'Roof of the World' rebels against Pakistan

[HRK]

Since my last post on the subject you have quoted me thrice but none addressed the point made in that post.

No more arguments?

Done?

What was your 'new point' I have replied to all of the raised queries ..... ???

we have read it several times. The issue of jammu and Kashmir is no more under UN resolution, rather under bilateral talks.

Hatdharmi ..... nothing els ...

 

[Screambowl]

Hatdharmi ..... nothing els ...

Ask the think tanks here. UN resolution cannot advocate it any more. Other wise UN would have intervened in kargil war.

Faced with growing international pressure, Sharif managed to pull back the remaining soldiers from Indian territory. The joint statement issued by Clinton and Sharif conveyed the need to respect the Line of Control and resume bilateral talks as the best forum to resolve all disputes

Meanwhile I want to ask you, again when article 257 clearly says, it is only after plebiscite that Pakistan can have any kind of relation with Kashmir, then why Military is still there? And why this article is still there.

 

[toxic_pus]

What was your 'new point' I have replied to all of the raised queries ..... ???

That Pakistan is obligated to completely demilitarize P0K before the 'final settlement' of Kashmir can begin.

 

[HRK]

Ask the think tanks here. UN resolution cannot advocate it any more. Other wise UN would have intervened in kargil war.

Faced with growing international pressure, Sharif managed to pull back the remaining soldiers from Indian territory. The joint statement issued by Clinton and Sharif conveyed the need to respect the Line of Control and resume bilateral talks as the best forum to resolve all disputes

Meanwhile I want to ask you, again when article 257 clearly says, it is only after plebiscite that Pakistan can have any kind of relation with Kashmir, then why Military is still there? And why this article is still there.

What think tank .... has India officially submit any document informing UN that India will not comply UN resolution ...... ???
read previous post I have replies to your query ....

 

[Screambowl]

What think tank .... has India officially submit any document informing UN that India will not comply UN resolution ...... ???
read previous post I have replies to your query ....

Shimla Agreement, India does not support resolution as Kashmir is already an INTEGRAL PART OF INDIA.

 

[HRK]

That Pakistan is obligated to completely demilitarize P0K before the 'final settlement' of Kashmir can begin.

Pakistan never deny this .... but situation changed as per Karachi agreement .... now unilateral withdrawal is not possible.

Shimla Agreement, India does not support resolution as Kashmir is already an INTEGRAL PART OF INDIA.

hypocrisy .... violation of Shimla agreement ....

 

[Screambowl]

hypocrisy .... violation of Shimla agreement ....

yes, kargil war was, by Pakistan!!

Pakistan never deny this .... but situation changed as per Karachi agreement .... now unilateral withdrawal is not possible.

Not just demilitarization but also , the demographic change which has happened must be reversed.

 

[toxic_pus]

Pakistan never deny this .... but situation changed as per Karachi agreement .... now unilateral withdrawal is not possible.

The only thing that Karachi Agreement does is create a Cease Fire Line (CFL) latter came to be known as Line of Control (LoC). Para B/1 of the Agreement (Pg 2) states:

Under the provisions of Part I of the Resolution of 13 August 1948, and as a complement of the suspension of hostilities in the State of Jammu and Kashmir on 1 January 1949, a cease-fire line is established.​

Part II of the same resolution requires complete withdrawal of Pakistani forces from P0K.

Part I: Establish CFL and maintain truce along the line
Part II: Complete withdrawal (among other things)
What is it that you find confusing?

 

[HRK]

yes, kargil war was, by Pakistan!!

Siachen was the violation of Shimla agreement by India ...... plus in Shimla agreement India accepted Kashmir

Not just demilitarization but also , the demographic change which has happened must be reversed.

no demographic change ....

 

[Screambowl]

Siachen was the violation of Shimla agreement by India ...... plus in Shimla agreement India accepted Kashmir



no demographic change ....

LOC is till point NJ9842, not beyond that. Siachen was no man's land, but after knowing Pakistan's misadventure to occupy Siachen, India deployed it forces.

no demographic change ....

What do you mean by no demographic change, It happened in Indian Kashmir and happened in Azad Kashmir. Through sectarian conflict between pro Indian Shias and Pro Pakistani Sunnis. Zia had taken full care that Shias are converted.

Plus Punjabi influence in Gilgit region and Mirpur is known to the world. There is nothing to hide.

Article 257 does not even allow your military to be stationed in Azad Kashmir. Because Azad Kashmir is part of Greater Kashmir. Which article says, deploy military in Pakistani constitution?

 

[toxic_pus]

Siachen was the violation of Shimla agreement by India ......

Nope. Try again.

 

[HRK]

The only thing that Karachi Agreement does is create a Cease Fire Line (CFL) latter came to be known as Line of Control (LoC). Para B/1 of the Agreement (Pg 2) states:

Under the provisions of Part I of the Resolution of 13 August 1948, and as a complement of the suspension of hostilities in the State of Jammu and Kashmir on 1 January 1949, a cease-fire line is established.​

Part II of the same resolution requires complete withdrawal of Pakistani forces from P0K.

As shown earlier in Karachi Agreement India accepted the right of Pakistan to deploy its troops .... in clause D & E deny this ....??

Pakistan and India agreed to discuss Part II of resolution seperatly ..... read again

 

[toxic_pus]

As shown earlier in Karachi Agreement India accepted the right of Pakistan to deploy its troops .... in clause D & E deny this ....??

Pakistan and India agreed to discuss Part II of resolution seperatly ..... read again

Part I: Establish CFL and maintain peace along that line. That's where Karachi Agreement comes in.
Part II: Withdraw completely (among other things)

So, if you want plebiscite in accordance to UN resolution, Pakistani will have to withdraw completely. How effing difficult is it to comprehend?

 

[Screambowl]

As shown earlier in Karachi Agreement India accepted the right of Pakistan to deploy its troops .... in clause D & E deny this ....??

Pakistan and India agreed to discuss Part II of resolution seperatly ..... read again

This agreement is NOT VALID!!! Because it has been violated by Pakistan in 1965!!!! and 1971!!!!!! This was changed and substituted by Shimla Agreement!!!!

Part I: Establish CFL and maintain peace along that line. That's where Karachi Agreement comes in.
Part II: Withdraw completely (among other things)

So, if you want plebiscite in accordance to UN resolution, Pakistani will have to withdraw completely. How effing difficult is it to comprehend?

Karachi agreement is Invalid, because in 1965 and 1971 Pakistan violated it.

 

[HRK]

LOC is till point NJ9842, not beyond that. Siachen was no man's land, but after knowing Pakistan's misadventure to occupy Siachen, India deployed it forces.

any documentary or circumstantial evidence ....???

What do you mean by no demographic change, It happened in Indian Kashmir and happened in Azad Kashmir. Through sectarian conflict between pro Indian Shias and Pro Pakistani Sunnis. Zia had taken full care that Shias are converted.

prove it ....