What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
Denies troop presence in PaK

Beijing, Sept 2: China today said it had no intention to interfere in the Kashmir issue as it dismissed reports of presence of up to 11,000 PLA troops in Gilgit in Pakistan administered Kashmir (PaK).


"As a neighbour and friend of both countries, China believes that the (Kashmir) issue should be left to the two countries so that it could be properly handled through dialogue and consultation," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu told a media briefing.Clarifying on the Kashmir issue, the spokesperson said, "About Kashmir issue our position is that we believe it is an issue left over from history between India and Pakistan".

She rejected reports that up to 11,000 soldiers of the Peoples Liberation Army were in Gilgit in Northern Pakistan, saying: "The story that China has deployed its military in northern part of Pakistan is totally groundless and out of ulterior purpose".

Her comments came in response to a New York Times opinion piece last week which said that 11,000 PLA men had been deployed in Gilgit-Baltistan area to build up its rail and road access to the warm waters of the Persian Gulf.

The report said that the troops had been deployed to safeguard the project as well as use them for working on the railway link across the Karakorams.

"Some people are fabricating reports to destroy relations between China, Pakistan and India. But their efforts will get nowhere," Jiang said.

Asked whether China would review the policy to issue stapled visas to people of Jammu and Kashmir, she said "about our visa policy toward inhabitants in the Indian controlled Kashmir region the policy is consistent and stays unchanged".
 
.
Link please???? Do not post anything without link!
 
.
Denies troop presence in PaK

Beijing, Sept 2: China today said it had no intention to interfere in the Kashmir issue as it dismissed reports of presence of up to 11,000 PLA troops in Gilgit in Pakistan administered Kashmir (PaK).


"As a neighbour and friend of both countries, China believes that the (Kashmir) issue should be left to the two countries so that it could be properly handled through dialogue and consultation," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu told a media briefing.Clarifying on the Kashmir issue, the spokesperson said, "About Kashmir issue our position is that we believe it is an issue left over from history between India and Pakistan".

She rejected reports that up to 11,000 soldiers of the Peoples Liberation Army were in Gilgit in Northern Pakistan, saying: "The story that China has deployed its military in northern part of Pakistan is totally groundless and out of ulterior purpose".

Her comments came in response to a New York Times opinion piece last week which said that 11,000 PLA men had been deployed in Gilgit-Baltistan area to build up its rail and road access to the warm waters of the Persian Gulf.

The report said that the troops had been deployed to safeguard the project as well as use them for working on the railway link across the Karakorams.

"Some people are fabricating reports to destroy relations between China, Pakistan and India. But their efforts will get nowhere," Jiang said.

Asked whether China would review the policy to issue stapled visas to people of Jammu and Kashmir, she said "about our visa policy toward inhabitants in the Indian controlled Kashmir region the policy is consistent and stays unchanged".

As if India will let them!:coffee:
 
. .
Link please???? Do not post anything without link!

This is the official response from China. I had no idea where all the add-on came from.

China on Wednesday rejected reports of the presence of over 11,000 Chinese troops in northern Pakistan, saying that such "groundless reports" were made with "ulterior motives."

"We believe the attempts of some people to fabricate stories to provoke China-Pakistan or China-India relations are doomed to fail," said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu in a statement.

The comment came in response to recent reports of some American and Indian press that China had deployed more than 10,000 troops in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan.

Source: Xinhua
China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan - People's Daily Online
 
. . .
This is the official response from China. I had no idea where all the add-on came from.

China on Wednesday rejected reports of the presence of over 11,000 Chinese troops in northern Pakistan, saying that such "groundless reports" were made with "ulterior motives."

"We believe the attempts of some people to fabricate stories to provoke China-Pakistan or China-India relations are doomed to fail," said Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu in a statement.

The comment came in response to recent reports of some American and Indian press that China had deployed more than 10,000 troops in the Gilgit-Baltistan region of Pakistan.

Source: Xinhua
China refutes reports of sending troops to Pakistan - People's Daily Online

I think your source did not report it fully...

BEIJING, 2 SEPT: China today rejected reports of the presence of more than 11,000 Peoples Liberation Army troops in Pakista.n-occupied-Kashmir, saying that such "groundless reports" had been made with "ulterior motives".
"We believe the attempts of some people to fabricate stories to provoke China-Pakistan or China-India relations are doomed to fail," foreign ministry spokesperson Ms Jiang Yu said in a statement. “The story that China has deployed its military in northern part of Pakistan is totally groundless and out of ulterior purpose," she said.
It said it had no intention of interfering in the Kashmir issue but made it clear that it was not reviewing its stance on stapled visas to Kashmiris. “As a neighbour and friend of both countries, China believes that the (Kashmir) issue should be left to the two countries so that it could be properly handled through dialogue and consultation,” Ms Jiang Yu said in a media briefing. “About Kashmir issue our position is that we believe it is an issue left over from history between India and Pakistan."
China rules out troops presence, J&K interference
 
. .
Whats the point, whoever calls whatever...if there has to be a plebiscite as so vigorously demanded....all Kashmir has to be one again irrespective of terminology isn't it?
 
.
What does that have to do with my post or your claims of 'integrity of India' which I refuted? Try addressing the arguments made first.


I'll check them out, but my point made here stands.

I'm sorry, but India refused every single proposal for demilitarization and plebiscite put forward by the various UN appointed commissions - the intransigence was obviously on your side, and it is your side that withdrew from the commitment made to the Kashmiri people, international community and to Pakistan, that the dispute would be resolved through plebiscite.

These arguments, including the one that so clearly illustrates Indian hypocrisy and double standards between Muslims and Hindus, in occupying Hindu Junagadh and annexing it through plebiscite while denying the same to Muslims in J&K, are factual arguments, not emotions.

The emotional arguments here are the tripe about 'shedding blood, and not thinking twice about killing and dying over Indian integrity', when that integrity is based on hypocrisy, double standards, deceit and broken commitments to the Kashmiris and the international community.

Oh no not again!

Man, why are we going round and round the khoonta like a bhains?

Why don't you understand AM, we are acting on interests and not morals/promises/emotions/free will etc. because that's not the way you run a country.

1. We can't demilitarize until we see the promise of peace from the side of pak. We learnt our lessons from 1947, 1965 and Kargil. Quite frankly, we don't trust you. But don't worry demilitarization will be an automatic fallout the day K-issue is resolved.

2. I don't care if we are called hypocrites/double standard/evils/satan and neither does GoI. Cmon AM, as I said, we are acting purely on our interests here.

Does USA care when you call them everything you do?
Does China care when we call them everything we do?

Heck, even Idi Amin or Fidel Castro never cared what the world says about them. At least not beyond a certain point.

You may shout about junagarh and what not to your heart's content..the point is...IS ANYBODY LISTENING?

There's always a limit beyond which we don't pay heed to anyone's invectives.

One thing I have found here on PDF, even sane pakistani members are very very emotional when it comes to kashmir. My dear friend, you do not solve problems by being emotional, when will you understand this simple common sense?

Mushy wasn't emotional and see how far we went with him.

An emotional doctor only kills the patient.
 
.
Google is merely following the internationally and UN accepted status of J&K as disputed, everywhere accept in India.

Why not in India if they are soooo righteous?

Because of business right? So that means whenever and wherever a nation threatens Google, it will mend its ways, although in that country only, but it will nevertheless.

So you see their is a limit to their righteousness.

LOL...ever heard of anything more ridiculous than 'limited righteousness' ?

It's like saying 'limited love'
It's like saying 'limited honesty'

My friend, don't get confused. This is called opportunism, not righteousness.:coffee:
 
Last edited:
. .
In that case you should have made your intentions clear to the Kashmiris before your leadership promised them the right to self-determination to decide their status as part of India or Pakistan, and then further committed to that position through committing to the UNSC resolutions.

Claiming 'integrity' by denying Kashmiris the right to self-determination, which India herself chose to argue was the primary means of determining accession, through her invasion and annexation of the State of Jungadh over a month after it had acceded to Pakistan, and which your own leadership promised them and committed to, is dishonest to say the least.

Just to correct to you dear, he meant territorial integrity and not integrity of character.

You got it wrong there :P
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom