‘Sab ka Kashmir’

[Peshwa]

In the case of the Option Quattro..

it seems largely unrealistic for many reasons...
One being that South Asians arent, Mature enough, educated or advanced politically to be able to sustain a status quo in the state without trying to influence the Kashmiris...

Second, India will NOT take a losing proposition from a position of strength...especially if this means that a free state bordering Afghanistan is ripe for a spillover that bring the Afghan war to india's doorsteps

Third, allowing this means that Pakistan will have to open up Gilgit and Baltistan to India for Trade with CAR....which wields considerable consequences given the perpetual paranoia about a two front war with India
It also completely marginalizes pakistans geo-strategic advantage that it currently holds with regards to the events brewing in Afghanistan and CAR

lastly...the option does not spell out who will be the net security provider of the region...
india will obviously NOT allow Pakistani presence in J&K and compromise on a deal where indian security is jeopardized.

 

[dabong1]

Don't use idioms that you don't know, out of context.

The link you gave (in fact I gave you that link earlier) says nothing of what you said, that the ICJ declared the instrument of accession null and void.

Please show me a link to the resolution on their website, or any respectable, non partisan media source. These are lies peddled by pakistanis.

You wanted a non-pakistani link to my claim and i gave you the BBC NEWS link.........now want the specific ICJ link and once i give you that ,what will be your next demand?......Next you will want me to get a videotape of the reporter-investigators saying the full report on videotape and then you will say that ther "biased" "one sided" "naive".
The problem is you will keep raising the bar until it gets to the impossible and then say " india was right".

Just to keep you happy.....Human rights in Kashmir: report of a mission | ICJ
The same report has been mentioned in indian publications, M. G. Chitkara and K.R. Gupta being just two examples.
As K.R. Gupta points out.....why accept a UN plebiscite if the kashmir has already signed the instrument of accession to india?

When you realize the truth about that, think about other lies you have been taught.

maybe you should take your own advice first before giving it out to others.

 

[janon]

You wanted a non-pakistani link to my claim and i gave you the BBC NEWS link.........now want the specific ICJ link and once i give you that ,what will be your next demand?......Next you will want me to get a videotape of the reporter-investigators saying the full report on videotape and then you will say that ther "biased" "one sided" "naive".
The problem is you will keep raising the bar until it gets to the impossible and then say " india was right".

Just to keep you happy.....Human rights in Kashmir: report of a mission | ICJ
The same report has been mentioned in indian publications, M. G. Chitkara and K.R. Gupta being just two examples.
As K.R. Gupta points out.....why accept a UN plebiscite if the kashmir has already signed the instrument of accession to india?




maybe you should take your own advice first before giving it out to others.

Look, I'll make it quite simple. Your assertion was that the ICJ declared Kashmir's instrument of accesion to India null and void. Show me a link for that. None of the links you provided says that. Because it's not true.

Your BBC link doesn't say that. Neither does the new link you gave.

Stop being so dishonest.

 

[dabong1]

Look, I'll make it quite simple. Your assertion was that the ICJ declared Kashmir's instrument of accesion to India null and void. Show me a link for that. None of the links you provided says that. Because it's not true.
Your BBC link doesn't say that. Neither does the new link you gave.

When something is fraudulent how do aspect it not to be null and void?

From the BBC site it clearly indicates that the indian version of events with the maharaja signing the treaty could not have happened before the invasion by the indian army into kashmir......no treaty was signed before the invasion and now you seem to have lost it.
Indian authors mention the same ICJ report......are they dreaming this up?

Stop being so dishonest.

It seems going of your debate that you accept all my points accept the ICJ
The ICJ report rejects the right of the maharaja to give kashmir to india.

 

[ghauri05]

Look around the world - these religious nutjobs pick up any reason to kill civilians. You don't have a Kashmir issue in Pakistan - so what's happening there? - even if the Kashmir issue is resolved they will come up with something else - because the premise is war against kaffirs and the religious extremism that's inculcated in them at a young age coupled with poverty and no education.

When it is against india it has to do only with Kashmir my friend, the religious issue only aroused when USA invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and even now the "religious war" is against USA,NATO. There is no mention of india in religious war.
And if there are some very minor group has the religious thinking against india the larger groups will snub it when the Kashmir issue is resolved(if ever)