‘Kashmir can go to Pakistan’ : Sardar Patel

[kaykay]

if kashmir should have been indias then hydrabad deccan should have been pakistans

sure but if you can take it...

 

[Jade]

It is not the question of what should have happened, but the question of what has happened. Maharaja of Kashmir has signed the instrument of accession to India, hence the whole of Kashmir belongs to India including P0K and GB. If anybody is illegal occupying that is Pakistan.

Peace between India and Pakistan is not possible unless Pakistan handover P0K and GB. Pakistan has two choice either handover P0K and GB thereby enjoy friendly relation with India and thereby prosperity and integration with Indian economy or keep on harping Kashmir and go into oblivion.

The ball is in Pakistan's court.

 

[Icewolf]

princely state of Kashmir is Indias property legally given to India by maharaja of Kashmir. Pakistan should return occupied territory to India.
also Lahore and Karachi were non Muslim majority at the time of partition, and close to Indian mainland (either by land or sea connection). Pakistan should give back Karachi and Lahore to India.
also 1/3rd of Muslims stayed back in India, so Pakistan should give back its additional 1/3rd land to India.
also thar was Hindu majority and continous with India by land and culture. the part of thar in possession of Pakistan also belong to India.

Good Lord! Is Indian education system that bad?

Partition was based on Muslim majority provinces and KINGDOMS!

If you claim Kashmir because of the Maharaja, we will also claim Hyderabad because of the Sultan. Simple as that.

It is not the question of what should have happened, but the question of what has happened. If anybody is illegal occupying that is India.

Peace between India and Pakistan is not possible unless India handover IoK and Jammu. India has two choice either handover IoK and Jammu thereby enjoy friendly relation with Pakistan and thereby prosperity and integration with Indian economy or keep on harping Kashmir and go into oblivion.

The ball is in India's court.

Here changed it for you bud. You need a editor.

Sometime you claim Kashmir is for Kashmiri, sometimes claim opposite of it that Kashmir is disputed between India and Pakistan(while India officially never accept Kashmir as disputed) Why Pakistanis so confused about Kashmir. Kashmir joined India by accession but Kalat was annexed by Pakistan, so there is a difference.

We give up Kalat, you also give up Hyderabad, Kashmir and Goa, and lower Bhutan. Deal?

 

[Jade]

Good Lord! Is Indian education system that bad?

Partition was based on Muslim majority provinces and KINGDOMS!

If you claim Kashmir because of the Maharaja, we will also claim Hyderabad because of the Sultan. Simple as that.



Here changed it for you bud. You need a editor.



We give up Kalat, you also give up Hyderabad & Kashmir. Deal?

Changing 'Pakistan' to 'India' doesn't make Pakistan India.

 

[INDIC]

Good Lord! Is Indian education system that bad?

Partition was based on Muslim majority provinces and KINGDOMS!

If you claim Kashmir because of the Maharaja, we will also claim Hyderabad because of the Sultan. Simple as that.



Here changed it for you bud. You need a editor.

Pakistan was the frontrunner to show greed for Hindu majority areas like Junagarh and Hyderabad and now guys are crying foul after losing Junagarh, Kashmir and Hyderabad.

 

[livingdead]

@Icewolf, if you want to visit kashmir, get a visa, and take @Armstrong with you..

when you guys feel strong enough, fight us again. We are going nowhere mate. For now, try to conserve energy.

 

[INDIC]

We give up Kalat, you also give up Hyderabad, Kashmir and Goa, and lower Bhutan. Deal?

tumhe giveup karna hai to kar do, hamara koi mood nahi.

 

[Dushmann]

if kashmir should have been indias then hydrabad deccan should have been pakistans

Hyderabad deccan is not Muslim majority, forget majority, they are insignificant number, no geographical connection with Pakistan, Hyderabad never officially signed accession to Pakistan, and even before Indian police went there, the people-son of the soil, and majority-started rebellion to join India (unlike Kashmir where barbarian invaders infiltrated on orders of jinnah, there was no local rebellion or demand to join Pakistan, and Muslims were majority only in two of the four regions of state, one of which Shiau majority and one Sunni majority.)

 

[Icewolf]

Pakistan was the frontrunner to show greed for Hindu majority areas like Junagarh and Hyderabad and now guys are crying foul after losing Junagarh, Kashmir and Hyderabad.

There can't be a one way deal.

If Pakistan is illegally occupying Kashmir because of the Maharaja, then India must also hand over to Pakistan the lost occupied territories of Hyderabad, Junagrh, and West Bengal (which was Muslim majority pre-1947).

 

[Hope4btr]

Good Lord! Is Indian education system that bad?

Partition was based on Muslim majority provinces and KINGDOMS!

If you claim Kashmir because of the Maharaja, we will also claim Hyderabad because of the Sultan. Simple as that.



Here changed it for you bud. You need a editor.



We give up Kalat, you also give up Hyderabad, Kashmir and Goa, and lower Bhutan. Deal?

Here you go. You are wrong about the sultan of hyderabad. He wanted a independent nation of his own. The Razakars were actually pro-pakistanis. The sulatan himself acceded to India and after that troops were sent into Hyderabad and it was free of Razakars in just four day.

 

[Dushmann]

There can't be a one way deal.

If Pakistan is illegally occupying Kashmir because of the Maharaja, then India must also hand over to Pakistan the lost occupied territories of Hyderabad, Junagrh, and West Bengal (which was Muslim majority pre-1947).

by that logic, whole India was non-muslim majority so Pakistan should give back whole of Pakistan to India and go back to whereever they think they come from.

 

[INDIC]

There can't be a one way deal.

If Pakistan is illegally occupying Kashmir because of the Maharaja, then India must also hand over to Pakistan the lost occupied territories of Hyderabad, Junagrh, and West Bengal (which was Muslim majority pre-1947).

Losers are given no second change. But Hyderabad never joined Pakistan and the diwan of Junagarh Shahnawaz Bhutto handed over Junagarh to India weeks after the Nawab fled to Pakistan. So, what's the basis of your claims.

 

[Icewolf]

Here you go. You are wrong about the sultan of hyderabad. He wanted a independent nation of his own. The Razakars were actually pro-pakistanis. The sulatan himself acceded to India and after that troops were sent into Hyderabad and it was free of Razakars in just four day.

Buddy thats why I say to never keep your textbooks in mind when arriving on PDF.
Hyderabad sultan wanted to acede with Pakistan, it was when Indian troops marched in Hyderabad that he surrendered, just like the Maharaja of Kashmir.

by that logic, whole India was non-muslim majority so Pakistan should give back whole of Pakistan to India and go back to whereever they think they come from.

Look you monkey.
Partition was based on provinces and kingdoms.
No such thing as India pre-1947.
It was either British India or Hindustan or seperate Hindu kingdoms.

Get that into your less evolved head.

 

[livingdead]

There can't be a one way deal.

If Pakistan is illegally occupying Kashmir because of the Maharaja, then India must also hand over to Pakistan the lost occupied territories of Hyderabad, Junagrh, and West Bengal (which was Muslim majority pre-1947).

too late for deal, you should not have attacked kashmir in first place. Anyway, you got 1/3 kashmir. Try to run it properly.

 

[Silverblaze]

There is a book by a Pakistani bureaucrat who claimed that Patel offered to exchange Hyderabad with Kashmir, but Ghulam Mohammad (governor general) of Pakistan) refused.

this was a fundamental mistake.