Welcome To Pakistan in IOK

[shahbaz baig]

Pakistan flag in Barsoo Ganderbal, Indian Occupied Kashmir.

This tower is fully equipped with more than 16000 kw Electric Current, Imagine the bravery of the man who put Pakistani flag there.

Woow it's big middle finger with high voltage electric shocks for gangadeshi.

 

[Crystal-Clear]

Kashmirs in India have more freedom than their brothers in Pakistan. The writing is on the wall!
https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world-2018-table-country-scores



We got it. You don't. Thank You!

https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world-2018-table-country-scores

ehmmm kashmiris. disagreed.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

This is the reason the very name 'Pakistan' causes so much ruckus, animosity, vitriol in Indian people at the helm of affairs, Pakistan is the name of an idea and not just a country...an idea of freedom.

Check Indian media insane, senile reaction about anything associated with Pakistan, it is in the name, and the idea.

Or to antagonize authority and gain some media coverage they use Pakistan flag. Later they form a polytical party and try to rule the state. Take bribes and so on. Does any of them wish to go to Pakistan willfully given their chance? No. None, neither of them want to live in the land of freedom. Says so much.

The message is important, not the messenger, an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any power. If someone misuses this idea then it is up to them and their hindsight or foresight.

For a large number of people it is a bigger idea...Pakistan connotes freedom for them.

 

[Chhatrapati]

The message is important, not the messenger, an idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any power. If someone misuses this idea then it is up to them and their hindsight of foresight.

For a large number of people it is a bigger idea...Pakistan connotes freedom for them.

I was simply saying, don't get your hopes too high. It's a country of hundreds of ethnicities and we manage to hold them all together for 70 years without any state breaking away. If you look back there were Naxals, Maoists, North East states all had a bunch of people who thinks of breaking away and most of them became a political party and took the oath to defend the constitution of India. That's about it.
Now speaking of the so-called idea of freedom, I have to repeat, nobody in this country wants to take Pakistan as an example, or they want to live there. Your thought of Pakistan as a land of freedom or a utopia is not present. Not to mention the separatists who are divided on free Kashmir and join Pakistan.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

I was simply saying, don't get your hopes too high. It's a country of hundreds of ethnicities and we manage to hold them all together for 70 years without any state breaking away. If you look back there were Naxals, Maoists, North East states all had a bunch of people who thinks of breaking away and most of them became a political party and took the oath to defend the constitution of India. That's about it.

It is not about I hoping or the people of Pakistan hoping for something in India...it is mostly about the Indian people, the Muslims and specially Kashmiris, the untouchable Dalits and others, all the disenfranchised, suppressed, marginalized people in India, the hope of the Indian people to get out of the apartheid system, worst form of region and religion, ethnicity and cultural division and suppression.

So we are hoping for the hopes of these people....hope springs eternal. It is not about them joining Pakistan or not, Pakistan here is the name of the freedom...and a country. In this context Pakistan as a country is not important, Pakistan as an idea of freedom is important.

 

[Chhatrapati]

It is not about I hoping or the people of Pakistan hoping for something in India...it is mostly about the Indian people, the Muslims and specially Kashmiris, the untouchable Dalits and others, all the disenfranchised, suppressed, marginalized people in India, the hope of the Indian people to get out of the apartheid system, worst form of region and religion, ethnicity and cultural division and suppression.

So we are hoping for the hopes of these people....hope springs eternal. It is not about them joining Pakistan or not, Pakistan here is the name of the freedom...and a country.

The point is you guys are too much into what happens on this side of the border and trying to prove we are better. But the reality is entirely different. I can sit here and starts showing things that goes around in your country, same thing you can do with mine. But, let's not change the goal post.

Speaking of some people, how sure are you that All Kashmiri people are with you? Or they want freedom from India? You only have a small bunch of troublemakers. What if I told you, only a small fraction of them really want to join Pakistan. We can't spare land for them, has at any instant any of them left for Pakistan in hoards?

 

[Turingsage]

History’s shackles
Irfan Husain April 07, 2018
Facebook Count337

irfan.husain@gmail.com


STATES can choose their friends, but not their neighbours. In an existential sense, geography is destiny.

But while we can’t change our neighbourhood, we can at least try and make it less dangerous. Located in an area that has witnessed invasions and massacres without end, we are at one of the world’s deadliest focal points of conflict and human ambition. However, if we allow ourselves to become prisoners of history, we can never get out of the hole we have dug for ourselves.

When we started out with a clean slate in 1947, our early leaders looked to the West for help in facing the perceived threat from India. Despite all the criticism levelled at them for signing up to anti-communist pacts like Seato and Cento, the fact is that at the time, only the United States had the cash and the equipment to arm the newly formed Pakistan Army.

Also, many of our founding fathers had received their higher education in England, and had a pro-West bias. Indeed, Jinnah is on record as promising to provide our ex-colonial masters with bases in return for support for the creation of Pakistan.

American hardware supplies in the mid-1950s gave us a misplaced sense of military superiority, and our position on Kashmir hardened into rigid anti-India dogma. I recall my two-month attachment with a Punjab infantry battalion as a fresh civil servant in the late 1960s. When I mentioned the Indian army’s preponderance in numbers to the commanding officer, he answered in all seriousness that one Muslim soldier was equal to five Hindus.

We had options other than the path of confrontation with our huge eastern neighbour.

And this despite the 1971 war, and the Kargil misadventure which was yet another reminder that the small guy doesn’t always win. A friend recounted a recent chance encounter with a serving brigadier in which he brought up the subject of the growing military and economic imbalance between India and Pakistan. The army officer replied heatedly: “We will embrace martyrdom if necessary! We will never surrender!”

The point of this historical detour is to suggest that we had options other than the path of confrontation with our huge eastern neighbour. Until the mid-1970s, ‘parity’ was the official mantra in our Foreign Office as our diplomats demanded equal treatment with India.

Now, of course, we watch major statesmen and industrialists visit India while skipping Pakistan. Even friends and allies like China and Saudi Arabia no longer mention the United Nations resolutions on Kashmir, and urge us to negotiate directly with India instead.

As the gap between the two neighbours grows, we appear to have made things more difficult for ourselves. By refusing to open up trade with India, we have restricted our economy’s potential. For all his faults, Nawaz Sharif saw the flaws of our current India policy, and tried to improve relations. His opponents have used this as a stick to beat him with.

We need to realise that Kashmir will not be handed over to us on a platter. One can also question whether many of the protesters rebelling against the Indian yoke are doing so in order to join Pakistan; their demand is for azadi.

It is a reality that India will continue to move ahead in both military and economic terms. And the links between Washington and New Delhi will become closer, no matter who the president of the United States is. For them, India is too important a market to ignore, and is the only country in the region that can counter the growing Chinese clout.

Add to this factor Kabul’s growing dependence on India for help to build up its infrastructure, as well as for military training. Given Pakistan’s ability and willingness to halt overland trade as a political lever, more and more goods will reach Afghanistan via Iran.

With Iran, our relations have worsened over time due to our siding with Saudi Arabia in the Shia-Sunni conflict. There was a time when Iran was one of Pakistan’s closest friends and allies, but short-sighted policies and the desire to be on the right side of Riyadh have alienated Tehran.

As we grow more isolated, the chances of improved ties with India have grown ever more remote. Over the last decade, attitudes towards Pakistan in New Delhi have hardened; and we have delayed action against militant groups that have committed acts of terrorism in India.

So here we are, impoverished, alone and insecure in a hostile region. Our military needs increasing funds to fight the monsters created to further our regional agenda. If we want to emerge from this dead end, we will have to cast off the shackles of history.

Published in Dawn, April 7th, 2018

https://www.dawn.com/news/1400111/historys-shackles

 

[N.Siddiqui]

Speaking of some people, how sure are you that All Kashmiri people are with you? Or they want freedom from India? You only have a small bunch of troublemakers. What if I told you, only a small fraction of them really want to join Pakistan. We can't spare land for them, has at any instant any of them left for Pakistan in hoards?

It is the vast majority who want freedom, not a small bunch, it is the doctored Indian media under state control who gives this perception about a small group who want independence and the trouble makers are from Pakistan.

Look at the independent neutral media houses to get the correct picture in Kashmir, Indian state controlled media will surely gives a lopsided picture, a doctored one...how can you believe the Indian media unless someone has no sense.


Majority in Kashmir Valley want independence: poll

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Nearly 90 percent of people living in Indian Kashmir’s summer capital want their troubled and divided state to become an independent country, according to a poll in an Indian newspaper on Monday.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-want-independence-poll-idUSDEL29179620070813

 

[Windjammer]

The point is you guys are too much into what happens on this side of the border and trying to prove we are better. But the reality is entirely different. I can sit here and starts showing things that goes around in your country, same thing you can do with mine. But, let's not change the goal post.

Speaking of some people, how sure are you that All Kashmiri people are with you? Or they want freedom from India? You only have a small bunch of troublemakers. What if I told you, only a small fraction of them really want to join Pakistan. We can't spare land for them, has at any instant any of them left for Pakistan in hoards?

Isn't it incredible that what you call a small bunch of trouble makers can shut down and paralyse the whole valley at will not to mention how the tens of thousand Indian security forces are finding it difficult to control that tiny minority.....if that what you are lead to believe than it's ideally serving your Netas purpose.

 

[boxer_B]

Use some common sense if you have any...there are close to 0.7 million Indian forces in a small area of Kashmir valley, the highest concentration of forces anywhere in the world.

No army in the world requires 700000 troops to manage 7 million people. The idea behind large number of troops is to use minimum force. The number of troops can be reduced to 20,000 easily with use of Helicopter Gunships and Tanks. Your point of 0.7 million troops in Kashmir is totally inverse to force we want to use in Kashmir.

Or to antagonize authority and gain some media coverage they use Pakistan flag. Later they form a polytical party and try to rule the state. Take bribes and so on. Does any of them wish to go to Pakistan willfully given their chance? No. None, neither of them want to live in the land of freedom. Says so much.

All the political parties in Kashmir have done that, later swallowed the free Kashmir stuff and started ruling state, enjoy central funds. While keeping a leash on separatists.

Pakistanis don't get this. They think Kashmiris are holding on even after all brutalities of Indian army. The fact is they would have ran across LoC just like what Aghanis did after NATO invasion, Bangalis did in 1971 and Rohingayas did after Myanmar Army crackdown, if Indian Army was really hammering them.

 

[American Pakistani]

Death to 7 lakh indian occupier terrorists.

 

[N.Siddiqui]

The point is you guys are too much into what happens on this side of the border and trying to prove we are better. But the reality is entirely different. I can sit here and starts showing things that goes around in your country, same thing you can do with mine. But, let's not change the goal post.

The thread is about Kashmir freedom...add to this many other voices of freedom in India, the suppressed and downtrodden majority versus the casteist ruling elites.

India is now the only country in the world which runs an apartheid system of caste and creed. Why are you defending this apartheid system where humanity is divided between low caste and high caste, where human beings are not born equal, where marginalized Dalits and oppressed Muslims(about 70% of Muslim population in India lives in Ghettos) trying to make a living in constant fear of being lynched for the smallest of mistake, like eating or possessing beef.

There is nothing to defend...you just can't defend a caste based apartheid system, entrenched in India and where there is no escaping, thrown away from world over. And if you defend it you become the part of this system.



Dalits, Adivasis, Muslims worst off, says Indian Exclusion Report

http://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...s-indian-exclusion-report/article18427801.ece

 

[Azadkashmir]

No army in the world requires 700000 troops to manage 7 million people. The idea behind large number of troops is to use minimum force. The number of troops can be reduced to 20,000 easily with use of Helicopter Gunships and Tanks. Your point of 0.7 million troops in Kashmir is totally inverse to force we want to use in Kashmir.



Pakistanis don't get this. They think Kashmiris are holding on even after all brutalities of Indian army. The fact is they would have ran across LoC just like what Aghanis did after NATO invasion, Bangalis did in 1971 and Rohingayas did after Myanmar Army crackdown, if Indian Army was really hammering them.

because to leave your land is to lose your land to others like occupying force india is. if Kashmirs don't want indians on their land than it is their right who are indians to occupy their land. whenever a big force occupies other people land they always resort to violence against natives and claim that the natives are terrorist but who land it is.

 

[Rollno21]

Isn't it incredible that what you call a small bunch of trouble makers can shut down and paralyse the whole valley at will not to mention how the tens of thousand Indian security forces are finding it difficult to control that tiny minority.....if that what you are lead to believe than it's ideally serving your Netas purpose.

Bro,tell me valley is a small remote location in our country.did you see us locking down a whole city to conduct a cricket match.but you know what happened last time a cricket match is conducted in your country ,the city I am talking about is a major city in your country.

 

[boxer_B]

because to leave your land is to lose your land to others like occupying force india is. if Kashmirs don't want indians on their land than it is their right who are indians to occupy their land. whenever a big force occupies other people land they always resort to violence against natives and claim that the natives are terrorist but who land it is.

No, you are lying. When bullets starts flying indiscriminately and tanks starts rolling on streets, people don't care about land. History has shown it numerous times. Self preservation anytime combats over assets.

Let me give you perspective from other side. They think the same about land and occupiers.