Musharaf is severely ill may die soon

[VCheng]

What the hell is ceasefire line?
And if you are talking about LOC then those lines are crossed regularly by both armies and no war beaks out. so you are wrong again.

And how do you think the LoC was drawn in the first place?
(Hint: It was along a ceasefire line. )

Kargil never turned into a full fledge war, PAF or Navy wasnt used. it was capturing of strategic peaks which india went to US for to meddle and contain the situation.

It was high treason by a rogue COAS by instigating such a criminal incident that required US intervention to reverse. The world can thank USA for preventing a nuclear war in South Asia.

 

[Introvert]

100% true.
Mushraff has been severly ill for last 3 months, doctors have told him he has only a few months.

How come no other news channel is reporting this?

 

[gangsta_rap]

sher ka baacha who would have taken entire illegally indian occupied kashmir had it not been for the fat coward Nawaz.

Every time we know something new about the kargil episode this statement becomes truer and truer.

 

[M. Sarmad]

It was high treason by a rogue COAS by instigating such a criminal incident ...

Hold your horses, dear
It's India that has occupied Kargil (and Kashmir) illegally.
There was nothing 'criminal' about what the then COAS did.
I don't think you know what 'High Treason' is.
NS had approved it anyway

 

[El Sidd]

And how do you think the LoC was drawn in the first place?
(Hint: It was along a ceasefire line. )



It was high treason by a rogue COAS by instigating such a criminal incident that required US intervention to reverse. The world can thank USA for preventing a nuclear war in South Asia.

syed sahab.

zakaat nikalti nahi per fatwe Check karen

 

[Dreamer.]

11 pages in less than 48 hours.
I hope this thread doesn't go the way of the army rifle replacement thread, 400+ pages with nothing to show for it.

 

[VCheng]

Hold your horses, dear
It's India that has occupied Kargil (and Kashmir) illegally.
There was nothing 'criminal' about what the then COAS did.
I don't think you know what 'High Treason' is.
NS had approved it anyway

I wonder what the following means, then:

(ii) In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this line.

(And if you bring up Indian action in Siachin, please do look up the primary references about the demarcation where the last point determined is short of the glaciers and continues due north from it.)

Also, General Musharraf is totally responsible for instigating the Kargil fiasco, claimed rubber stamping from NS notwithstanding. The damage to Pakistan was immense.

 

[syed_yusuf]

His is Musharraf doing, any news about his health?

 

[BRAVO_]

on official facebook recent pic shared on taken on 17th January

 

[M. Sarmad]

I wonder what the following means, then:

(ii) In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this line.

(And if you bring up Indian action in Siachin, please do look up the primary references about the demarcation where the last point determined is short of the glaciers and continues due north from it.)

Did you even read it yourself before posting?

• Pakistan and India had differences in the interpretation of “… thence north to the glaciers.” from point NJ 9842.
• As per the agreement, neither side was supposed to alter it "irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations"
• But India did occupy the Siachen area as per its own interpretation of "thence north to the glacier" without considering the Pakistani interpretation, or even informing Pakistan through military or diplomatic channels, thus effectively altering it unilaterally in clear violation of the letter and spirit of the Agreement.
• Even Indian PM Rajiv Gandhi had later acknowledged that India had 'recovered' 5000 sq km of area from Pakistan.

Every time India fires a bullet on LoC, it violates the Simla Agreement
Even the fencing of LoC by India is in violation of the spirit of Simla Agreement.
Recently, India claimed that its troops had carried out a 'surgical strike' across LoC

And yet you blame only Pakistan for violating the Simla Agreement?
You believe that Kargil was a "criminal offense" by Pakistan, but you have never said anything against Indian crimes on the LoC, (or in IOK)

Hindustan k khilaf baat kertay zuban mein aablay par jatay hain kiya? munafiqat kahain isko ab ya kuch aur?

Also, General Musharraf is totally responsible for instigating the Kargil fiasco, claimed rubber stamping from NS notwithstanding. The damage to Pakistan was immense.

Wrong on both accounts. We all know NS has never accepted pressure from the military establishment.
The 1999 Kargil conflict has actually prevented major wars,
first in 2002 and then after 26/11

 

[VCheng]

Every time India fires a bullet on LoC, it violates the Simla Agreement
Even the fencing of LoC by India is in violation of the spirit of Simla Agreement.
Recently, India claimed that its troops had carried out a 'surgical strike' across LoC

And yet you blame only Pakistan for violating the Simla Agreement?
You believe that Kargil was a "criminal offense" by Pakistan, but you have never said a word about Indian crimes on LoC, (or inside IOK)

Hindustan k khilaf baat kertay zuban mein aablay par jatay hain kiya, munafiqat kahain isko ab ya kuch aur?

I blame both sides for the present stalemate, but the fact remains that Pakistan's narrative over Kashmir struggles to find traction globally, while India's doesn't. My own personal views have nothing to with this observation. The Kargil "adventure" did more to harm whatever merit Pakistan's arguments ever had than everything else put together done by India. And that damage continues till today.

It is not munafiqat but mere dispassionate observation that leads me to say the above. To stay on topic, I wish the General the very best of health. May he live long enough to be put on trial.

The 1999 Kargil conflict has actually prevented major wars,
first in 2002 and then after 26/11

Thanks to USA, the issue has not spilled over into a wider conflict.

 

[M. Sarmad]

I blame both sides for the present stalemate, but the fact remains that Pakistan's narrative over Kashmir struggles to find traction globally, while India's doesn't. My own personal views have nothing to with this observation. The Kargil "adventure" did more to harm whatever merit Pakistan's arguments ever had than everything else put together done by India. And that damage continues till today.

It is not munafiqat but mere dispassionate observation that leads me to say the above. To stay on topic, I wish the General the very best of health. May he live long enough to be put on trial.
.

That's simply because India has more economic and diplomatic clout than Pakistan. That has nothing to do with the merits of the Kashmir issue. India, however, despite having all the advantages, esp. post 9/11 and the resultant war against Islam/Muslims under false pretenses, still hasn't been able to convince the International Community (the UN) that Kashmir is an integral part of India (and not a disputed territory).

 

[VCheng]

That's simply because India has more economic and diplomatic clout than Pakistan. That has nothing to do with the merits of the Kashmir issue. India, however, despite having all the advantages, esp. post 9/11 and the resultant war against Islam/Muslims under false pretenses, still hasn't been able to convince the International Community (the UN) that Kashmir is an integral part of India (and not a disputed territory).

Here you make a fair point, but that is exactly how international geopolitics works, always has and always will.

Claiming merit for Pakistan's narrative is easy, but establishing its merit according to the rules of international geopolitics is quite impossible in the present and extrapolated circumstances, unfortunately. Again, my own personal views have no bearing on this rather blunt, but true, statement.

Who knows, Pakistan economic and diplomatic clout may yet improve to the point it can sway the world to see things its way rather than India's. It will take a lot of hard work and time to begin reversing the situation that India has been able to use to its advantage over the last several decades, including General Musharraf's ill-advised (no pun intended to stay on topic) misadventures including Kargil.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Here you make a fair point, but that is exactly how international geopolitics works, always has and always will.

Claiming merit for Pakistan's narrative is easy, but establishing its merit according to the rules of international geopolitics is quite impossible in the present and extrapolated circumstances, unfortunately. Again, my own personal views have no bearing on this rather blunt, but true, statement.

Who knows, Pakistan economic and diplomatic clout may yet improve to the point it can sway the world to see things its way rather than India's. It will take a lot of hard work and time to begin reversing the situation that India has been able to use to its advantage over the last several decades, including General Musharraf's ill-advised (no pun intended to stay on topic) misadventures including Kargil.

Yes, international geopolitics may lead to outcomes that differ from those required under International legal obligations of States. India has stronger diplomatic clout than Pakistan, but definitely not strong enough to manipulate/bend International rules in their favor.

 

[VCheng]

Yes, international geopolitics may lead to outcomes that differ from those required under International legal obligations of States. India has stronger diplomatic clout than Pakistan, but definitely not strong enough to manipulate/bend International rules in their favor.

Hence the stalemate we can observe.