Pak Asif Admits Publically We have Sponsored Terror for 40 Years

[Jackdaws]

Quite the contrary, it was the Maharaja who violated the stand still agreement (with Pakistan) by signing accession agreement with India .. Pakistani troops entered Kashmir only when the Maharaja had violated the stand still agreement (i.e. the Indian troops had already invaded Jammu.

Did the Maharaja actually sign the accession document (or does such a document even exist) or what legal or moral authority the Maharaja had to sign an accession when he had already lost control/authority over the State of Jammu or Kashmir, of course, is another debate ..

Of course not. The Maharaja wanted his state to be independent. And Standstill Agreements and Accession Agreements were mutually exclusive - he was well within his rights to sign any with either of the new States. So even if he had signed the Accession Agreement with India, Pakistan was still obligated to honor the Standstill Agreement. Ask any legal expert.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

Stupidity of Indian has no bounds when the deluded losers lists azad Kashmir as only disputed

Ever heard the term rule by !majority?


Such as AFSPA, sure

Rule by majority? LOL - sure, did Jinnah believe in that or did he fight for minority rights?

 

[M. Sarmad]

Of course not. The Maharaja wanted his state to be independent. And Standstill Agreements and Accession Agreements were mutually exclusive - he was well within his rights to sign any with either of the new States. So even if he had signed the Accession Agreement with India, Pakistan was still obligated to honor the Standstill Agreement. Ask any legal expert.

You are absolutely wrong ....

Standstill Agreement on Kashmir was offered to Pakistan by Maharaja Hari Singh himself, of his own accord; Pakistan accepted that and it is now an international document.

A similar offer was made to India but India didn't sign such an agreement. So, over Jammu and Kashmir, only two parties – Pakistan and Kashmir were left. In the presence of the Standstill Agreement, no other ‘accord’ as to the status of Jammu and Kashmir could be made at all under international law.

Even the Maharaja in his letter to Governor General of India had to give an "explanation" ... He alleged that Pakistan had violated the agreement and he had no choice left but to accede the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India ... But as the UN rejected the Indian claim and didn't declare Pakistan an aggressor state, these allegations remain unsubstantiated. And until and unless these allegations are proven in any international court, Maharaja's accusations and "explanation" carries no weight .... Hope that helps

 

[RescueRanger]

 

[salarsikander]

Rule by majority? LOL - sure, did Jinnah believe in that or did he fight for minority rights

Looool. Stop bringing things that are not relevant to defend yourself. Learn the basics of democracy.
What Jinnah did was the he's worst fear came alive when he saw Hindu majority will always win, which again is not relevant to what you are discussing. What can I expect from a dimwit who says the only part that is disputed is azad Kashmir. Lol. And where we have Indian occupied part with AFPSA

 

[t_for_talli]

Kashmir is a muslim majority state, after the partition of the sub continent it wanted the simple freedom to be part of a muslim country

India with its greed ended the hope of peace in the sub continent by occupying a muslim majority state

We will support the quest of freedom for Kashmiri muslims from hindu occupation

India cannot complain about emnity from Pakistan, india cannot complain about the lack of peace or hatred, it wS indias greed that has caused this

Tell where it said all muslim majourity states belong to pakistan,

There are muslim majority areas in UP, bengal. Hyderabad, Kerala etc. There are also muslim majority areas in China, Myanmar etc. So as per your logic all of them belong to Pakistan.

British draw lines on the regions they controlled (based on certain factor) and princely states had options to join Pak, India or remain independent. Raja of Kashmir chose India

 

[hussain0216]

Tell where it said all muslim majourity states belong to pakistan,

There are muslim majority areas in UP, bengal. Hyderabad, Kerala etc. There are also muslim majority areas in China, Myanmar etc. So as per your logic all of them belong to Pakistan.

British draw lines on the regions they controlled (based on certain factor) and princely states had options to join Pak, India or remain independent. Raja of Kashmir chose India

It was the whole point of Partition that muslim majority areas hated hindus and did not want to live side by side with them, Kashmiris wanted the same thing as all Pakistanis and they were a border state, not some small area stuck in the middle of india

The suppression of their right to freedom and to be part of a muslim country is why there is conflict

 

[Jackdaws]

Looool. Stop bringing things that are not relevant to defend yourself. Learn the basics of democracy.
What Jinnah did was the he's worst fear came alive when he saw Hindu majority will always win, which again is not relevant to what you are discussing. What can I expect from a dimwit who says the only part that is disputed is azad Kashmir. Lol. And where we have Indian occupied part with AFPSA

Hahahaha. Learn basics of democracy from a country which has never known democracy.

 

[t_for_talli]

It was the whole point of Partition that muslim majority areas hated hindus and did not want to live side by side with them, Kashmiris wanted the same thing as all Pakistanis and they were a border state, not some small area stuck in the middle of india

The suppression of their right to freedom and to be part of a muslim country is why there is conflict

You are wrong , Pakistan was made keeping religion in Mind, India was a secular state.
So those who want to stay in Islamic nation were free to move out and those who wanted to be in secular state were welcomed.

For you guys having a muslim state was the point of partition and Indians welcomed it, It was an option given to leave secular state for Islamic republic at the time of partition

Please educate yourself, line were drawn for the region under british control, Princely states were free to chose India/ Pak or remain independent. Kashmir state chose India.

The Kings of Bahawalpur, Khairpur, Chitral, Swat, Hunza etc. showed their intent to stay with Pakistan the same way Raja of Kashmir joined India

 

[hussain0216]

India was a secular state.

It was only secular in the eyes of leaders like Gandi and Nehru, in reality it was a hindutva state in waiting

It has taken 70 years but the creep towards hindutvaism is continuous

Jinnah knew this, he understood the consequences of being a minority Muslim in such a state

Thus the idea of Pakistan was born, whilst it was unfeasible to include muslim majority areas in the middle of india, Kashmir was a muslim majority state and would be part of a continuous Pakistan

Kashmiris wanted the same, the risk of being part of a hindu india was all too real

It was indian greed and frankly stupidity that they thought forcing a state full of muslims that didnt want to be part of india was a good idea

 

[t_for_talli]

It was only secular in the eyes of leaders like Gandi and Nehru, in reality it was a hindutva state in waiting

It has taken 70 years but the creep towards hindutvaism is continuous

Jinnah knew this, he understood the consequences of being a minority Muslim in such a state

Thus the idea of Pakistan was born, whilst it was unfeasible to include muslim majority areas in the middle of india, Kashmir was a muslim majority state and would be part of a continuous Pakistan

Kashmiris wanted the same, the risk of being part of a hindu india was all too real

It was indian greed and frankly stupidity that they thought forcing a state full of muslims that didnt want to be part of india was a good idea

Please educate your self about princely states and the options given to them.

The Kings of Bahawalpur, Khairpur, Chitral, Swat, Hunza, KASHMIR were given same options and they acted on their will.
Kings of Bahawalpur, Khairpur, Chitral, Swat, Hunza preferred Pakistan while Raja of Kashmir preferred India

 

[hussain0216]

Please educate your self about princely states and the options given to them.

The Kings of Bahawalpur, Khairpur, Chitral, Swat, Hunza, KASHMIR were given same options and they acted on their will.
Kings of Bahawalpur, Khairpur, Chitral, Swat, Hunza preferred Pakistan while Raja of Kashmir preferred India

Nothing should deny a population the right and freedom to determine their future, they were muslims who simply wanted the right to be part of a newly formed Pakistan

Even if you wished to take the word of a king over the will of the people, if the people revolted as the Kashmiris did then they should be given freedom

All india did was create endless conflict in South Asia by forcing a muslim majority state into a union full of hindus becoming increasingly hindutva

Indian muslims are stuck but why should Kashmiris be stuck

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Nothing should deny a population the right and freedom to determine their future, they were muslims who simply wanted the right to be part of a newly formed Pakistan

Even if you wished to take the word of a king over the will of the people, if the people revolted as the Kashmiris did then they should be given freedom

All india did was create endless conflict in South Asia by forcing a muslim majority state into a union full of hindus becoming increasingly hindutva

Indian muslims are stuck but why should Kashmiris be stuck

Well... has Pakistan given Kashmiris their rights?
Every member of Pakistan Controlled Kashmir Parliament files election nomination on a form that declares Kashmir to become a part of Pakistan... Kashmir could have been an Azad country had Pakistan not attacked in October 1947.... if there is anyone to blame for Kashmir's current situation its no other tan Pakistan.

 

[t_for_talli]

Nothing should deny a population the right and freedom to determine their future, they were muslims who simply wanted the right to be part of a newly formed Pakistan

Even if you wished to take the word of a king over the will of the people, if the people revolted as the Kashmiris did then they should be given freedom

All india did was create endless conflict in South Asia by forcing a muslim majority state into a union full of hindus becoming increasingly hindutva

Indian muslims are stuck but why should Kashmiris be stuck

lines were drawn, princely states were given options to choose sides,
And option were given to all, Muslims in India who wanted Muslim state were free to go and non muslims were given option to move to secular state. Now tell me where rights were denied.

It was crystal clear, People looking for Muslim state go, People who want secular state can stay in India

 

[hussain0216]

lines were drawn, princely states were given options to choose sides,
And option were given to all, Muslims in India who wanted Muslim state were free to go and non muslims were given option to move to secular state. Now tell me where rights were denied.

It was crystal clear, People looking for Muslim state go, People who want secular state can stay in India

Sure and Muslims who didn't want to live in amongst hindutva indians moved at great cost and tragedy

However Kashmir was a muslim majority state where the overwhelming desire was to be part of Pakistan and as a muslim majority state to have their rights to a future of their choice being stolen just to force them into a indian union was a injustice forced upon them by india

Well... has Pakistan given Kashmiris their rights?
Every member of Pakistan Controlled Kashmir Parliament files election nomination on a form that declares Kashmir to become a part of Pakistan... Kashmir could have been an Azad country had Pakistan not attacked in October 1947.... if there is anyone to blame for Kashmir's current situation its no other tan Pakistan.

Balls, A independent Kashmir is neither feasible nor desired by the majority of Kashmiris

The writing was on the wall and the indian intentions were clear to disregard the will of the people and get a hindu raja to cede to india, inaction by Pakistan would have resulted in all if Kashmir being occupied

Instead Azad Kashmir is free as is GB and by opening a direct route to China and blocking india from Central Asia Russia etc the geo strategic future of Pakistan was changed forever


The fault for conflict in South Asia lies at the feet of india alone and its inability to respect the point of Partition which was so muslim majority areas could form a Pakistani state

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Sure and Muslims who didn't want to live in amongst hindutva indians moved at great cost and tragedy

However Kashmir was a muslim majority state where the overwhelming desire was to be part of Pakistan and as a muslim majority state to have their rights to a future of their choice being stolen just to force them into a indian union was a injustice forced upon them by india


Balls, A independent Kashmir is neither feasible nor desired by the majority of Kashmiris

The writing was on the wall and the indian intentions were clear to disregard the will of the people and get a hindu raja to cede to india, inaction by Pakistan would have resulted in all if Kashmir being occupied

Instead Azad Kashmir is free as is GB and by opening a direct route to China and blocking india from Central Asia Russia etc the geo strategic future of Pakistan was changed forever


The fault for conflict in South Asia lies at the feet of india alone and its inability to respect the point of Partition which was so muslim majority areas could form a Pakistani state

Don't you love the lies Pakistanis tell themselves and believe them.... LOL

Azad my ***... Gilgit is not even a constitutionally accepted Pakistani territory ... that is why they shut their shops to protest being forced to pay tax to Pakistani Tax Authorities....
https://www.dawn.com/news/1370780