What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
the answer is simple. if they are not indians then they can be pakistanis, like millions transferred in '47, those who dont want to be indian can also migrate.
If you ask why should they migrate from their homes, then ask why did migration happpen during partition.

it's because people wanted to migrate so they migrated.... Kashmiris think they are not Indians and India is invading Kashmir so it's their right to ask for freedom from an invader...
 
this kashmir problem will never be solved, india and pakistan both want it for themselves without conceding anything to eachc other.
 
Affect that country ??? which country ? INDIA? well thats NOT their country so they are not the one who should think over the benefit or harm to Bharat. Rather bharat should think over the end result of its occupation of the Country Kashmir which belongs to Kashmiris.

Its part of India and no one take it from us ....
U try 4 time and got punishment lets try one more time :smitten:
 
Part of this violence is due to the Kashmir's wrong way of protest. In the entire Kashmir there are only 2,3 areas where is protest is happening. Understand this, remember it is Spore, Some Parts of Srinagar mostly. So may I ask why only these places? In any given society there will never be a situation where everyone will be happy with current government/ situation. So there are separatist in Kashmir, and the way they protest clearly indicates that their masters want to create a situation where bullets are fired and someone is killed. I feel that likes of Gilani might feel very happy when someone is killed because that gets them more people. It should be common sense to these people that when you are stone pelting (Act of violence), the security forces will retaliate in defense. If they really want to protest then they should adopt peaceful means, if they did not do that means their intention is different. Also if Kashmiri's were unhappy from 1948 then why these protest never started till 1980's? Why they did not come on Street at time of Kargil and said Pakistan is helping us get what we want, we welcome you? Not a single person came in your support in Kargil. It is not difficult to manufacture dissent, the common people are gullible and feed them with wrong info and some fools will sure jump in. Just because someone is playing games does not mean we will give up. Last the protest is only limited to few region.
 
Those Idiots called for it, You dont go out and throw stones on the security forces and dont expect them to throw flowers back.
 
* Several others injured as paramilitary forces fire rubber bullets on protesters to disperse them

SRINAGAR: Another man was killed in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) on Sunday when paramilitary forces fired rubber bullets to disperse protesters who had defied a strict curfew, police said.

Sopore, 50 kilometres north of IHK’s summer capital Srinagar, has been under indefinite curfew since Friday after two young men died when troops opened fire in response to anti-India protesters who attacked their vehicle.

Police clamped the curfew on the town after thousands of people poured into the streets, torched a security vehicle and attacked a police station to protest against the killing of the two men.

On Saturday, thousands of demonstrators, defying the curfew, staged noisy protests and clashed with security forces.

Chanting “We want freedom!” and “Blood for blood!”, hundreds of residents again defied the curfew on Sunday, prompting security forces to fire rubber bullets that killed a 24-year-old man, a police officer said.

“A rubber bullet pierced his neck. He died on the way to Srinagar’s main hospital,” the officer said, adding that several others were injured.

Residents said the victim was not part of the protest and was heading to a mosque when he was hit.

Tensions have risen in recent months in Indian Kashmir, where two decades of rebellion against New Delhi’s rule have left thousands dead.

In all, six civilians have been killed in incidents implicating Indian security forces over the past two weeks.

Nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan each rule part of Jammu and Kashmir, but lay claim to all of the scenic Himalayan region.
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
 
My 2 cents on the topic:

We're back to where this chain of discussion usually ends up, most notably:

Pak posters: The Kashmiri's are fighting for their freedom from Indian occupation, it's their right.
Indian posters: Kashmir is an integral part of India, these protesters are making their own lives a misery. If Kashmiri's are not happy, they're free to join Pakistan.

This merry-go-round doesn't help in providing any solution to this issue. All we do is accentuate our traditional stands. A starting point should be to talk about where we agree on what's happening in Kashmir. And my take on this is the following:

  • Kashmiri's are suffering, and there is genuine despair - this suffering is concentrated predominantly in the Valley. A political and non-violent solution is the ONLY answer to their troubles.

  • Annexation or seccession from the Indian Union is a non-starter. However, autonomy or a greater devolution of powers may be the answer, particularly in the Valley. Whether that meets the demands of 'azadi' that so many shout for is unknown. However, that, coupled with a reduced / withdrawn military presence could quell the troubles of the state. I understand the Indian counter-argument that doing this may result in similar demands in other states, but the 'special status' of Kashmir needs to be the overriding concern.

  • Borders cannot be redrawn - I don't see Indian administered Kashmir merging with Pakistan, I don't foresee an independent Kashmir. Nor do I see Pakistan administered Kashmir joining India. The LOC as it is will become the current border, although perhaps softened (as has been advocated) to allow greater movement between both sides of the LOC.

  • The military build-up / presence within the Valley is detrimental to peace efforts. This needs to be reduced for the frustration and humiliation amongst the local population to dissapate.

  • Pakistan needs to stifle those that scream and preach about jihad in Kashmir. If we're using the excuse that in a democracy, we need to ensure freedom of expression, then that has to be expressed responsibly. That was our response on the facebook / Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) drawing episode, or was it not? Brainwashing another generation on hate and violence will get us nowhere.
Now I'm sure I've said things above that might upset people on both sides of the border. There are entrenched views, and has been mentioned, both sides are only interested in give and not take.

Our thoughts should be primiarily for those that are suffering - Kashmiri's. How can we help them achieve a better life, and how can we in the way of peace improve lives for both nations?

Rose tinted and idealistic is what many may term my stance to be, but our stated positions on Kashmir won't get us anywhere.

Happy to hear views on what I've said (in a respectful and adult like manner of course).
 
My 2 cents on the topic:

We're back to where this chain of discussion usually ends up, most notably:

Pak posters: The Kashmiri's are fighting for their freedom from Indian occupation, it's their right.
Indian posters: Kashmir is an integral part of India, these protesters are making their own lives a misery. If Kashmiri's are not happy, they're free to join Pakistan.

This merry-go-round doesn't help in providing any solution to this issue. All we do is accentuate our traditional stands. A starting point should be to talk about where we agree on what's happening in Kashmir. And my take on this is the following:

  • Kashmiri's are suffering, and there is genuine despair - this suffering is concentrated predominantly in the Valley. A political and non-violent solution is the ONLY answer to their troubles.

  • Annexation or seccession from the Indian Union is a non-starter. However, autonomy or a greater devolution of powers may be the answer, particularly in the Valley. Whether that meets the demands of 'azadi' that so many shout for is unknown. However, that, coupled with a reduced / withdrawn military presence could quell the troubles of the state. I understand the Indian counter-argument that doing this may result in similar demands in other states, but the 'special status' of Kashmir needs to be the overriding concern.

  • Borders cannot be redrawn - I don't see Indian administered Kashmir merging with Pakistan, I don't foresee an independent Kashmir. Nor do I see Pakistan administered Kashmir joining India. The LOC as it is will become the current border, although perhaps softened (as has been advocated) to allow greater movement between both sides of the LOC.

  • The military build-up / presence within the Valley is detrimental to peace efforts. This needs to be reduced for the frustration and humiliation amongst the local population to dissapate.

  • Pakistan needs to stifle those that scream and preach about jihad in Kashmir. If we're using the excuse that in a democracy, we need to ensure freedom of expression, then that has to be expressed responsibly. That was our response on the facebook / Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) drawing episode, or was it not? Brainwashing another generation on hate and violence will get us nowhere.
Now I'm sure I've said things above that might upset people on both sides of the border. There are entrenched views, and has been mentioned, both sides are only interested in give and not take.

Our thoughts should be primiarily for those that are suffering - Kashmiri's. How can we help them achieve a better life, and how can we in the way of peace improve lives for both nations?

Rose tinted and idealistic is what many may term my stance to be, but our stated positions on Kashmir won't get us anywhere.

Happy to hear views on what I've said (in a respectful and adult like manner of course).

Your thoughts are clear, realistic and implementable; I feel the final solution to Kashmir would be more on these line articulated by you
 
kashmir-insurgency-afp608.jpg


SRINAGAR: Indian-administered Kashmir is on the boil again: this time over the killing of eight young Kashmiris in less than three weeks allegedly at the hands of Indian security forces.

The deaths have brought thousands of war-weary residents out onto the streets chanting “Blood for Blood!” and “Freedom for Kashmir!”. Authorities have responded with bullets, tear gas, curfews and arrests.

The latest wave of unrest started on June 11 when a 17-year old student died after being hit by a teargas shell fired by police during an anti-India demonstration in Srinagar.

Tufail Matoo was not part of the protest and was carrying his school bag when he was hit, his family said.

Since then seven other young Kashmiris have been killed during protests including one who died from serious skull injuries after being allegedly beaten-up by paramilitary soldiers.

The strikes, protests and growing ill-will are putting pressure on the young, British-born chief minister of the volatile Muslim-majority region, Omar Abdullah, a scion of Kashmir's main political dynasty.

He came to office last year, promising to reduce the estimated 500,000 Indian troops in the Himalayan state and also to improve human rights.

“Omar (Abdullah) is facing a very serious challenge. The situation is fast getting out of control,” the editor of leading Urdu weekly “Chattan” (Rock), Tahir Mohiudin, told AFP.

“His seriousness on improving human rights is now being questioned,” he said, adding the present situation has been “mishandled as security forces have used excessive force.”

Leading separatist and chief priest of the region's main mosque, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, called at the weekend for Abdullah to resign “because he has failed to protect the lives of Kashmiris.”

The latest deaths and protests are also a setback for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who pledged to improve human rights during a visit this month.

“The security forces in Jammu and Kashmir have been strictly instructed to respect human rights of civilians,” Singh said in Srinagar.

With bitterness and anger on the rise, the latest protests play into the hands of hardline separatists, who have long resisted talks with New Delhi and seek independence or a merger with Pakistan for the Muslim-majority region.

“This is a situation that favours them and they are making full use of it,” said Mohiudin.

Nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan have each administered part of Kashmir since the partition of the subcontinent after the end of British rule in 1947.

The global flashpoint has been the trigger for two of the three wars fought by the neighbours in the last 60 years.

Once famously called “paradise on earth,” the heavily militarised region is often described as “India's Switzerland” dotted as it is with snow-capped peaks, lakes and lush vegetation during the summer months.

During the darkest days of an anti-India insurgency that began in 1989, it was also frequently referred to as the most dangerous place on earth.

Today, it is safer than at any point during the last 20 years measured by the number of murders. But anti-India street protests by young Kashmiris show that resentment still runs deep.

The young generation is fed up with the stalemate, says Mohiudin.

“They want a permanent solution and hence they hit the streets regularly,” he told AFP.

But several rounds of talks between moderate separatists and New Delhi have failed to produce any results and killings by security forces reinforce the notion of “occupying” Indian troops mistreating the local population.

Radha Kumar from the New Delhi-based Nelson Mandela Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution attributes the street protests to the lack of prospects for young Kashmiris and the economic backwardness of the region.

Given the instability, companies have shunned investment in the region and tourism, the mainstay of the local economy, has suffered. Most Western governments still discourage their nationals from travel to Kashmir.

“Delay in resolution is bad in itself, but not necessarily the reason for people to go out on the streets. To me the reason for the unrest is the growing number of unemployed young people,” Kumar told AFP.

Overall, nearly 70 protesters have died in clashes during protests since mid-2008, according to the police.
 
and these brutal Indian armed forces should stop this massacre it's enough now stop killing innocent people and then blaming them as terrorists... :cheers:
 
These guys are terrorists. They are throwing such big stones in response to very small bullets.

They should be eliminated. I agree with Indians.
:)
 
^^^^Well its been almost 6 decades....the great freedome game has been played on all possible turfs.....Direct attack...to gorillah wars ...to Operation Gibraltars...to the so called Jihadis...to stone throwers......lets see what comes next.....
 
Back
Top Bottom