Kashmiri Nationalist
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2009
- Messages
- 859
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Really? But then the IOA doesn't show that doesn't it? That's what matters. Now digging up graves of false myths just t justify your separatist mindset on religious grounds (last minute "secularism"), doesn't really change the realities.
As a state, they have the freedom to live anywhere in Kashmir as they want when they want. There is no ghettoization as even in Ladakh Muslims are allowed to live. But this was not the case in the valley from where they escaped marginally with their lives.
But you doesn't mean you my dear friend, it means your types. What's personal in that?
The terms are discussed in more than just PDF and IDF mate. They've been discussed in a lot of other forums including neutral European and forums like MP as well. Somehow the terms look very different from here that needed removal of Pakistanis and Chinese from the state as well to carry out whatever you're calling.
Plus the violence in the valley due to jihad against my people, nullified any justification and resulted simply in demographic cleansing to justify the separatism.
The signing of the IOA was more so "Sign it, or we'll let the tribals do what they want with you", I'm sure you'd logically agree. The Maharaja also wished for the wishes of his people to be respected by India, which hasn't happened yet, has it?
Of course they do, that wasn't the point. The point was that there's near-no militancy in Ladakh so the massacres you project are non-existant and again, a figment of your imagination.
My types includes myself, I find that personnel. Perhaps you should stick to the debates on hand, logically?
Of course they've been discussed, I wasn't questioning that; but then again, if you actually read my posts, you'd get the gist of what I'm saying.
I'll leave that to the UN, to which India is a member of and hasn't fulfilled their obligations yet.