F
Our military can go wherever they want. And Kashmir is an integral part of India, not just Kashmir but Bangladesh and Pakistan too. Changing religion won’t change your ethnicity or ancestry.
F
They are jokers, let them claim whatever they want. They forget that their ancestors were also Hindus and Sikhs who were ruled by the invaders, but then they embraced Islam and now they say wE rUlEd HiNdUs fOr 1000 yEaRs (Lolz).
If no one would have invaded India then we would not have been fighting with Pakistanis as they are also our Indian brothers and sisters who lost their dharma to invaders.
F
We gave birth to LTTE because the Sri Lankan government was genociding our Tamil population in Sri Lanka, so we supplied them arms for self defence which later became a terror outfit and we were the ones who sacrificed a lot fighting against LTTE.
And we assist terrorists in our neighbours? When? That brainfart ISPR dossier proof?
Should I show you the video of Ex-Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif and current Pakistani PM Imran Khan openly accepting that Pakistani Army is killing innocents in Balochistan?
And does anyone here need videos of terrorist camp of Balakot inside Pakistan? Here it is...
It is Pakistan’s state policy, Pervez Musharraf accepted use of terrorism against India in an interview to Wajahat Khan, should I post it too?
Paro
Well-known member
- Messages
- 368
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
Well, the interesting question is why is the Pakistan military promoting peace rather than pushing the civil body like always ( You need to ignore the mushy movement angle, that doesn't sell well for the local audience especially after all the big talk since Aug 5th).
If peace on the border was a joint move initiated by both military and civil body together, we wouldn't have seen Imran doing the usual bitching 2 days earlier and the NSA slashing out at fake reports of an NSA meet. Surprisingly both of them turned plates and fell in line with Bajwa the next day.
Though I agree with all the economic points raised by @Nilgiri I do believe this cease-fire has a military angle and it won't last more than a year or two at most.
For the Pakistanis, the military casualties have been considerably high last two years and IA got well-stocked during the Ladakh standoff. PA knows now that IA will divert considerable stocks to the west and is expecting a harsher reaction coming summer which could turn out to be costly in all ways.
For the Indians, they need some time off from counter-insurgency in Kashmir ( now that it's stocked up enough in the past few months) and focus more on QUAD. So even a year or two of peace on the western border is good to re-orient its forces facing china.
And Also an interesting visual is the Indian side is not interested in usual optics, which makes me think that either they are not serious about it or the south block has evolved from the old mindset and don't consider Pakistan to be their number one foe to invest any political capital.
If peace on the border was a joint move initiated by both military and civil body together, we wouldn't have seen Imran doing the usual bitching 2 days earlier and the NSA slashing out at fake reports of an NSA meet. Surprisingly both of them turned plates and fell in line with Bajwa the next day.
Though I agree with all the economic points raised by @Nilgiri I do believe this cease-fire has a military angle and it won't last more than a year or two at most.
For the Pakistanis, the military casualties have been considerably high last two years and IA got well-stocked during the Ladakh standoff. PA knows now that IA will divert considerable stocks to the west and is expecting a harsher reaction coming summer which could turn out to be costly in all ways.
For the Indians, they need some time off from counter-insurgency in Kashmir ( now that it's stocked up enough in the past few months) and focus more on QUAD. So even a year or two of peace on the western border is good to re-orient its forces facing china.
And Also an interesting visual is the Indian side is not interested in usual optics, which makes me think that either they are not serious about it or the south block has evolved from the old mindset and don't consider Pakistan to be their number one foe to invest any political capital.
- Messages
- 9,761
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
There is definitely a military/tactical angle to it driving it...especially in the short term.
I am just operating with assumption that any notable diminishment of that noise/surface waves succeeds for sake of argument....so both populations (esp the much smaller one) can take a gander at the depths below the surface-tactics in larger way.
It very likely wont succeed (given various stated quo interests of smaller party and given that precedence inertia is quite an obstacle) and we will likely be in the regular surficial churn yet again (with the relative intensities these intrinsically take upon a population of X and 6X and the disparities like this past population size).
But with small but still non-zero chance of regular noise diminshment, the strategic undercurrents will become more dominant to confront regardless....and in any case they do bear larger effect on the noise-creation/tactics side of it.... albeit more indirectly.
Your last para is key, the Indian reaction is indeed muted (for now) as the known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knowns and unknown unknowns all crystallise with a predictable overall entity with repeated behaviour patterns known to us....due to simple passage of time and existence of evidence from charted course so far.
It needs firm concrete deliverables to show some semblance of good-faith change, otherwise not much really is going to change or needs investing in (given its better to invest that elsewhere).
E
Bangladesh, Pakistan or Kashmir are not regarded as integral parts of India anywhere in the world.
The international community regards Bangladesh and Pakistan as sovereign, independent members of the Untied Nations and Kashmir as a disputed region with Pakistan. The majority of Kashmir's population shares the same religion, culture, identity with that of Pakistan. If a free, fair, transparent plebiscite were to be held in Kashmir, we could have access to reliable data regarding the population's desires.
Not only is your statement illogical, it is also incongruous with internationally recognized norms.
E
They may not agree with your ridiculous theories.
Sikhism appeared long after Mohamed bin Qasim liberated the oppressed peoples of Sindh from a horrible tyrant.
Hinduism, from what I can deduce, has no mention in any of the scriptures held in high esteem by the believers of "Hinduism". Apparently, the term "Hindu" itself was invented by foreign visitors from Arab, Iranian, Turkic/Afghan/Central Asian regions that happened to visit the various regions with multiple nativist polytheist cultures.
It is in someways similar to the term Africa that is supposedly a corruption of the original name in Arabic given to the region by numerous Arabian travellers, explorers, scholars and diplomats on diplomatic missions to various regions of the world. The Arabs in their heydays were renowned for their excellent navigational skills.
Having said that, apparently your Prime Minister insists that he/his ilk were indeed "enslaved" for 1,200 years. Whether anybody takes his word at face value or otherwise is, of course, their own choice.
1,200 years of servitude: PM Modi offers food for thought
The question, it seems, is not about foreign rule or local rule, but about ‘slavery’ or subservience to a foreign power that gave birth to slave mentality.
Outlook India: More than just the news magazine from India
Get the latest issue of Outlook India Magazine, the weekly English news magazine from India, offering latest news and analysis on politics, cricket, sports, cinema and business from India and worldwide besides book reviews, interviews, opinion pieces, photo essays and Page 3 stuff.
LIE: The mentality of 1200 years of slavery is troubling us.
India was enslaved by the British for 200 years. The term ‘slavery’ is used for the Britishers to signify how they looted India for the benefit of their home country, unlike the prior rulers.Rea
www.modilies.in
E
You should address these matters to Pakistani members such as @Waz @Kaptaan or @Saiyan0321.
You should also refrain from using such obscene terms as the one in bold.
The only disputed part of Kashmir is the one illegally occupied by Pakistan.
I am sure as soon as Pakistan withdraws from the part it illegally occupies, we can conduct a plebiscite just as outlined in the UN Resolutions.
Of course BD and Pakistan and sovereign nation states.
E
Your other compatriot - whom I had quoted earlier - do not agree that Bangladesh or Pakistan are sovereign, independent member states of the United Nations.
The dispute is over the status of Kashmir, not over whether Kashmir should go independent or join Pakistan. The latter can be decided in a free, fair, transparent referendum by the Kashmiris.
F
Say that to Pakistan’s muslim population with Bajwa surname, there have been many conversions that were done without the presence of invaders.
Even we do, but historically we were a single nation.
Seriously? Even Pakistanis in Pakistan occupied Kashmir can’t speak Kashmiri. Being a Kashmiri I don’t find any similarities with Pakistan infact Pakistan’s Punjabis are culturally same to Indian Punjabis and Pakistani Sindhis are culturally same to Indian Sindhis.0
You would have asked Pakistan to follow the UN protocols which it didn’t follow, we did a plebiscite in Junagarh and were ready to do in Kashmir, Pakistan denied because it knew that they would lose the plebiscite as they did a massacre of Kashmiris in their failed 1947 attack and no Kashmiri was willing to join Pakistan back then so they never removed troops from PoK for plebiscite and resorted to unconventional proxy warfare by radicalisation of muslims here mentally via hurriyat and other parties.
Indian population don’t recognise the existence of Pakistan and Bangladesh as it was carved out of India, rest they politically are a sovereign state no doubt.
F
If Bin Qasim liberated the oppressed people of Sindh then Hitler liberated Jews from oppression.
F
Kashmiris, Dogras, Gilgit Baltistanis and Ladakhis too. Every person living in J&K and the Kashmiri Hindus also whom were thrown out by Pakistani terrorists from Kashmir.
E
I doubt any of these statements would be widely accepted or popular in Pakistan or Bangladesh and quite justifiably so.
There was never an India - an independent country - to begin with before 1947, the question of carving out Pakistan or Bangladesh out of "it" should not arise in that case.
Instead, it has been argued that India is a creation of the Brits, the former colonial masters of Indians. Without the Brits, probably the majority of Indians would continue to be ruled by their historical rulers who had lorded over them in the previous 1,000 years.
E
I don't know of any Pakistani terrorist who threw out any community from Kashmir.
I have merely received reports from affected individuals and family members of the oppression they have continuously faced at the hands of the Indian invaders and occupiers. Those same occupiers have often been called terrorists - or state sponsored terrorists by many victims or their kith and kin.
Before the Brits came, India was a patchwork of Kingdoms. It would likely continued to be ruled by a series of these monarchs. They lorded over rest of present day India, Pak and Bangladesh for 4000 years so yes, that would probably continue.
Pakistan was carved out of British India as a reward to Jinnah for being loyal to his British masters and not spending a day in jail in the freedom movement or partaking in any movement for independence - be it Civil Disobedience or Quit India movement. This was of course the non violent versions of the independence movement - more violent ones led by Bose or Bhagat Singh were obviously too much for him.
Today Pak and erstwhile East Pak (B'desh) are independent nations - good for them.
Simply because you didn't know, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Read up.
- Messages
- 9,761
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
News of UAE so called mediating coming in
timesofindia.indiatimes.com
An unfortunate choice of words - perhaps the correct one would be "brokering"
What's prompted the Pak climbdown? They earlier said no talks till India reinstated the Special Status of Kashmir via Art 370. And now they are talking.
What's changed? @Waz @Kaptaan
India Pakistan border dispute: UAE claims it mediated India-Pakistan ceasefire pact | India News - Times of India
India News: NEW DELHI: UAE’s ambassador to the US Yousef Al Otaiba was quoted in international media reports as saying that the Gulf nation mediated between India.
timesofindia.indiatimes.com
An unfortunate choice of words - perhaps the correct one would be "brokering"
What's prompted the Pak climbdown? They earlier said no talks till India reinstated the Special Status of Kashmir via Art 370. And now they are talking.
What's changed? @Waz @Kaptaan
- Messages
- 1,734
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
You should know nothing is fixed in geo-politics. Behind the scenes discussions always go on. So nothing has changed other than this has come out.
