Absolutely true. I agree and if you have a little look on Pakistan's present situation, you can judge that we are doing the same thing. Let it play like you said. Dramatic expressions.
We are trying to overcome the fire in the house, you know we are successfull. Now once we have taken care of that fire we will certainly go for the very reason, which produced that fire. The neigbhbour who threw a petrol bomb in our house.
And there's your problem, you guys haven't even been able to acknowledge the problem yet, let alone find a solution to it. Unless ordinary Pakistanis like yourself take on the mullahs and their ideology, Pakistan will simply move from crisis to crisis.
All that is happening in Pakistan is YOUR fault, the citizens, who allowed leaders like Zia to spread islamist ideology throughout the length and breadth of you country.
Pakistan allowed a dangerous and vociferous minority to gain such power that never mind your politicians, even your army can't challenge the mullahs for fear of ripping the social fabric of the country apart. There could be plenty of reasons as to how or why all this happened, but IMO, its mostly because of Pakistan's inherent identity crisis and paranoia viz via India.
You know, let me tell you straight-forwardedly, that whatever you do, you will not be able to rule Kashmir, peacefully. And when you talk of permenance of LoC as a border, Pakistan later, Kashmiris themselves would not allow that. What do you think they will agree to do this, so that the option of independance gets vanished forever? Never. Think again. Your politicians I suppose drink much and the wrath of not being good at night they show to Pakistan. Never mind, old habbits follow till grave rather ashes.
Kashmir is a part of India, we have been 'ruling' Kashmir peacefully for quite some time now. Keep the militants on your side in check and things will eventually pipe down on our side.
I am not in favor of a 'soft border'. Its high time both countries sign a peace treaty and stop the fighting, the borders are here to stay.
You talk of two decesive victories and forget about two decesive defeats of yours. Don't say now that '48 and '65 were ain't failures.
KIT Over
Pakistani tribals invaded Kashmir, the IA pushed them out, took control of the major population centers and the maharaja acceded to India. Pakistan OTOH managed to get only a slither of the population, and controls mostly the mountainous, uninhabited part of Kashmir. I think '48 worked out in our favor.
In '65, Pakistan crossed the LoC with the aim of annexing Kashmir, India attacked Lahore in response and the PA withdrew from Kashmir. Pakistan did however manage to defend Lahore, but given how India wasn't prepared for such an attack and that Pakistan ended up defending Lahore instead of capturing Kashmir, I think '65 worked out in our favor too.
Fearing a war on two fronts, India successfully intervened in East Pakistan and helped create Bangladesh. In retrospect, it was a prudent decision given how Pakistan has acquired nuclear weapons today and India's limited capabilities w.r.t China. Strategically speaking, I believe India is in much better position today than it would otherwise have been in if Pakistan was left intact.
Lastly, here's a little eye opener for you,
http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...-responsibility-mosque-attack.html#post571474
, Pakistan almost reached, but it didn't did it? 
