Kashmir | News & Discussions.

[MilesTogo]

If LeT is not a terror organization but a Kashmiri Freedom Struggle group, then why did Pakistan ban it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

@Taimikhan: Why was my post deleted? Wasn't that the bitter truth? I understand that you don't particularly like me, but..here is my simple point.

Many here support the militants calling them freedom fighters and variants thereof. One mod even changed the title to suit the 'sentiments' of some other members. Many here pray for those who come across borders and get killed in their attempt to wreck havoc in the Kashmir valley.

But none among them have come forth to celebrate the achievements of the Kashmiri doctor who topped the IAS exam or other achievements by the Kashmiris.

You all support Kashmiri freedom, so why don't you all celebrate their achievements? No prayers for the Kashmiri's welfare? Hypocrisy is not lost upon intelligent observers.

Instead of labeling it as a useless rant, please do provide evidence of Pakistani members support for Kashmiris' achievements instead of their support for the terrorist scumbags!

My point still stands! Unless you post evidence of support for Kashmiris' welfare, many shall presume that all that Pakistan wants is only the territory in question as a balm, sorry to say, for a collective fractured ego and failed state policies based on a pseudo-superiority complex of past governments, without as much as a scant thought about the Kashmiris!

Posting or not posting on a thread is not evidence of caring or not caring for the welfare of Kashmiris.

You are coming up with an arbitrary standard of how you want to define 'caring'. I do not see how you have shown anything you claim about what Pakistan wants or thinks, but you are welcome to your opinion.

Now please stick to the topic.

---------- Post added at 12:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:11 PM ----------

If LeT is not a terror organization but a Kashmiri Freedom Struggle group, then why did Pakistan ban it.

Because the UN called for it, without a trial, without allowing those accused to challenge their designation.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

If you have proof that these men are freedom fighters,then why don't you disclose this matter to the whole world that Indian army killed 6 innocent civilians.

Being 'freedom fighters' does not make them 'innocent civilians' - they are still combatants, and the IA is within its rights to engage them and kill them, as they are to engage the IA and kill its soldiers in pursuit of and end to Indian occupation.

It's another fact that hardly any country believes Pakistan...

Does not change the facts.

you may call them freedom fighter in Pakistan,but here we called them terrorist in India, & Indian army don't care what ever you said about them...

Call them what you will, over here the Indian Army is called a terrorist occupation army, but if there is to be any civil discourse on the forum, then name calling has to stop.

 

[Prometheus]

@Prometheus

Let it go.. remember the story of 5 blind men and the elephant. Thats the problem with the Pakistan today. They see this animal of terrorism as seperate groups like AT, LeT, Jaish (pro Pakistan ) and TTP etc (anti Pakistan). Till the day they dont realize that its one big 800 pound gorilla in their house, determined to convert the house into a jungle, they are destined to face its warth on a day in day out basis and get blamed every time there is a terror like incident anywhere in the world..

as you say ..................but i never locked it that I have to let it go.

good nite mate.

I will await my answer from Super mod (* best mod here)........agno

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

.
4. Now it is upto the mod team to walk the talk and either give proof that they were pro freedom insurgents or it should not call them that applying the same logic that I am supposed to follow..

If they are insurgents, then it is pretty obvious they are not fighting the IA because they are pro-India, and if they are not pro-India, then they are fighting the IA to end 'occupation' and therefore for 'freedom'.

btw will we apply the same logic when PA kills so called TTP terrorists in NWFP and the news is reported in this forum? Or is that exempt?

You are correct, they may not be TTP militants, but Uzbeks, Chechens, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Al Qaeda etc. But all those groups are terrorists given their open claims of responsibility for attacking civilians, in many cases videos as well. So calling them terrorists or militants would be accurate, since no one aside from these groups is fighting the PA in that region.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

So, if BLA targets Pakistani army - then would you recognize it as freedom struggle.

Too late for that now, since they have in the past few weeks (and before that) openly claimed responsibility for attacking and killing school teachers, principals, laborers, civil servants etc.

They have also openly called for killing/eliminating non-Baluch (especially Punjabi) residents of Balochistan, indicating they wish to perpetrate a genocide.

Once upon a time they might have been 'freedom fighters'.

 

[afriend]

Well.. these freedom strugglers had a history of killing civilians who had refused to shelter them. And also they have unique distinction of killing pandits and throwing them out of kashmir. I do not think this comes under the purview of freedom strugglers.

And AM what evidence do you have to assume these where pro freedom strugglers or militants who come under the above category. I believe its a matter of convinient assumption.

Fundemental disagreement of the categorisation of these militants are always there, and hence the change in title dont make much difference as long as these terrorists are given their well deserved appoinment to hell.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well.. these freedom strugglers had a history of killing civilians who had refused to shelter them. And also they have unique distinction of killing pandits and throwing them out of kashmir. I do not think this comes under the purview of freedom strugglers.

Not all militants have that 'history' just like one could argue not all IA soldiers are torturing, raping and murdering innocent Kashmiris, though enough have.

And AM what evidence do you have to assume these where pro freedom strugglers or militants who come under the above category. I believe its a matter of convinient assumption.

So, are you suggesting the people killed in these encounters are innocent civilians?

 

[bandmaster]

If you have proof that these men are freedom fighters,then why don't you disclose this matter to the whole world that Indian army killed 6 innocent civilians.

It's another fact that hardly any country believes Pakistan...

you may call them freedom fighter in Pakistan,but here we called them terrorist in India, & Indian army don't care what ever you said about them...

Pakistan's Kashmir policy suits India well. If a jihadi narrative wasn't given to the Kashmir issue, there would be a lot more international pressure on India to resolve it. Pakistan's Kashmir policy has also promoted the jihadi monster which threatens Pakistan's very existence. I couldn't be more pleased with the general sentiment expressed in this thread by Pakistani members here. It seems to me that Pakistan will continue to radicalize itself over Kashmir and other issues, at grievous cost to it's society and economy.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan's Kashmir policy suits India well. If a jihadi narrative wasn't given to the Kashmir issue, there would be a lot more international pressure on India to resolve it. Pakistan's Kashmir policy has also promoted the jihadi monster which threatens Pakistan's very existence. I couldn't be more pleased with the general sentiment expressed in this thread by Pakistani members here. It seems to me that Pakistan will continue to radicalize itself over Kashmir and other issues, at grievous cost to it's society and economy.

Actually the Jihadi monster has a lot more to do with the Western Front, the Soviet invasion and Afghan Jihad, and Pakistan's subsequent Afghan policies, not Kashmir.

You are correct though that India has painted the Kashmiri freedom struggle in a Jihadi light to gain leverage to continue its occupation and not resolve the dispute.

 

[karan.1970]

If they are insurgents, then it is pretty obvious they are not fighting the IA because they are pro-India, and if they are not pro-India, then they are fighting the IA to end 'occupation' and therefore for 'freedom'.

Who says they are insurgents?? Could be common criminals like kidnappers or robbers or smugglers ?? Are you taking IA's word for it that they are insurgents?? Then why not their word that they are LeT. Either accept IA's word or dont. Why be selective??

You are correct, they may not be TTP militants, but Uzbeks, Chechens, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Al Qaeda etc. But all those groups are terrorists given their open claims of responsibility for attacking civilians, in many cases videos as well. So calling them terrorists or militants would be accurate, since no one aside from these groups is fighting the PA in that region.

So when a so called freedom fighter tries to take a hotel in srinagar hostage and results in deaths of a few civilians, is he a terrorist or not?? May be not LeT as they dont carry i cards, but a terrorist??

Or plants a bomb on a railway track used by civilians?

or throws a hand grenade at a traffic junction??

btw, how do you get a proof that those killed in NWFP were actually the same ones attacking the civilians?? Do they carry Id Cards of belonging to any of the organizations you mentioned?? Or do you take PA's word for it??

 

[afriend]

Not all militants have that 'history' just like one could argue not all IA soldiers are torturing, raping and murdering innocent Kashmiris, though enough have.


So, are you suggesting the people killed in these encounters are innocent civilians?

Well these guys came from other side with arms and ammuniions, they where tracked down and encountered before they could do any damage thanks to many of our peace loving kashmiri brothers who tips of the army. So i agree, lot of arguments and assumptions can be made in such a scenario. And there shall be always a fundemental disagreement.

 

[afriend]

Actually the Jihadi monster has a lot more to do with the Western Front, the Soviet invasion and Afghan Jihad, and Pakistan's subsequent Afghan policies, not Kashmir.

You are correct though that India has painted the Kashmiri freedom struggle in a Jihadi light to gain leverage to continue its occupation and not resolve the dispute.

I think, such demarcation of good violance and bad violance is not good as a policy for any country. You had been bitten once in the western front, and you never know when it will turn around in the eastern front. So clear and uniform policy should be there for all forms of violence else there would always be a trust deficit when it comes to pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Who says they are insurgents?? Could be common criminals like kidnappers or robbers or smugglers ?? Are you taking IA's word for it that they are insurgents?? Then why not their word that they are LeT. Either accept IA's word or dont. Why be selective??

Common criminals/smugglers would not be crossing over the heavily militarized LoC, and therefore the reasonable suspicion is that they were insurgents. Smugglers could be an option, but unlikely given the major markets are across the IB (where smuggling is well documented) and that some contraband shoudl have been found with them.

If they had assault weapons and what not, suspicion falls on them being insurgents, but identifying them as insurgents from a particular group is not a reasonable assumption.

However, smuggling rackets (alcohol etc.) across the IB are widely documented.

So when a so called freedom fighter tries to take a hotel in srinagar hostage and results in deaths of a few civilians, is he a terrorist or not?? May be not LeT as they dont carry i cards, but a terrorist??

If taking refuge in a hotel/house to hide from SF's, then part of a guerrila war I'd say. If deliberately taking hostages as human shields or to kill, then a terrorist I suppose.

Or plants a bomb on a railway track used by civilians?

Attacking infrastructure, not civilians.

or throws a hand grenade at a traffic junction??

Were there security forces present there? How does a US drone attack on a house where suspected Taliban and civilians both live, as well as civilians in surrounding houses, come across? Terrorist attack since civilian deaths were known and taken as acceptable?

btw, how do you get a proof that those killed in NWFP were actually the same ones attacking the civilians?? Do they carry Id Cards of belonging to any of the organizations you mentioned?? Or do you take PA's word for it??

They belong to groups whose leadership has openly come out in support of terrorist attacks and proudly claimed them when they occur. No possibility of being anything but terrorists, since the above mentioned groups are the only ones fighting the PA in those regions.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I think, such demarcation of good violance and bad violance is not good as a policy for any country.

Yet I have not seen you condemn Indira Gandhi and India for supporting violent rebels/terrorists in East Pakistan.

Once Indians themselves stop being hypocritical about 'good terrorists and bad terrorists' they might get more support for their position.

You had been bitten once in the western front, and you never know when it will turn around in the eastern front. So clear and uniform policy should be there for all forms of violence else there would always be a trust deficit when it comes to pakistan.

The eastern front has been clamped down on for over a decade now. That is why the violent insurgency in J&K and cross-LoC infiltration remain at historically low levels.