Then Ziaul Haq was also from Indian side of Punjab.

Even if they remained, they would not have become more than crack head Mullahas giving fatwa's out of their *****..

 

[Joe Shearer]

@Joe Shearer

Increase and decrease of the pain threshold on a set of people does affect. But can continuous infliction and application of pain on a same set of people for over tens of years, kill their desires. I don't think so. What it does is that they become tolerant to more pain and a stage comes where even increased application of pain may not matter. The result is even more popular and more vicious response.

You will permit me to point out that most of the pain has been inflicted by one side, which did the following:

1. Sought to influence the hearts and minds of the people of Kashmir unsuccessfully, in the period before independence, partly due to the lack-lustre representation of the Muslim League by the Mirwaiz, whom Jinnah despised and denigrated in caustic terms for his unsuitability;
2. Took advantage of the emergence of a minority faction in the National Conference and its revolt against the state administration to promote an attack on the state forces;
3. Justified the looting, rape, abduction and killing of Muslims (93.7% of the Vale was Muslim) by the invaders;
4. Refused to abide by the UN Resolution, ironically so, as the public stand of Pakistan always has been to wrap herself in the UN Resolution, glossing over the minor matter of her own non-compliance; this, incidentally, you have yourself brought back into the limelight when you wrung our withers with Nehru's inner conviction that the plebiscite would never happen, because conditions would never be conducive to make it happen, where you cited it as his double-dealing in the teeth of the public fact that Pakistan refused compliance;
5. Made much of Sheikh Abdullah during his 1964 visit, agreed to come in full force to Delhi for detailed and definitive negotiations;
6. Infiltrated SSG troops to attack Indian Army units in the Vale, and on their rejection by the Kashmiris, and elimination by the Army,launched an armoured column at Jammu in 1965;
7. Poured funds into the Vale during the later days of Sheikh Abdullah, continuing after his death in 1982, to those who had been reduced to a minority by the National Conference earlier;
8. Trained, armed and launched nearly 30,000 terrorists from 1989 onwards, continuing today allegedly under the auspices of independent jehadi bodies, in spite of evidence of your own media and your own commentators that the deep state was behind these supposedly independent bodies;
9. Were detected in the act of moving troops to Siachen and unsuccessfully fought Indian troops who had moved there in pre-emotive actions;
10. Occupied Indian positions abandoned for the winter and had to be expelled by force on detection, claiming all the while that the occupants were mujahedeen, even as the regular Army shelled Kashmiri towns in support of the troops occupying positions on the mountains.

Who was responsible for the bloodshed then? The status quo side, or the side that tried for 63 years to reverse the position?

 

[IND151]

Effect, not effort; reading implies reading accurately.

Unlike us humble folk down in the undergrowth, attention-getters are chrome-yellow in the correct places. Look up Mandrill.

As for the second lesson, work for one line. One word would be better; the fact that such short sentences cannot be printed should not deter you. Just think of the vast improvement in quality you would have achieved single-handed.



You're welcome. I hope you meant me, though I don't know which bit of information stirred you into comment. You're welcome anyway.



I don't know if this is correct. The Pakistanis ceded the Shaksgam Valley. I'm not sure that it forms part of Aksai Chin.

at bolded part> i was referring to your explanation about princely states not having treaty with British India and thus being free to join Pakistan or India on their wish, not religion

i was referring to this part of your post

They think that the partition of India wad on communal lines and majority Muslim provinces were to go to Pakistan, and conversely. Few of them even know that besides British India, the British colony, there were 562 princes who had treaties with the Crown, but not with British India. The moment the British left, they became free. They were under no obligation to join either side on the basis of the percentage of each religion that they had.