Indian troops fire live rounds to disperse thousands of protesters in Srinagar: Al Jazeera

[Hermoine Green]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Indian troops fire live rounds to disperse thousands of protesters in Srinagar, Indian-administered Kashmir <a href="https://t.co/a8VykPK1Ym">https://t.co/a8VykPK1Ym</a> <a href="https://t.co/N25T6euuz3">pic.twitter.com/N25T6euuz3</a></p>— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) <a href="https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1159861722011832322?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 9, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[desirous of desire]

India fires these bullets for the better economic future of the martyrs.

 

[Extra_Cover]

Prosperous future being delivered to Kashmir

 

[KingKhanWC]

Disgusting pathetic cowardly army who would fire live rounds.

Hope nobody was killed.

 

[Majestic_Inzi]

Why is our govt UK quiet, live rounds targeting protestors.

Curfew back on. Food shortages.

 

[mustang]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Indian troops fire live rounds to disperse thousands of protesters in Srinagar, Indian-administered Kashmir <a href="https://t.co/a8VykPK1Ym">https://t.co/a8VykPK1Ym</a> <a href="https://t.co/N25T6euuz3">pic.twitter.com/N25T6euuz3</a></p>— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) <a href="https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1159861722011832322?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 9, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Sad to hear and I hope no lives will be lost in the future. Resorting to live rounds on your citizens is not exemplary for sure.

 

[troodon]

Al Jazeera is known to show India in poor light. I would wait for other News sources.

If true, I hope no one is killed and the shots were just fired in the air.

 

[msaaim89]

Al Jazeera is known to show India in poor light. I would wait for other News sources.

If true, I hope no one is killed and the shots were just fired in the air.

Regardless of bias (which I disagree with the way), you can't get live rounds wrong.

India is purely terrorising the civilian population.

 

[troodon]

Regardless of bias (which I disagree with the way), you can't get live rounds wrong.

India is purely terrorising the civilian population.

I doubt live rounds were fired at people. In any case, I would not trust Al Jazeera completely when it comes to India. I will wait before I condemn this.

 

[Junaid_ahmed]

this mummy ki kasam daal khor army can only fight against innocents.

 

[msaaim89]

I doubt live rounds were fired at people. In any case, I would not trust Al Jazeera completely when it comes to India. I will wait before I condemn this.

What will you wait for? A video of 10 specifically picked people congregating during a curfew celebrating previous few days events?

 

[troodon]

this mummy ki kasam daal khor army can only fight against innocents.

Whom do you want them to fight against? Pak army?

 

[troodon]

What will you wait for? A video of 10 specifically picked people congregating during a curfew celebrating previous few days events?

I will not trust Al Jazeera based on their past reporting about India. I will wait for more evidence.

 

[Extra_Cover]

Al Jazeera is known to show India in poor light. I would wait for other News sources.

If true, I hope no one is killed and the shots were just fired in the air.

Are you suggesting Al Jazeera is giving fake news here?

Why would Al Jazeera do so being an independent news organization it has got no stakes in Kashmir so why the bias. And regardless of bias why would they give fake news to jeopardize their reputation?

 

[msaaim89]

Whom do you want them to fight against? Pak army?

We'd prefer if you didn't bruutalise a civiian population and end the occupation.

 

[Junaid_ahmed]

Whom do you want them to fight against? Pak army?

If they have courage then yes.

 

[rhony]

India fires these bullets for the better economic future of the martyrs.

Apparently being a martyr is better than an economic future. Bunch of cuckoos

 

[msaaim89]

If they have courage then yes.

Despite having 5x numerical superiority, they would never consider such a move.

 

[rhony]

Are you suggesting Al Jazeera is giving fake news here?

Why would Al Jazeera do so being an independent news organization it has got no stakes in Kashmir so why the bias. And regardless of bias why would they give fake news to jeopardize their reputation?

Al Jazeera ain't BBC. They are a million times better than Desi news channels but are still an Islamic channel.

 

[troodon]

If they have courage then yes.

Why would India fight Pak army? India is doing what it wants to do in its own territory.

If Pak has so much love for Kashmiris, then they should invade India and seek revenge.

 

[rhony]

Live rounds firing in the air is better than pellet guns aimed at people. Looks like they dispersed.

 

[troodon]

If Kashmiris are smart, they would give up their separatist movement and join India wholeheartedly. Their future will be better with India who will be a major economic and military power in the next 2 decades.

 

[rhony]

If Kashmiris are smart, they would give up their separatist movement and join India wholeheartedly. Their future will be better with India who will be a major economic and military power in the next 2 decades.

Ladakh and Jammu apparently already did that. They will prosper. Kashmiris did this before and they will continue. Key for India is to make it a manageable conflict. No killings

 

[Junaid_ahmed]

Why would India fight Pak army? India is doing what it wants to do in its own territory.

If Pak has so much love for Kashmiris, then they should invade India and seek revenge.

There is a proverb in urdu, let me translate it for you.

You cant do anything to a man who is lying on your face or the one who is abusing from the other bank of river.

& you hindustani do both.

Kashmir is not hindustani territory.

 

[troodon]

Ladakh and Jammu apparently already did that. They will prosper. Kashmiris did this before and they will continue. Key for India is to make it a manageable conflict. No killings

I agree. Even the death of a single person will be used as an ammo for future recruits.

I hope no lives are lost and situation calms down after a few days of unrest. It will be a win-win for both India and Kashmiris if peace prevails.

 

[troodon]

There is a proverb in urdu, let me translate it for you.

You cant do anything to a man who is lying on your face or the one who is abusing from the other bank of river.

& you hindustani do both.

Kashmir is not hindustani territory.

Who is ruling it? What currency runs there? Which passport do Kashmiris use when they travel overseas?

 

[blackanhyellow]

Apparently being a martyr is better than an economic future. Bunch of cuckoos

The British probably said that about their subjects in the subcontinent.

Cuckoos, why would they want to fight for independence when we built roads, civilized them, provided them with jobs, etc...

 

[rhony]

There is a proverb in urdu, let me translate it for you.

You cant do anything to a man who is lying on your face or the one who is abusing from the other bank of river.

& you hindustani do both.

Kashmir is not hindustani territory.

Those proverbs were from another century I guess. They don't make much sense in the current context. Nothing changed for the Kashmiris if you think about it. India has been governing it for decades. India always said there was not going to be any Azadi. Not a single part from Kashmir has been independent yet. Not even the ones governed by Pakistan. Nothing changed for Pakistan too. Pakistan never accepted 370 or 35a or the letter of accession.

This is a natural progression based on events for decades if anybody assumed anything else would have happened, they are delusional.

 

[pakistani pride]

If Kashmiris are smart, they would give up their separatist movement and join India wholeheartedly. Their future will be better with India who will be a major economic and military power in the next 2 decades.

Sure in an ideal world yes but reality is not like that.

 

[rhony]

The British probably said that about their subjects in the subcontinent.

Cuckoos, why would they want to fight for independence when we built roads, civilized them, provided them with jobs, etc...

No. The British treated Indians as second class citizens. Here, India elevated Kashmiris to their own status and embraced them. Half a million soldiers for 3 decades and people thought they will get Azadi? That's why i called them a bunch of cuckoos.

 

[desirous of desire]

Apparently being a martyr is better than an economic future. Bunch of cuckoos

Its not your cup of tea( althiugh it was fantastic) to understand.

 

[troodon]

The British probably said that about their subjects in the subcontinent.

Cuckoos, why would they want to fight for independence when we built roads, civilized them, provided them with jobs, etc...

British indeed built roads and brought modern tech to India. But British were also looting money from India and taking it to build their own cities in England.

India wants Kashmiris to be Indians and be part of the growth that the country is experiencing.

Also, British has no connection to India. They are invaders.
Indians have massive connection to Kashmir. Kashmir is the seat of Hinduism. It hosts many holy sites for Hindus. Hinduism has been present in Kashmir for thousands of years. Islam is only a few hundred years old in Kashmir.
Just because the Pandits changed their religion to Islam does not mean that we are nobody to Kashmiris.

 

[Hitman]

Really unfortunate. Posters hating us Indian posters need to realize that we are not in charge of affairs in Kashmir.

 

[rhony]

I agree. Even the death of a single person will be used as an ammo for future recruits.

I hope no lives are lost and situation calms down after a few days of unrest. It will be a win-win for both India and Kashmiris if peace prevails.

Yes. papers like AlJazeera will highlight every little thing there. All of a sudden everybody is expecting Kashmiris to have a US style freedoms and liberties. Nobody cares how bad it was even before 370 article repeal. It's as if things have been reset.

 

[Junaid_ahmed]

Who is ruling it? What currency runs there? Which passport do Kashmiris use when they travel overseas?

Britishers led hindustan meant hindustan belongs to them???

 

[rhony]

Its not your cup of tea( althiugh it was fantastic) to understand.

Yeah. Apparently the real life begins after death. Beats the purpose of living actually. Not sure why people need education, hospitals and life in general. Just say Azadi and blast themselves and be the epitome of Humanity

 

[Extra_Cover]

Really unfortunate. Posters hating us Indian posters need to realize that we are not in charge of affairs in Kashmir.

No one blames rest of India for Kashmir current situation. But one will point finger at rest of India for turning a blind eye towards the oppression that is happening.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Really unfortunate. Posters hating us Indian posters need to realize that we are not in charge of affairs in Kashmir.

Because most of you are justifying it or in denial. It's frankly disgusting from such posters after this forum has given you the platform in a fair way to air your views.

There are a few Indian posters against this dictorial move but they are quickly attacked by other fellow Indian posters.

If you dont have any humanity within yourselves or are happy when you see innocent people hurt/killed, you are no better than those doing the harm/killings.

The poster who said firing live rounds in the air is safer is clueless, those can harm or even kill people fired in the air.

 

[rhony]

This is ironic and hypocritical at the highest order. One one hand you feel sorry for their injuries and death. On the other, you provoke them to wage a war. The one who are suggesting that they should be safe by trying to be practical are villains. The logic is laughable. The ones who are practical based on how world works are barbarians. However the one who imagine sticks and stones and a few guns can defeat an army are well wishers.

Instead of the drama, people should accept it's the land and not the people that matter here. If one cares for the people, nobody will ask them to go out and fight an army with stones.

 

[Lego20]

This is ironic and hypocritical at the highest order. One one hand you feel sorry for their injuries and death. On the other, you provoke them to wage a war. The one who are suggesting that they should be safe by trying to be practical are villains. The logic is laughable. The ones who are practical based on how world works are barbarians. However the one who imagine sticks and stones and a few guns can defeat an army are well wishers.

Instead of the drama, people should accept it's the land and not the people that matter here. If one cares for the people, nobody will ask them to go out and fight an army with stones.

Thats too much sound logic. Very boring.

 

[Azzurri]

Really and ugly face of Indians is exposed yet again this week. Disgusting people

 

[Musakhel]

Only kashmiris can Really change their situation, I don't want to belittle their struggle but Look at the Chechens, Dagestanis, Afghans, South Phillapines, these people fight for their right to self determination.

 

[blackanhyellow]

No. The British treated Indians as second class citizens. Here, India elevated Kashmiris to their own status and embraced them. Half a million soldiers for 3 decades and people thought they will get Azadi? That's why i called them a bunch of cuckoos.

Two contradicting statements.

First you say you have elevated them to be equal citizens. Then you mention 500,000 soldiers needed to suppress the people's choice.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Yeah. Apparently the real life begins after death. Beats the purpose of living actually. Not sure why people need education, hospitals and life in general. Just say Azadi and blast themselves and be the epitome of Humanity

Rajput Hindus are famous for their ghairat. Apparently, hindu women used to commit suicide, rather than being taken prisoner while their men fought bravely against the invaders.

In this case, if kashmiris want to resist occupation, they are jihadis?

In one case, the hindus are brave for standing up for themselves, in the other (more recent case) muslims love death that is why they are behaving this way?

 

[rhony]

Two contradicting statements.

First you say you have elevated them to be equal citizens. Then you mention 500,000 soldiers needed to suppress the people's choice.

Not contradictory. It's for law and order. Anywhere in the world, if there is unrest, you deploy forces to keep the peace. There is no other way to restore order. Azadi is dead. It's not new. It died decades ago. If people don't realize it, there will be casualties.

 

[Extra_Cover]

This is ironic and hypocritical at the highest order. One one hand you feel sorry for their injuries and death. On the other, you provoke them to wage a war. The one who are suggesting that they should be safe by trying to be practical are villains. The logic is laughable. The ones who are practical based on how world works are barbarians. However the one who imagine sticks and stones and a few guns can defeat an army are well wishers.

Instead of the drama, people should accept it's the land and not the people that matter here. If one cares for the people, nobody will ask them to go out and fight an army with stones.

In the bolded part are you suggesting that the land is important to the overall one of the largest land mass countries of the world. It is so important that the people living in that land doesn't matter to rest of India. As long as the land is occupied the rest of India is in its comfort zone. For the people living there the rest of India does not want to know about their struggles.

Logic for this resolution and as implied from your post above. Rest of India to Kashmir; we want your resources not your people.

This goes against the motto that is being re-iterated by Indian Government that this move is for Kashmiri people. Irony or reality?

 

[rhony]

Rajput Hindus are famous for their ghairat. Apparently, hindu women used to commit suicide, rather than being taken prisoner while their men fought bravely against the invaders.

In this case, if kashmiris want to resist occupation, they are jihadis?

In one case, the hindus are brave for standing up for themselves, in the other (more recent case) muslims love death that is why they are behaving this way?

Those happened centuries ago. There is no rajput woman jumping into fire now. There are laws internally and nationally. If people are running their daily lives, there will not be any difference between kashmir and Delhi. A guy who's supposed to be the biggest hindu radical is the CM of Uttar Pradesh that is the most Muslim populated state. He can't go and do whatever he wants. There could be a few incidents here or there due to communal violences but they happen all around the world.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Not contradictory. It's for law and order. Anywhere in the world, if there is unrest, you deploy forces to keep the peace. There is no other way to restore order. Azadi is dead. It's not new. It died decades ago. If people don't realize it, there will be casualties.

Tell me anywhere in the world, where 500,000- 700,000 military soldiers are used to police a group of people they claim are their own country members.

The only place this happens is when there is an invasion like that of NATO troops in Afghanistan.

 

[rhony]

In the bolded part are you suggesting that the land is important to the overall one of the largest land mass countries of the world. It is so important that the people living in that land doesn't matter to rest of India. As long as the land is occupied the rest of India is in its comfort zone. For the people living there the rest of India does not want to know about their struggles.

Logic for this resolution and as implied from your post above. Rest of India to Kashmir; we want your resources not your people.

This goes against the motto that is being re-iterated by Indian Government that this move is for Kashmiri people. Irony or reality?

Indian government is lying. Pakistanis government is lying. Nobody cares for Kashmiris. They all want land. Why is this so difficult to understand. The land is pristine with water resources. It has been given religious color, sympathies etc etc and at the end of the day all they want is land. Then they say Jihad and something else knowing full well that these people will die against an army. Even armies cannot win wars against other armies these days. How can a bunch if teens and twenty somethings win? What will be the end result?

 

[rhony]

Tell me anywhere in the world, where 500,000- 700,000 military soldiers are used to police a group of people they claim are their own country members.

The only place this happens is when there is an invasion like that of NATO troops in Afghanistan.

Because of the situation. This land is of supreme importance to Pakistan as well due to water resources. If it was China in place of Pakistan, they would have waged a full scale war years ago. There were no 500 k soldiers until the 90s when terrorism took root.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Those happened centuries ago. There is no rajput woman jumping into fire now. There are laws internally and nationally. If people are running their daily lives, there will not be any difference between kashmir and Delhi. A guy who's supposed to be the biggest hindu radical is the CM of Uttar Pradesh that is the most Muslim populated state. He can't go and do whatever he wants. There could be a few incidents here or there due to communal violences but they happen all around the world.

I know it happened a long time ago.

But Hindus still see this as a ghairatmand thing. It is glorified in bollywood movies. Rajputs remember this as a brave act.

So if this concept exists even in hindus, where it is better to die than be opressed, why are you singling out muslims or kashmiris?

Any group that feels oppressed will lash out.

Irish did it against the english, bangladeshis did it against pakistan, and kashmiris are doing it against India.

 

[Extra_Cover]

Indian government is lying. Pakistanis government is lying. Nobody cares for Kashmiris. They all want land. Why is this so difficult to understand. The land is pristine with water resources. It has been given religious color, sympathies etc etc and at the end of the day all they want is land. Then they say Jihad and something else knowing full well that these people will die against an army. Even armies cannot win wars against other armies these days. How can a bunch if teens and twenty somethings win? What will be the end result?

The point around Kashmiris fighting against the army and winning is inconsequential.

However, the point you make that Indian Government is doing all this act is to secure the land of Kashmir. If we break the logic of this decision then you are suggesting that this act is done to gain power over water supply and perhaps cut off the supply to Pakistan and thereby make a move towards POK after a period of time. But that logic does not make any sense considering China can cut off the water supply of India, considering the relationship China has with Pakistan and to slow down Indian economy why would China not do that?

The point is what Imran mentioned in his Parliament speech. This decision is not made without any logic, this decision has been made in line with RSS ideology and appease their vote banks and effectively secure re-elections going forward. I expect in near future there will be decision taken on Babri Masjid too which would spark another controversy.

Extremem ideology in hands of powerful government is a recipe for disaster. The next generation of India will feel the worse of it.

 

[rhony]

I know it happened a long time ago.

But Hindus still see this as a ghairatmand thing. It is glorified in bollywood movies. Rajputs remember this as a brave act.

So if this concept exists even in hindus, where it is better to die than be opressed, why are you singling out muslims or kashmiris?

Any group that feels oppressed will lash out.

Irish did it against the english, bangladeshis did it against pakistan, and kashmiris are doing it against India.

There is a difference. Those people died when they had no other option and when the living is not possible. Here people are asking to die for what? Burhan Wani died. What happened? Did he achieve anything? Was death his last resort? No. If you are a student and go to school or college who is gonna kill you? You might bring up a couple of instances but there are a million students in kashmir. If you don't throw stones at army, you won't be hurt with pellets. This is not a regular police. This is not even a regular army. It is an army with special powers. They have no need to show restraint as you saw in the 90s. Now there is no point in killing people. Peace can be attained only if people want it.

 

[Lego20]

The point around Kashmiris fighting against the army and winning is inconsequential.

However, the point you make that Indian Government is doing all this act is to secure the land of Kashmir. If we break the logic of this decision then you are suggesting that this act is done to gain power over water supply and perhaps cut off the supply to Pakistan and thereby make a move towards POK after a period of time. But that logic does not make any sense considering China can cut off the water supply of India, considering the relationship China has with Pakistan and to slow down Indian economy why would China not do that?

The point is what Imran mentioned in his Parliament speech. This decision is not made without any logic, this decision has been made in line with RSS ideology and appease their vote banks and effectively secure re-elections going forward. I expect in near future there will be decision taken on Babri Masjid too which would spark another controversy.

Extremem ideology in hands of powerful government is a recipe for disaster. The next generation of India will feel the worse of it.

So what would one do without that ideology? Give away a possessed territory on a plate to Pakistan? Or local Kashmiri leaders for them to part it away to China/Pakistan and/or create trouble for us?

What has been done has nothing to do with ideology. It is what any nation state would do for the security (resources and external thread) of 1.3 billion people.

 

[rhony]

The point around Kashmiris fighting against the army and winning is inconsequential.

However, the point you make that Indian Government is doing all this act is to secure the land of Kashmir. If we break the logic of this decision then you are suggesting that this act is done to gain power over water supply and perhaps cut off the supply to Pakistan and thereby make a move towards POK after a period of time. But that logic does not make any sense considering China can cut off the water supply of India, considering the relationship China has with Pakistan and to slow down Indian economy why would China not do that?

The point is what Imran mentioned in his Parliament speech. This decision is not made without any logic, this decision has been made in line with RSS ideology and appease their vote banks and effectively secure re-elections going forward. I expect in near future there will be decision taken on Babri Masjid too which would spark another controversy.

Extremem ideology in hands of powerful government is a recipe for disaster. The next generation of India will feel the worse of it.

Nobody is cutting anybody's water. Do you think international community is going to sit tight. As you said China can act too. However don't forget that the same water is a lifeline for millions of Indians too. This is India securing it's water resources. Also, the natural barriers are good for defense as they have been for centuries. This is inline with national interests. People give it religious color in India too. All this is because of Muslim majority in Kashmir. It's a convenient situation for both countries to rally their bases based on religion. At the heart of it, it's q national conflict based on interests and not religious

 

[Lego20]

70 years and some people are still wondering what the fight is about.

 

[blackanhyellow]

The point around Kashmiris fighting against the army and winning is inconsequential.

However, the point you make that Indian Government is doing all this act is to secure the land of Kashmir. If we break the logic of this decision then you are suggesting that this act is done to gain power over water supply and perhaps cut off the supply to Pakistan and thereby make a move towards POK after a period of time. But that logic does not make any sense considering China can cut off the water supply of India, considering the relationship China has with Pakistan and to slow down Indian economy why would China not do that?

The point is what Imran mentioned in his Parliament speech. This decision is not made without any logic, this decision has been made in line with RSS ideology and appease their vote banks and effectively secure re-elections going forward. I expect in near future there will be decision taken on Babri Masjid too which would spark another controversy.

Extremem ideology in hands of powerful government is a recipe for disaster. The next generation of India will feel the worse of it.

India can threaten to unilaterally cancel the indus water treaty.

The problem is, its a double edged sword.

If they cancel the treaty, then in theory, China could divert water originating from Tibet, which then means India wouldnt have a leg to stand on if they approached international courts complaining of China.

The other thing is, it requires massive infrastructure development and funds to be able to divert rivers, so India would have to do this over the course of years. In the mean time, they would then face many international issues, not to mention Pakistan would become a bigger problem in terms of security.

So yes, India can do it, but along with having massive implications for Pakistan, India would also have to withstand consequences.

 

[blackanhyellow]

There is a difference. Those people died when they had no other option and when the living is not possible. Here people are asking to die for what? Burhan Wani died. What happened? Did he achieve anything? Was death his last resort? No. If you are a student and go to school or college who is gonna kill you? You might bring up a couple of instances but there are a million students in kashmir. If you don't throw stones at army, you won't be hurt with pellets. This is not a regular police. This is not even a regular army. It is an army with special powers. They have no need to show restraint as you saw in the 90s. Now there is no point in killing people. Peace can be attained only if people want it.

People did have a choice, the irish could have stayed under oppressive british rule, hindus could have gave up fighting and submitted to mughal rulers, etc... they would have lived.

But there is a difference between living free and living under occupation, which is why people resisted.

Its human nature, kashmiris are not unique in this case.

History has way too many examples to list here of why that is not the case.

 

[IMMY69]

If Kashmiris are smart, they would give up their separatist movement and join India wholeheartedly. Their future will be better with India who will be a major economic and military power in the next 2 decades.

You are factually wrong.
Kashmir, the whole of Kashmir should be Pakistan or st the very least be it’s own sovereign nation.

Why are people so thick?

 

[Lego20]

India can threaten to unilaterally cancel the indus water treaty.

The problem is, its a double edged sword.

If they cancel the treaty, then in theory, China could divert water originating from Tibet, which then means India wouldnt have a leg to stand on if they approached international courts complaining of China.

The other thing is, it requires massive infrastructure development and funds to be able to divert rivers, so India would have to do this over the course of years. In the mean time, they would then face many international issues, not to mention Pakistan would become a bigger problem in terms of security.

So yes, India can do it, but along with having massive implications for Pakistan, India would also have to withstand consequences.

India will not cut/divert the water. Under ICJ, India agreed to not use water from 3 of its rivers (ICJ). Withdrawal from IWT would mean we will be able to use water from these 3 rivers and nothing more.

IWT is a big betrayal to the Indian people. No other upper reparten country in the world has generously donated water from 3 of its rivers to lower reparten country. So much for gratefulness. I am sure next in line is IWT if Pakistan foments any more trouble.

 

[Lego20]

You are factually wrong.
Kashmir, the whole of Kashmir should be Pakistan or st the very least be it’s own sovereign nation.

Why are people so thick?

Learned the "strategy" from you when you donated parts of it to China. Lets be open - its not about any brotherhood or humanity or love.

 

[blackanhyellow]

India will not cut/divert the water. Under ICJ, India agreed to not use water from 3 of its rivers (ICJ). Withdrawal from IWT would mean we will be able to use water from these 3 rivers and nothing more.

IWT is a big betrayal to the Indian people. No other upper reparten country in the world has generously donated water from 3 of its rivers to lower reparten country. So much for gratefulness. I am sure next in line is IWT if Pakistan foments any more trouble.

Divert, or stop is similar in the sense that Pakistan is deprived of the water.

China could also do similar to India. Not saying China would do it as a reaction to India doing it to Pakistan. But in the future if relations sour between China and India, China could theoretically do it. And if India has already done it to Pakistan, then India wont have a moral or legal leg to stand on if it decides to go to ICJ against China.

All of these are hypotheticals, but in statecraft you have to consider all of the potential outcomes.

 

[Lego20]

Divert, or stop is similar in the sense that Pakistan is deprived of the water.

China could also do similar to India. Not saying China would do it as a reaction to India doing it to Pakistan. But in the future if relations sour between China and India, China could theoretically do it. And if India has already done it to Pakistan, then India wont have a moral or legal leg to stand on if it decides to go to ICJ against China.

All of these are hypotheticals, but in statecraft you have to consider all of the potential outcomes.

Well yes - China can do that anytime regardless of what India does. Infact, it is already doing as we speak.

That said, "using" is different from "diverting" or "stopping". Using is not wrong in any sense. Its only IWT thats binding us to not use these waters.

 

[rhony]

India can threaten to unilaterally cancel the indus water treaty.

The problem is, its a double edged sword.

If they cancel the treaty, then in theory, China could divert water originating from Tibet, which then means India wouldnt have a leg to stand on if they approached international courts complaining of China.

The other thing is, it requires massive infrastructure development and funds to be able to divert rivers, so India would have to do this over the course of years. In the mean time, they would then face many international issues, not to mention Pakistan would become a bigger problem in terms of security.

So yes, India can do it, but along with having massive implications for Pakistan, India would also have to withstand consequences.

No can do it. But if there is a war, who knows? One doesn't trust their resources and future of their country on trusting other countries. So Pakistan concerns are legitimate. Indian concerns are legitimate too as they need the water as well. However, if you write in the text books that Pakistan needs water, people won't care. Instead drum up the rhetoric that our brothers and sisters are dying. They have an obligation of jihad and their freedoms are trampled and they are dying by the thousands everyday sacrificing their lives. Now that's appealing to the masses and will keep the fire burning. At the end of the day only people who are burning are youngsters who take a stick or a gun or a rock. They get destroyed by the army. Everybody knows that's the end result. So now one has to glorify death so people can embrace death. What's the end result of that death? Zero.

 

[mgtow]

If Kashmiris are smart, they would give up their separatist movement and join India wholeheartedly. Their future will be better with India who will be a major economic and military power in the next 2 decades.

I think it is best that India along with Kashmir should be part of Greater Pakistan. We ruled them for 1000 years and they were controlled under our ruling compared to now where even women are not safe under their [India] protection. Can’t wait for Greater Pakistan soon enough.

 

[IMMY69]

So what would one do without that ideology? Give away a possessed territory on a plate to Pakistan? Or local Kashmiri leaders for them to part it away to China/Pakistan and/or create trouble for us?

What has been done has nothing to do with ideology. It is what any nation state would do for the security (resources and external thread) of 1.3 billion people.

No no no

Pakistan’s very creation was on the basis that any Muslim majority state with s boarder to Naya Pakistan would cede to Pakistan.

That is indisputable... The Hindu Raj ceded to India illegally and thereafter we had the UN resolution that a plebiscite would take place where the people would decide.

The plebiscite was in the condition that both parties withdraw its army, not just Pakistan.

12m Kashmiris, 100,090 to 300,009 Hindu Pandits... vastly Muslim majority during and after the time of partition.

Kashmir is not part of India, does not belong to India and that’s is why what Modi did is illegal.

You can’t take back what you never had in the first place.

This is what it is

 

[IMMY69]

Learned the "strategy" from you when you donated parts of it to China. Lets be open - its not about any brotherhood or humanity or love.

That doesn’t make sense

 

[Pakpak]

Just saw a BBC report where they sneaked in journalists and Kashmiris are literally spitting on the Indians. Good luck after you remove your troops.

 

[Lego20]

No no no

Pakistan’s very creation was on the basis that any Muslim majority state with s boarder to Naya Pakistan would cede to Pakistan.

That is indisputable... The Hindu Raj ceded to India illegally and thereafter we had the UN resolution that a plebiscite would take place where the people would decide.

The plebiscite was in the condition that both parties withdraw its army, not just Pakistan.

12m Kashmiris, 100,090 to 300,009 Hindu Pandits... vastly Muslim majority during and after the time of partition.

Kashmir is not part of India, does not belong to India and that’s is why what Modi did is illegal.

You can’t take back what you never had in the first place.

This is what it is

Just sharing a border was a pre-req and not a sufficient condition. My understanding is that the state authority (in Kashmir's case Raja Hari singh) was required to accede. We have the accessation letter from the King. So by law its ours.


/closed

 

[IMMY69]

Just sharing a border was a pre-req and not a sufficient condition. My understanding is that the state authority (in Kashmir's case Raja Hari singh) was required to accede. We have the accessation letter from the King. So by law its ours.


/closed

That’s complete nonsense as proven by subsequent UN resolutions

 

[cricketjoshila]

That’s complete nonsense as proven by subsequent UN resolutions

Non binding UN resolutions.

UN cannot decide to divide a country.

 

[cricketjoshila]

No no no

Pakistan’s very creation was on the basis that any Muslim majority state with s boarder to Naya Pakistan would cede to Pakistan.

That is indisputable... The Hindu Raj ceded to India illegally and thereafter we had the UN resolution that a plebiscite would take place where the people would decide.

The plebiscite was in the condition that both parties withdraw its army, not just Pakistan.

12m Kashmiris, 100,090 to 300,009 Hindu Pandits... vastly Muslim majority during and after the time of partition.

Kashmir is not part of India, does not belong to India and that’s is why what Modi did is illegal.

You can’t take back what you never had in the first place.

This is what it is

Lol. You forgot to add the hindus from Jammu and buddhists from Ladakh.

 

[Lego20]

That’s complete nonsense as proven by subsequent UN resolutions

There we are. Part of Kashmir with India is non-negotiable as amply clear from the 35A/370 abolition.

Ball is in Pakistan's court. Indians are prepared for armed conflict if Pakistan so wishes. If Pakistan foments troube through proxy attacks, then India will reciprocate.

If Pakistan is willing to settle with current status - that is welcome and least violent option.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Just sharing a border was a pre-req and not a sufficient condition. My understanding is that the state authority (in Kashmir's case Raja Hari singh) was required to accede. We have the accessation letter from the King. So by law its ours.


/closed

Have you read the conditions? Even though this clown had no right to give away others land , he stipulated the area should remain autonomous and no other people should be allowed to purchase land unless he agrees.

 

[rhony]

No no no

Pakistan’s very creation was on the basis that any Muslim majority state with s boarder to Naya Pakistan would cede to Pakistan.

That is indisputable... The Hindu Raj ceded to India illegally and thereafter we had the UN resolution that a plebiscite would take place where the people would decide.

The plebiscite was in the condition that both parties withdraw its army, not just Pakistan.

12m Kashmiris, 100,090 to 300,009 Hindu Pandits... vastly Muslim majority during and after the time of partition.

Kashmir is not part of India, does not belong to India and that’s is why what Modi did is illegal.

You can’t take back what you never had in the first place.

This is what it is

Right and wrong. The basis of Pakistan creation etc was right. However your assumption is wrong that the people would have voted for Pakistan then. They wanted to be independent. Abdullah even wanted to join India and he was the leader of the largest political party. Would Kashmiris have voted the same way years later if there was a plebisite? Who knows? India's claim is the accession document but Pakistan's claim is based on imagination. There were no riots in kashnir to join Pakistan then. On the contrary people wanted India to save them from the tribals that attacked. As far as plebiscite goes, Pak needs to remove it's army entirely. India needs to keep a required army numbers enough to keep the peace.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Lol. You forgot to add the hindus from Jammu and buddhists from Ladakh.

The thread is regarding live rounds, stick to the topic.

Do you agree with using live rounds against protestors?

 

[Lego20]

Have you read the conditions? Even though this clown had no right to give away others land , he stipulated the area should remain autonomous and no other people should be allowed to purchase land unless he agrees.

The accessation document signed by Hari Singh was the exact same as 500 other princely states. So not sure which conditions you are talking about here.

 

[IMMY69]

Right and wrong. The basis of Pakistan creation etc was right. However your assumption is wrong that the people would have voted for Pakistan then. They wanted to be independent. Abdullah even wanted to join India and he was the leader of the largest political party. Would Kashmiris have voted the same way years later if there was a plebisite? Who knows? India's claim is the accession document but Pakistan's claim is based on imagination. There were no riots in kashnir to join Pakistan then. On the contrary people wanted India to save them from the tribals that attacked. As far as plebiscite goes, Pak needs to remove it's army entirely. India needs to keep a required army numbers enough to keep the peace.

The revised resolution (one year later) called for both armies to be removed.

Whether the people wanted to be independent or not was the point of the resolution.

Kashmir is not part of India and the what Modi did is illegal.

Ok?

 

[IMMY69]

There we are. Part of Kashmir with India is non-negotiable as amply clear from the 35A/370 abolition.

Ball is in Pakistan's court. Indians are prepared for armed conflict if Pakistan so wishes. If Pakistan foments troube through proxy attacks, then India will reciprocate.

If Pakistan is willing to settle with current status - that is welcome and least violent option.

It doesn’t take much effort to bring out the littler Hitlers in some..

 

[Bilal7]

I think it is best that India along with Kashmir should be part of Greater Pakistan. We ruled them for 1000 years and they were controlled under our ruling compared to now where even women are not safe under their [India] protection. Can’t wait for Greater Pakistan soon enough.

This will eventually happen, InshaAllah. Until then, I see no peace in Kashmir or even the rest of India. You can't illegally occupy a people and not expect retaliation. Modi the Monkey made a boneheaded move here by expecting Kashmiris to simply go along with his "economic progress" rhetoric.