Proud LAHORI at home in BOMBAY

[Developereo]

Now if Pakistanis had to declare on an application that they do not support terrorism then [...] At least 60% of the Applicants would be lying under oath.

It is blanket generalizations like this that make many Pakistanis think that Indians are hateful, ignorant jingoists.

Understand this: the Kashmiri people's struggle against Indian occupation forces is not terrorism. Kashmir is considered disputed territory by the international community, and their freedom struggle is NOT classified as terrorism, regardless of what India thinks about it. India's continual attempts to classify it as terrorism aren't working.

Not issuing a visa at all may not be a solution. But everyone born in Pakistan post 1947 should be made to undergo a comprehensive background check, irrespective of the passport they carry. E.g. David Headley. Even though this entails delay in visa processing, that should be deemed acceptable. And such personnel should undergo extra security checking at all airports & ports of entry. If there is even an iota of ambiguity in their background or intent to visit India, visa should be refused.

I don't know about recently but in the past, Pakistani nationals travelling in India were required to register at the local police station upon arrival in any city. Ditto when they travelled within India. The same procedure applied to Indians in Pakistan.

all comments and judgments made are based upon interactions from the online forums. ...like PDF....

This (and any internet forum) gives a slanted view of Indians/Pakistanis. I used to have a very favorable view of India(ns) before I started visiting internet forums. After reading the idiotic rants and pointless debates from Indians, I discovered the extremist side of Indians. The same is probably true from the Indian perspective towards some Pakistani posts.

My point is that most Indians and Pakistanis get along just fine in real life and internet forums give a skewed picture because we tend to focus on our disagreements rather than our commonalities.

 

[Halaku Khan]

As for Kashmir, Asim is quite correct when he says that Indian soldiers are a fair target to Pakistani soldiers if there is engagement.

Asim supports murder of Indian soldiers by "Kashmiri separatists". For Pakistanis that term includes non-Kashmiri speaking infiltrators from Pakistan occupied Kashmir. It is probably flexible enough to include deranged individuals from Punjab as well.

Anybody who advocates the murder of Indian servicemen, anywhere, regardless of the circumstances, ought not be welcomed.

That is the least Indians can do to honour the widows and orphans of those who have sacrificed their lives.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

It is blanket generalizations like this that make many Pakistanis think that Indians are hateful, ignorant jingoists.

Understand this: the Kashmiri people's struggle against Indian occupation forces is not terrorism. Kashmir is considered disputed territory by the international community, and their freedom struggle is NOT classified as terrorism, regardless of what India thinks about it. India's continual attempts to classify it as terrorism aren't working.



I don't know about recently but in the past, Pakistani nationals travelling in India were required to register at the local police station upon arrival in any city. Ditto when they travelled within India. The same procedure applied to Indians in Pakistan.



This (and any internet forum) gives a slanted view of Indians/Pakistanis. I used to have a very favorable view of India(ns) before I started visiting internet forums. After reading the idiotic rants and pointless debates from Indians, I discovered the extremist side of Indians. The same is probably true from the Indian perspective towards some Pakistani posts.

My point is that most Indians and Pakistanis get along just fine in real life and internet forums give a skewed picture because we tend to focus on our disagreements rather than our commonalities.

In a nutshell you call them freedom fighters and we term them terrorists. I don't see much of an international hue and cry about Kashmir except for your buddy China whenever we poke them about some issue or another whenever you are busy and we cant get your attention

In fact Pakistan is India's biggest ally in classifying the infiltrators as terrorists. Seriously , India owes Pakistan a debt of gratitude for assisting India in holding firm its claim over Kashmir. Pakistan is the biggest enemy of those people in Kashmir who seek independence. Not India.

Our disagreements are the reason why we visit or register on a Pakistani Defence Forum. It gives us a chance to understand and to criticise your views. When I meet with my Pakistani friends here in Africa, the most unlikely topic which is discussed is Kashmir. Usually it is cricket or planning a barbeque or some other social issue. Trust me when I say that the view I have of some people here in no way makes me determine the mindset of the country which they originate from. It purely enlightens me on the current affairs of the sub continent and the stress of some of our people back home on l issues which can be easily resolved

 

[Halaku Khan]

Next Time you go to USA please sign

I support Iraq war etc.

If a US visa officer had reasonable grounds to believe that an applicant supported the murder of US servicemen, he would be denied a visa. Americans are not so callous about the sacrifice of their men in uniform.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

Asim supports murder of Indian soldiers by "Kashmiri separatists". For Pakistanis that term includes non-Kashmiri speaking infiltrators from Pakistan occupied Kashmir. It is probably flexible enough to include deranged individuals from Punjab as well.

Anybody who advocates the murder of Indian servicemen, anywhere, regardless of the circumstances, ought not be welcomed.

That is the least Indians can do to honour the widows and orphans of those who have sacrificed their lives.

Well I simply countered it by saying "send in your soldiers in full uniforms to Kashmir and let the rules of engagement commence" Then Pakistani soldiers can be fair game to Indian soldiers and vice versa. Bottom line is that if Pakistanis feel so strongly about Kashmir being a "disputed territory" then in terms of international norm they may attempt to "liberate" Kashmir from India either in conjunction with an ally/ies or alone. Time to stop the hoo hah and time to get down to business. We have it. They want it. Tell em to come and get it.

 

[Developereo]

Anybody who advocates the murder of Indian servicemen, anywhere, regardless of the circumstances, ought not be welcomed.

Then you better refuse visas to Amerians, EU nationals, Chinese, Japanese and citizens of just about every country on the planet.

Because all of these countries consider Indian-occupied Kashmir to be disputed territory, which implicitly makes the Indian Army an occupation force in a disputed territor and, under international law, occupied peoples have the right to defend themselves against an occupation army.

How long do you think you will be able to sustain this particular temper tantrum?

 

[Halaku Khan]

Then you better refuse visas to Amerians, EU nationals, Chinese, Japanese and citizens of just about every country on the planet.

Please provide a link showing that any of these countries advocate violence by non-state actors.

 

[Developereo]

In fact Pakistan is India's biggest ally in classifying the infiltrators as terrorists. Seriously , India owes Pakistan a debt of gratitude for assisting India in holding firm its claim over Kashmir. Pakistan is the biggest enemy of those people in Kashmir who seek independence. Not India.

I personally disagree with the GOP position and would favor the Kashmiri people to decide their own future, including independence.

Our disagreements are the reason why we visit or register on a Pakistani Defence Forum. It gives us a chance to understand and to criticise your views.

Some people visit forums to learn more about a country. But I agree that thread topics from both Indians and Pakistanis tend to focus on the differences.

If a US visa officer had reasonable grounds to believe that an applicant supported the murder of US servicemen, he would be denied a visa. Americans are not so callous about the sacrifice of their men in uniform.

Nobody is talking about deliberately murdering anyone, but in a conflict, people die, especially occupying forces.

Democratic India can solve the problem immediately by holding a plebiscite and letting the Kashmiri people decide their fate -- you know, the way democratic countries like Canada did in Quebec.

Please provide a link showing that any of these countries advocate violence by non-state actors.

Resistance to an occupying force is legal under international law. The Kashmiri civilians are fighting the occupying Indian army. The fact that all these countries refuse to recognize India's claims over Kashmir is an implicit endorsement of this freedom struggle.

 

[Halaku Khan]

Resistance to an occupying force is legal under international law. The Kashmiri civilians are fighting the occupying Indian army.

None of these countries call the Indian army in Kashmir an occupying army. And if they did, they would have to say the same about the Pakistani army in Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

In any case, would be an Indian prerogative to decide from which visa applicants declarations would be necessary.

Sunni Punjabis are a high risk group. I don't think they should be required from Christian Masihs or Balochis.

 

[Developereo]

None of these countries call the Indian army in Kashmir an occupying army. And if they did, they would have to say the same about the Pakistani army in Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

Both territories are considered disputed which makes both armies occupying forces. The difference is that Azad Kashmir is not mired in a freedom struggle.

Sunni Punjabis are a high risk group. I don't think they should be required from Christian Masihs or Balochis.

So now you will require people to state their religion and ethnicity on a visa application?

This just gets better and better...

 

[Halaku Khan]

Democratic India can solve the problem immediately by holding a plebiscite and letting the Kashmiri people decide their fate -- you know, the way democratic countries like Canada did in Quebec.

Democratic India is addressing the issue by allowing sepraratists to contest elections.

Unlike the case of Pakistan occupied Kashmir, where organizations like JKLF are debarred.

It is another matter that these separatists are too scared of facing the people. The last time a separatist contested, he lost his deposit.

 

[Halaku Khan]

Both territories are considered disputed which makes both armies occupying forces. The difference is that Azad Kashmir is not mired in a freedom struggle.

So called freedom struggle is nothing but Pakistani terrorism. I admit there are a few local Talibanized elements, but they are a very small minority.

So now you will require people to state their religion and ethnicity on a visa application?

This just gets better and better...

I think, in the case of Pakistan, it is necessary to distinguish between oppressed peoples on one hand, like Balochis and Masihs, and their oppressors on the other.

 

[Developereo]

Democratic India is addressing the issue by allowing sepraratists to contest elections.

Unlike the case of Pakistan occupied Kashmir, where organizations like JKLF are debarred.

It is another matter that these separatists are too scared of facing the people. The last time a separatist contested, he lost his deposit.

Yes, I am sure everyone believes the result of an "election" conducted under 600,000 guns.

In any case, this discussion is not going nowhere, so I will let you have the last word.

 

[Halaku Khan]

Yes, I am sure everyone believes the result of an "election" conducted under 600,000 guns.

In any case, this discussion is not going nowhere, so I will let you have the last word.

Nobody disputes that the election turnouts have been high despite the fact that the separatists (who are admittedly on Pakistani payroll) had called for a boycott, and had tried to enforce it with violence and intimidation.

 

[jagjitnatt]

The Kashmiri civilians are fighting the occupying Indian army. The fact that all these countries refuse to recognize India's claims over Kashmir is an implicit endorsement of this freedom struggle.

Killing innocent people of their own state does not a good freedom fighter make.

Freedom fighters don't go about planting bombs in hotels, schools and public places. Freedom can be achieved by peaceful methods like making a party, representing the people of kashmir and proving that the majority supports the resolution of a free Kashmir. But no one tends to do it. Majority of politicians in Kashmir are Kashmiris. They never said they wanted Kashmir to separate from India.

Killing people is simply inhumane and unacceptable. These people are termed terrorists. According to me, they deserve something even worse. Ask someone who has lost a dear in these attacks and they will tell you how much freedom they want.