What's new

Independence of Kashmir - Lt. Gen Amjad Shuaib

Kashmir will never be free without war. We have to fight for Kashmir to settle the score of 1971. It should be our declared national policy or let say national goal. And if wars goes against us then use every nuke in your arsenals. Victory or nothing survives in South Asia.
The time for negotiations is over. Since we Pakistanis are legally correct on the Kashmir dispute.

Indians did not follow the United Nations resolution recommendation on the matter.

There is no other fair way to settle the Kashmir dispute.

Thats why I do not bother arguing with idiots really.

Nehru and the Indian National Congress have to be blamed. They have lied to the world.

Again intellectual dishonesty ,taking time.

Atleast know when other states were joining the state of pakistan ,you attacked Kashmir in 47 and some did not join pakistan for much later.
Why was the Maharaja of Kashmir wasting time when trying to accede to either Pakistan or India.

By the way, why should Muslims be ruled by a Hindu leader. There was a popular uprising against the Hindu leader.

We have every right to Kashmir. The Hindu leader was a tyrant who did not take demographics and geography into consideration.

Again intellectual dishonesty ,taking time.

Atleast know when other states were joining the state of pakistan ,you attacked Kashmir in 47 and some did not join pakistan for much later.
We were liberating a Muslim country from being ruled by a tyrant. We have all the reasons to assist.
You are being dishonest. Why did India send troops to Kashmir, to support a tyrant? :D

I smell a hypocrite here.
Go show me the Instrument of Accession document. India does not have the document to show to Pakistan and the United Nations.

Again intellectual dishonesty ,taking time.

Atleast know when other states were joining the state of pakistan ,you attacked Kashmir in 47 and some did not join pakistan for much later.
I don't know why you mentioned Junagadh and Hyderabad state.

They were both Hindu majorities and went to India.

Pakistan said nothing.

It's a dead horse ,it's time to move on with reference to kashmir.

There is not much Pakistan can do to take back kashmir and the same applies to India for gilgit Bautista.

The whole point of the point is blaming India on baluchistan and the world community on keeping quiet.on both the counts Pakistan narrative is flawed and that's why they don't get any support internationally.

But the problem is Pakistan was the one who started it in 89 after the soviet union withdrawal from Afghanistan. Till then there was no terrorism in kashmir.


There is partial truth in it and not the whole truth. Even if we take your claims as whe truth why did not Pakistan us the same yardstick when claiming Junagadh and Hyderabad.
Funny part about you say Kashmir dispute is a dead horse.

How do you plan to solve the matter then that is fair? :azn:
 
Last edited:
Again intellectual dishonesty ,taking time.

Atleast know when other states were joining the state of pakistan ,you attacked Kashmir in 47 and some did not join pakistan for much later.
For someone who is intellectually dishonest like yourself, why don't you hold a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir to determine the destiny of the land. :azn:
How else should we determine the destiny of the land then?

The United Nations resolutions recommends holding a Plebiscite to determine the destiny of Kashmir.

The Partition plan according to the British says take demographics into consideration when acceding to either state and once the state had acceded hold a plebiscite to see if the princely state wants Pakistan or India.

But personally, enough said here. I cannot argue with ignorants or idiots.

1) Pakistan is legally correct here according to the partition plan and the Untied Nations resolutions.
2) China supports Pakistan's stance on Kashmir.
3) India promised to hold a plebiscite (Jawaharlal Nehru), and then reneged on it.

Therefore Pakistan has every right to declare war over India and capture Kashmir.

Even if it is a thousand year war, so be it then.

Thats why negotiations won't work because the Indians know they are the guilty party here.
 
For someone who intellectually dishonest like yourself, why don't you hold a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir to determine the destiny of the land. :azn:
How else should we determine the destiny of the land then?

The United Nations resolutions recommends holding a Plebiscite to determine the destiny of Kashmir.

The Partition plan according to the British says take demographics into consideration when acceding to either state and once the state had acceded hold a plebiscite to see if the princely state wants Pakistan or India.
For someone who cannot defend even the first point on kashmir but I still give up,you win . You win on PDF as long as I keep winning in the outside world.
 
For someone who cannot defend even the first point on kashmir but I still give up,you win . You win on PDF as long as I keep winning in the outside world.
I have successfully answered all your points.
No wonder the other Pakistani member said go spew your filth somewhere else.

Because the sore loser runs away when he is defeated.

Thanks God this forum is moderated against intellectual dishonesty and Indians spewing lies here.

You didn't even answer one of my points let alone answer them.

Junagadh and Hyderabad state went to India because they were Hindu majorities.

Pakistan said nothing.

Now Kashmir being a Muslim majority, according to partition plan should go to Pakistan. Kashmir would have gone to Pakistan had it been a normal province like Sindh.

Don't forget Sindh was separated from the Bombay presidency according to the old British archives.

For someone who cannot defend even the first point on kashmir but I still give up,you win . You win on PDF as long as I keep winning in the outside world.
By all means go ahead and live in your fantasy. Pakistan's claim on Kashmir legitimate according to the Partition Plan and the Untied Nations.

Go live in your "lala land."
 
I have successfully answered all your points.
No wonder the other Pakistani member said go spew your filth somewhere else.

Because the sore loser runs away when he is defeated.

Thanks God this forum is moderated against intellectual dishonesty and Indians spewing lies here.

You didn't even answer one of my points let alone answer them.

Junagadh and Hyderabad state went to India because they were Hindu majorities.

Pakistan said nothing.

Now Kashmir being a Muslim majority, according to partition plan should go to Pakistan. Kashmir would have gone to Pakistan had it been a normal province like Sindh.

Don't forget Sindh was separated from the Bombay presidency according to the old British archives.
Atleast read what you posted previously ,it's an advice and by no means it will be changing the result ,you win.
 
It's a dead horse ,it's time to move on with reference to kashmir.

There is not much Pakistan can do to take back kashmir and the same applies to India for gilgit Bautista.

The whole point of the point is blaming India on baluchistan and the world community on keeping quiet.on both the counts Pakistan narrative is flawed and that's why they don't get any support internationally.

But the problem is Pakistan was the one who started it in 89 after the soviet union withdrawal from Afghanistan. Till then there was no terrorism in kashmir.


There is partial truth in it and not the whole truth. Even if we take your claims as whe truth why did not Pakistan us the same yardstick when claiming Junagadh and Hyderabad.
You are a funny hypocrite.

Alright, so what are India's arguments in claiming the Kashmir region?

Is Kashmir Hindu majority, no. Kashmir is a Muslim majority region.

Geographically is Kashmir better connected with India, no. The Maharaja signed a standstill agreement with Pakistan before doing any communications with India.

Then what are your arguments?

Atleast read what you posted previously ,it's an advice and by no means it will be changing the result ,you win.
Yes, but Nehru and the Indian National Congress promised the world a plebiscite, but then reneged on it.
Essentially they had lied.

But you know, Since Pakistan is legally correct on Kashmir, Pakistan has the right to take Kashmir by force.

Now shoo.
 
Last edited:

Kashmir: Why India and Pakistan fight over it​

Published
8 August 2019


Pakistani men in Lahore chant slogans at a rally expressing solidarity with the people of Kashmir
Image source, Reuters
Image caption,
Kashmir has been a source of conflict between India and Pakistan for more than 70 years
Nuclear-armed neighbours India and Pakistan have fought two wars and a limited conflict over Kashmir. But why do they dispute the territory - and how did it start?

How old is this fight?​

Kashmir is an ethnically diverse Himalayan region, covering around 86,000 sq miles (138 sq km), and famed for the beauty of its lakes, meadows and snow-capped mountains.
Even before India and Pakistan won their independence from Britain in August 1947, the area was hotly contested.
Under the partition plan provided by the Indian Independence Act, Kashmir was free to accede to either India or Pakistan.
The maharaja (local ruler), Hari Singh, initially wanted Kashmir to become independent - but in October 1947 chose to join India, in return for its help against an invasion of tribesmen from Pakistan.
A war erupted and India approached the United Nations asking it to intervene. The United Nations recommended holding a plebiscite to settle the question of whether the state would join India or Pakistan. However the two countries could not agree to a deal to demilitarise the region before the referendum could be held.

In July 1949, India and Pakistan signed an agreement to establish a ceasefire line as recommended by the UN and the region became divided.
Kashmiri men walk by a river near the Line of Control, the de facto border between Pakistan and India
Image source, AFP/Getty Images
Image caption,
Kashmir is known by some as India's Switzerland, due to its verdant fields and sweeping mountainscapes
A second war followed in 1965. Then in 1999, India fought a brief but bitter conflict with Pakistani-backed forces.
By that time, India and Pakistan had both declared themselves to be nuclear powers.
Today, Delhi and Islamabad both claim Kashmir in full, but control only parts of it - territories recognised internationally as "Indian-administered Kashmir" and "Pakistan-administered Kashmir".

Why is there so much unrest in the Indian-administered part?

An armed revolt has been waged against Indian rule in the region for three decades, claiming tens of thousands of lives.
India blames Pakistan for stirring the unrest by backing separatist militants in Kashmir - a charge its neighbour denies.

Now a sudden change to Kashmir's status on the Indian side has created further apprehension.
Indian-administered Kashmir has held a special position within the country historically, thanks to Article 370 - a clause in the constitution which gave it significant autonomy, including its own constitution, a separate flag, and independence over all matters except foreign affairs, defence and communications.

On 5 August, India revoked that seven-decade-long privileged status - as the governing party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), had promised in its 2019 election manifesto. The Hindu nationalist BJP has long opposed Article 370 and had repeatedly called for its abolishment.
Telephone networks and the internet were cut off in the region in the days before the presidential order was announced. Public gatherings were banned, and tens of thousands of troops were sent in. Tourists were told to leave Kashmir under warnings of a terror threat.

Media caption,
Baramulla resident: 'Our livelihood is affected, nobody is at peace'
Two former chief ministers of Jammu and Kashmir - the Indian state which encompasses the disputed territory - were placed under house arrest.
One of them, Mehbooba Mufti, said the move would "make India an occupational force in Jammu and Kashmir," and that "today marks the darkest day in Indian democracy".


The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.View original tweet on Twitter
Pakistan fiercely condemned the development, branding it "illegal" and vowing to "exercise all possible options" against it.
It downgraded diplomatic ties with India and suspended all trade. India responded by saying they "regretted" Pakistan's statement and reiterating that Article 370 was an internal matter as it did not interfere with the boundaries of the territory.
Within Kashmir, opinions about the territory's rightful allegiance are diverse and strongly held. Many do not want it to be governed by India, preferring either independence or union with Pakistan instead.
Religion is one factor: Jammu and Kashmir is more than 60% Muslim, making it the only state within India where Muslims are in the majority.

Critics of the BJP fear this move is designed to change the state's demographic make-up of - by giving people from the rest of the country to right to acquire property and settle there permanently.
Ms Mufti told the BBC: "They just want to occupy our land and want to make this Muslim-majority state like any other state and reduce us to a minority and disempower us totally."
Feelings of disenfranchisement have been aggravated in Indian-administered Kashmir by high unemployment, and complaints of human rights abuses by security forces battling street protesters and fighting insurgents.
Mehbooba Mufti pictured at a podium in July 2019
Image source, EPA
Image caption,
Former chief minister Mehbooba Mufti has accused India of betraying Kashmir
Anti-India sentiment in the state has ebbed and flowed since 1989, but the region witnessed a fresh wave of violence after the death of 22-year-old militant leader Burhan Wani in July 2016. He died in a battle with security forces, sparking massive protests across the valley.
Wani - whose social media videos were popular among young people - is largely credited with reviving and legitimising the image of militancy in the region.
Thousands attended Wani's funeral, which was held in his hometown of Tral, about 40km (25 miles) south of the city of Srinagar. Following the funeral, people clashed with troops and it set off a deadly cycle of violence that lasted for days.
More than 30 civilians died, and others were injured in the clashes. Since then, violence has been on the rise in the state.
kashmir map

Presentational white space

More than 500 people were killed in 2018 - including civilians, security forces and militants - the highest toll in a decade.

Weren't there high hopes for peace in the new century?​

India and Pakistan did indeed agree a ceasefire in 2003 after years of bloodshed along the de facto border (also known as the Line of Control).
Pakistan later promised to stop funding insurgents in the territory, while India offered them an amnesty if they renounced militancy.
In 2014, India's current Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power promising a tough line on Pakistan, but also showed interest in holding peace talks.
Nawaz Sharif, then prime minister of Pakistan, attended Mr Modi's swearing-in ceremony in Delhi.
Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif shakes hands with Prime Minister Narendra Modi after the swearing-in ceremony of the NDA government in New Delhi on Tuesday, May 27, 1014
Image source, Getty Images
Image caption,
Pakistan and India's prime ministers promised peace in 2014
But a year later, India blamed Pakistan-based groups for an attack on its airbase in Pathankot in the northern state of Punjab. Mr Modi also cancelled a scheduled visit to the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, for a regional summit in 2017. Since then, there hasn't been any progress in talks between the neighbours.

Are we back to square one?​

The bloody summer of street protests in Indian-administered Kashmir in 2016 had already dimmed hopes for a lasting peace in the region.
Then, in June 2018, the state government there was upended when Mr Modi's BJP pulled out of a coalition government run by Ms Mufti's People's Democratic Party.
Jammu and Kashmir was since under direct rule from Delhi, which fuelled further anger.
The deaths of more than 40 Indian soldiers in a suicide attack on 14 February, 2019 have ended any hope of a thaw in the immediate future. India blamed Pakistan-based militant groups for the violence - the deadliest targeting Indian soldiers in Kashmir since the insurgency began three decades ago.
Following the bombing, India said it would take "all possible diplomatic steps" to isolate Pakistan from the international community.
On 26 February, it launched air strikes in Pakistani territory which it said targeted militant bases.
Pakistan denied the raids had caused major damage or casualties but promised to respond, fuelling fears of confrontation. A day later it said it had shot down two Indian Air Force jets in its airspace, and captured a fighter pilot - who was later returned unharmed to India.

Media caption,
Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman was handed over to Indian officials near a border crossing with Pakistan
Kashmir remains one of the most militarised zones in the world.

So what happens next?​

India's parliament has now passed a bill splitting Indian-administered Kashmir into two territories governed directly by Delhi: Jammu and Kashmir, and remote, mountainous Ladakh.
China, which shares a disputed border with India in Ladakh, has objected to the reorganisation and accused Delhi of undermining its territorial sovereignty.
Pakistan's Prime Minister Imran Khan has vowed to challenge India's actions at the UN security council, and take the matter to the International Criminal Court.
In an ominous warning, he said: "If the world does not act today... (if) the developed world does not uphold its own laws, then things will go to a place that we will not be responsible for."
But Delhi insists that there is no "external implication" to its decision to reorganise the state as it has not changed the Line of Control or boundaries of the region.
US President Donald Trump has offered to mediate in the crisis - an overture that Delhi has rejected.


There is one lie in this BBC article.

The Maharaja never signed the instrument of accession to India. That's India's narrative on the matter.

The Pakistan's narrative is that the Maharaja never signed the Instrument of Accession to India.
 
You are a funny hypocrite.

Alright, so what are India's arguments in claiming the Kashmir region?

Is Kashmir Hindu majority, no. Kashmir is a Muslim majority region.

Geographically is Kashmir better connected with India, no. The Maharaja signed a standstill agreement with Pakistan before doing any communications with India.

Then what are your arguments?


Yes, but Nehru and the Indian National Congress promised the world a plebiscite, but then reneged on it.
Essentially they had lied.

But you know, Since Pakistan is legally correct on Kashmir, Pakistan has the right to take Kashmir by force.

Now shoo.
See the video I posted, you guys are like the first person said and talking like the second person.
 
You are legally correct to do jackshit. Try to get your country in order first (how's Balochistan btw?) before eyeing Kashmir.
Reported!

@waz @The Eagle
Ban this Indiot. Even on Indian forums they openly abuse Pakistanis and Muslims.

Take your shit somewhere else Indiot. I have convincingly demonstrated why Pakistan has a claim on Kashmir.

You are legally correct to do jackshit. Try to get your country in order first (how's Balochistan btw?) before eyeing Kashmir.
Hey Indiot, there is no problem on Balochistan. Your country supports terrorists in Balochistan.

Balochistan is not disputed territory according to the United Nations.

🅱️indian stop polluting PDF with your filth. Go work on building toilets first.
I tried negotiating with the Indiots.
You were right, they are too blind to negotiate. I agree with @waz . The time for negotiating is over.

1947 was the time for negotiating. India has no valid claims on Kashmir.

Only war will solve the Kashmir dispute. So be it then.

You are legally correct to do jackshit. Try to get your country in order first (how's Balochistan btw?) before eyeing Kashmir.
Balochistan is irrelevant and is an integral part of Pakistan. United Nations say Kashmir is a territorial dispute.

Now shoo and stop spewing shit from your mouth here.
 
Last edited:
You are legally correct to do jackshit. Try to get your country in order first (how's Balochistan btw?) before eyeing Kashmir.
As Socrates said, "Slander is the tool of the loser."

You did not put any arguments of why India has a claim on Kashmir. Only Pakistan has a claim on Kashmir.
 
You are legally correct to do jackshit. Try to get your country in order first (how's Balochistan btw?) before eyeing Kashmir.

Before looking at Baluchistan how about you stop civil war between your states with Mizoram attacking Assam and visa versa.


"It was like a war between two countries" :disagree:
 
Last edited:
Give them a space to vent out. The dream of Kashmir will surely come true. People had the same opinion before operation zarb e Azb as well.
I have gotten into lengthy debates with Indians. Usually they have no sound arguments as to why India should have Kashmir.

Even the United Nations said hold a plebiscite since that is the fairest way to resolve the Kashmir dispute. There is no other fair way.

Regardless, personally I think there will be a war which will involve Pakistan + China against India.

Even China has a stake in Kashmir which is called Aksai Chin and Transkarakarum Tract.

Had Kashmir been a normal province of the British Raj empire it would have gone to Pakistan during partition.
 
Last edited:
I have gotten into lengthy debates with Indians. Usually they have no sound arguments as to why India should have Kashmir.

Even the United Nations said hold a plebiscite since that is the fairest way to resolve the Kashmir dispute. There is no other fair way.

Regardless, personally I think there will be a war which will involve Pakistan + China against India.

Even China has a stake in Kashmir which is called Aksai Chin and Transkarakarum Tract.

Had Kashmir been a normal province of the British Raj empire it would have gone to Pakistan during partition.
Indians are like a broken record. They keep repeating the same propaganda nothing new. And funny thing is the propaganda they keep repeating is wrong as well 😂.

The moment you start arguing with an ignorant fool, you have already lost. - Ali (R.A.)
 
I have gotten into lengthy debates with Indians. Usually they have no sound arguments as to why India should have Kashmir.

Even the United Nations said hold a plebiscite since that is the fairest way to resolve the Kashmir dispute. There is no other fair way.

Regardless, personally I think there will be a war which will involve Pakistan + China against India.

Even China has a stake in Kashmir which is called Aksai Chin and Transkarakarum Tract.

Had Kashmir been a normal province of the British Raj empire it would have gone to Pakistan during partition.

What they or anyone else claims on internet or even in their closed groups and media; doesn't matter and do not change the facts/ground reality. No doubt that Kashmir is a flash point better to be resolved as per UN Section and called it disputed territory.
 

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom