India's 700,000 Army for Kashmir Occupation, while Pakistan Freely recruits from Azad Kashmir!

[-xXx-]

The will of the people who lived under a brutal dictatorship
He did not represent the will of Muslims of his state why do you think rebellion broke put on Poonch?

I will take it as absence of legal argument.

Rhetoric are very subjective and are open ended. I do not indulge in them.

They are demanding Plebiscite...They are demanding freedom not Shariah....

There are international laws which distinguish between a legitimate right of self determination and secession.

I would recommend you to study the subject, come back then and argue how kashmiris have the right of self determination.

Did they have de facto right or de jure right. Or, were they granted that right in 47 or owe it.

 

[Asian.Century]

Indian presence is justified by the letter of accession which is legal as per Indian Independence Act 47. How do you justify Pakistani presence?

I hope you respect the act since it is the same act by virtue of which your country Pakistan was created.

Here is what happened to Kashmir Dispute in 1947 and how Indian presence is not justified, infact accession letter is fake:

There remained the problem of over 650 states, in India and Pakistan during partition. these princely states had the option of deciding which country to join, or of remaining independent. In practice, the restive population of each province proved decisive.

Because of its location, Kashmir could choose to join either India or Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, was Hindu while most of his subjects were Muslim. Unable to decide which nation Kashmir should join, Hari Singh chose to remain neutral.

Indian and Pakistani forces thus fought their first war over Kashmir in 1947-48. India referred the dispute to the United Nations on 1 January. In a resolution dated August 13, 1948, the UN asked Pakistan to remove its troops, after which India was also to withdraw the bulk of its forces.

Once this happened, a "free and fair" plebiscite was to be held to allow the Kashmiri people to decide their future.

India, having taken the issue to the UN, was confident of winning a plebiscite, since the most influential Kashmiri mass leader, Sheikh Abdullah, was firmly on its side. An emergency government was formed on October 30, 1948 with Sheikh Abdullah as the Prime Minister.

 

[Zibago]

Ok Just do comparison between Educational Institutes both AJK and J&K you will Know there Quality

60,000 Majority of them killed by Pakistani Paid Agents During 90s LEJ ,LET,Hizbul, etc

Nope majority of them taken out by the state

I will take it as absence of legal argument.

Rhetoric are very subjective and are open ended. I do not indulge in them.



There are international laws which distinguish between a legitimate right of self determination and secession.

I would recommend you to study the subject, come back then and argue how kashmiris have the right of self determination.

Did they have de facto right or de jure right. Or, were they granted that right in 47 or owe it.

Think of him as the Bashar Al Assad of the 20,th century just like him a huge number of his Muslim soldiers actually defected to the rebels it was after they reached way into the valley did he sign off Kashmir to India

 

[Asian.Century]

Renowned journalist Alastair Lamb regards the Instrument of Accession, ‘signed’ by the maharajah of Kashmir on October 26, 1947, as fraudulent (Kashmir – A disputed legacy 1846-1990). She argues that the maharajah was travelling by road to Jammu (a distance of over 350 km). How could he sign the instrument while being on the run for safety of his life? There is no evidence of any contact between him and the Indian emissaries on October 26, 1947.

Actually, it was on October 27, 1947 that the maharajah was informed by MC Mahajan and VP Menon (who had flown into Srinagar) that an Instrument of Accession is being fabricated in New Delhi. Obviously, the maharajah could not have signed the instrument earlier than October 27, 1947. The instrument remains null and void, even if the maharajah had actually signed it. The reason, as pointed out by Alastair is that the `signatures’ were obtained under coercion. Under law, any undertaking secured through coercion or duress is null and void. She points out Indian troops had already arrived at and secured Srinagar airfield during the middle of October 1947. On October 26, 1947, a further airlift of thousands of Indian troops to Kashmir took place. She questions: “Would the maharajah have signed the Instrument of Accession, had the Indian troops not been on Kashmiri soil?”



It is eerie to note that India has never shown the original `Instrument’ in any international forum. If India was truthful, it should have the temerity to present the document to Pakistan or to the UN. Isn’t it funny that, in the summer of 1995, the Indian authorities reported the original document as lost or stolen? This fact further beclouds authenticity of the document. India took the Kashmir issue to the UN in 1948 under article 35 of Chapter VI which outlines the means for a peaceful settlement of disputes. India avoiding presenting the Kashmir case under the UN Chapter VII which relates to acts of aggression. Obviously, it did so because it knew that the Kashmir was a disputed state. And, issue of its integration with India or Pakistan remained to be resolved. Simla accord also preserves sanctity of UN resolutions.



Any state that flouts international resolutions is a rogue state (Noam Chomsky). Doubtless India qualifies as such.

Any state that flouts international resolutions is a rogue state (Noam Chomsky).

India should be banned from United Nations, UN, It wants permanent security council seat, it should solve Kashmir dispute first.

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

I will take it as absence of legal argument.

Rhetoric are very subjective and are open ended. I do not indulge in them.



There are international laws which distinguish between a legitimate right of self determination and secession.

I would recommend you to study the subject, come back then and argue how kashmiris have the right of self determination.

Did they have de facto right or de jure right. Or, were they granted that right in 47 or owe it.

U promised them Plebiscite.....Conduct it.....And put end to this 70 years cause of conflict.....

 

[-xXx-]

Here is what happened to Kashmir Dispute in 1947 and how Indian presence is not justified:

There remained the problem of over 650 states, in India and Pakistan during partition. these princely states had the option of deciding which country to join, or of remaining independent. In practice, the restive population of each province proved decisive.

Because of its location, Kashmir could choose to join either India or Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, was Hindu while most of his subjects were Muslim. Unable to decide which nation Kashmir should join, Hari Singh chose to remain neutral.

Indian and Pakistani forces thus fought their first war over Kashmir in 1947-48. India referred the dispute to the United Nations on 1 January. In a resolution dated August 13, 1948, the UN asked Pakistan to remove its troops, after which India was also to withdraw the bulk of its forces.

Once this happened, a "free and fair" plebiscite was to be held to allow the Kashmiri people to decide their future.

India, having taken the issue to the UN, was confident of winning a plebiscite, since the most influential Kashmiri mass leader, Sheikh Abdullah, was firmly on its side. An emergency government was formed on October 30, 1948 with Sheikh Abdullah as the Prime Minister.

Travesty of history is what I would call this post.

Hari Singh did decide the fate and legally acceded to dominion of India.

If India would have been partitioned based on religious majority, the Indian Independence Act would have been drafted accordingly and would not have given the right to prince.

Secondly, India was not averse to muslims and believe that we can co-exist, so joining of Kashmir with muslim majority was neither against the act, nor against the ideology of India.

Tell me what legal right Pakistan can quote to invade and raise a war?

 

[NKVD]

Nope majority of them taken out by the state

Yeas because if there Islamist Ideologies and Hate towards Minorities Basically hindus
Kashmiris Sunni Mullas can either choose to come up in life through education and jobs which the Indian government is willing to provide, or they can choose to constantly engage in terrorism and anarchy. They seem to choose and like the latter and suffer.

Shias i trust most they are Majority in my district Even visit there Shrine I am a devotee to Baba reshi
I Love Sufi culture of my state Which Once existed Now Its look Like a close Society With Wahabi Mullahs Running With ISIS flags

 

[-xXx-]

U promised them Plebiscite.....Conduct it.....And put end to this 70 years cause of conflict.....

Again back to square one.

We promised to a rationale society of 1947 and a province of J&K, GB, Laddakh which is free of Pakistan and any external influence.

Time has changed, so as our plan.

 

[Tamilnadu]

Nope majority of them taken out by the state


Think of him as the Bashar Al Assad of the 20,th century just like him a huge number of his Muslim soldiers actually defected to the rebels it was after they reached way into the valley did he sign off Kashmir to India

Who sheltered and trained these terrorists,and how come punjabis from Pakistan getting killed carrying AK 47s ,and why no one picked up arms till late 80s. Pakistanies tarnished the kashmiri struggle if there was one even tiny at that time by adding guns and religion into it.

 

[-xXx-]

Renowned journalist Alastair Lamb regards the Instrument of Accession, ‘signed’ by the maharajah of Kashmir on October 26, 1947, as fraudulent .

When did journalist becomes the jury? The letter of accession and its validity was never contested and considered valid in every argument conducted ever in any forum.

Hence I shall not put my efforts in discussing something based on hearsay. We have enough proven content to ponder on.

Thank you.

 

[Asian.Century]

Let me tell you how this works

Keep supporting banned terrorist groups, we will not do anything we will just let the world see what you have been doing. Then we will show how these terrorist groups endorse other terrorist groups which are prevalant in other countries.... Oh wait Pakistan has nukes. We wont have to fire a single bullet. What you guys are doing is, "Apni kabra khud khodna"

Really you guys suck in politics and diplomacy. Dont you guys have IAS kinda exams for diplomats or something?

Actually India and Indian govt really sucks in politics and diplomacy and even in media propaganda, thats why India and its media keep getting humiliated.

While India keep supporting terror extremists groups like RSS, Bajrang, Dal, Shiva Sena etc etc, Pakistan will make sure to bleed India while raising the voice for the rights of Kashmirs to independent Kashmir state.

Kashmir State is a reality. Kashmir is going to be the next country...it take 1 day, 1 month, 10 years or 100 years, Kashmir will keep the 700,000 Indian army bleeding economically.

India spent $ 21 Billion in Jammu and Kashmir and with the recent increase in violence and uprising in Kashmir, the cost is going to escalate even higher...Indian blood treasure all lost and keep on escalating in Kashmir valley.

http://www.kashmirnewz.com/n000272.html

 

[-xXx-]

Think of him as the Bashar Al Assad of the 20,th century just like him a huge number of his Muslim soldiers actually defected to the rebels it was after they reached way into the valley did he sign off Kashmir to India

Quote me the law which render his act illegal or his crown was declared null and void?

He willfully signed the instrument of accession from a legal position of prince.

Unlike the khan of kalat who was bought to Karachi after an invasion, and was forced to sign a document whose even existence and authenticity is questionable.

Not to forget the Jinnah assurance to Khan of kalat on Aug 4, 1947.

 

[Zibago]

Yeas because if there Islamist Ideologies and Hate towards Minorities Basically hindus
Kashmiris Sunni Mullas can either choose to come up in life through education and jobs which the Indian government is willing to provide, or they can choose to constantly engage in terrorism and anarchy. They seem to choose and like the latter and suffer.

Shias i trust most they are Majority in my district Even visit there Shrine I am a devotee to Baba reshi
I Love Sufi culture of my state Which Once existed Now Its look Like a close Society With Wahabi Mullahs Running With ISIS flags

Nope they were taken out for being against Indian rule in Kashmir

 

[-xXx-]

While India keep supporting terror extremists groups like RSS, Bajrang, Dal, Shiva Sena etc etc, Pakistan will make sure to bleed India while raising the voice for the rights of Kashmirs to independent Kashmir state.

That's why your argument falls flat on ears of international community.

Quote me when these organisations are counted as terrorist one ever in UNSC/UN/US/EU or even in Pakistan. Are they declared terror group even by your own country?

Why you have to argument like this?

 

[Zibago]

Quote me the law which render his act illegal or his crown was declared null and void?

He willfully signed the instrument of accession from a legal position of prince.

Unlike the khan of kalat who was bought to Karachi after an invasion, and was forced to sign a document whose even existence and authenticity is questionable.

Not to forget the Jinnah assurance to Khan of kalat on Aug 4, 1947.

Its illegal to challenge Bashar Al Assad in Syria but many states support it right?
Why because he is a brutal dictator and other than Alawites no one listens to him it was same situation in pre partition Kashmir only Hindus and Sikhs supported dograsdogras

First decide are we discussing Kashmir or Balochistan?