Kashmiri locals fighting back is not “terrorism”

[marlonbrowndo]

Why do Indians call it a terrorist attack when a Kashmiri person rebels against their fascist government? It’s like calling it terrorism if a Jewish person fought back under Hitler’s regime. The real terrorism is being committed by the Indian fascist government in Kashmir. These people are just fighting back. Despite the accusations of fake news etc by the evil Indians who are supporting this, the world thankfully knows the truth about how the Kashmiri people are being silenced and tortured. Only supporters of this fascist regime can blame these poor people for retaliating and call it terrorism.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

I shouldn’t say Indian’s in the title because many sensible ones realize and are against the atrocities being committed by the government. Only those who support it and have blood on their hands

 

[Pakistanian]

Correct. Fighting against occupation isn't terrorism. Neither is separatism terrorism. Resisting armed combatants/non-civilians is self-defense.

The Indians who call Kashmiris terrorists are the same Indians who armed, supported and funded Bengali separatists in East Pakistan. Were they terrorist or separatists? If India was justified in arming and supporting militant separatism then Pakistan's support for Kashmiris is no different.

 

[marlonbrowndo]

Its always the same fascist excuse. Rohingya "terrorists", Palestinian "terrorists" and now Kashmiri "terrorists".

 

[cricketjoshila]

Its always the same fascist excuse. Rohingya "terrorists", Palestinian "terrorists" and now Kashmiri "terrorists".

Some people picking up arms because they cannot tolerate people of other religion and kill them and wanting a separate nation just because of religion, is TERRORISM.

 

[Pakistanian]

Some people picking up arms because they cannot tolerate people of other religion and kill them and wanting a separate nation just because of religion, is TERRORISM.

Kashmiris have always wanted to be separate from India. If Bengalis can split from Pakistan to form their own country, why not Kashmiris from India? India did after all train and arm militant separatists throughout the 60s and and the war of 1971 in East Pakistan. Would you call that terrorism or is that morally justified?

 

[Salma_T]

Kashmiris have always wanted to be separate from India. If Bengalis can split from Pakistan to form their own country, why not Kashmiris from India? India did after all train and arm militant separatists throughout the 60s and and the war of 1971 in East Pakistan. Would you call that terrorism or is that morally justified?

A fact Indians conveniently forget!

 

[AdamM97]

The word terrorism is thrown around all the time these days. Labelling a movement as a terror outfit is a good way to delegitimize their struggle.

 

[big_gamer007]

I think people need to think practically, most posts here I have seen are emotional or troll/lack of information.

For someone a terrorist can be a freedom fighter and vice versa. It depends on person to person.

Everyone involved in this crisis is involved for their personal gains, whether it be Pakistani Gov/Army, India GOV or Kashmiri leadership. The local population of Kashmir is the one who suffers.

Hyperbole's or mistakes committed in the past are used to commit same mistakes in present. The ideology of Revenge is used to commit atrocities. 30 years ago someone committed an atrocity against a Pandit does not mean it gives anyone a right to commit atrocities against current populace. Religion is used as a tool by both sides to push their agendas.

No one is winning anything other than the top notch elite.

Let's be clear of one thing, Pakistani leadership is as much to blame (if not more, since they started this whole mess) as their counterparts from India, if not more. The lack of trust is used as an excuse for wrong doings of Pakistani leadership, however if this issue has to be resolved one needs to publicly accept the mistakes of the past and then take it as a pure humanitarian cause.

Otherwise both sides will keep exploiting the local populace for their own gain. Even Kashmiri populace need to come out in open and accept the wrong doings against the Pandits in the past. Accept the mistakes of previous generations and welcome the Pandits back home with open arms. Only if they do that they can make a positive perception.

 

[jadaja]

Killing other locals in the name of religion is terrorism.Kashmir pandits don't want to seperate from India.They have equal say in Kashmir too.

 

[IMMY69]

Killing other locals in the name of religion is terrorism.Kashmir pandits don't want to seperate from India.They have equal say in Kashmir too.

So the Indian army are terrorists too?

 

[jadaja]

So the Indian army are terrorists too?

???????

 

[jadaja]

More than Kashmiris it seems Pakistanis are getting anxious about this.Based on all psuedo demostrations in other countries by fake supporters.

Kashmiris will be fine once they realize what happened is for their benefit.

 

[IMMY69]

???????

The Indian army has occupied a state and has killed and raped locals who have protested against this occupation. What does that make the Army?

 

[jadaja]

The Indian army has occupied a state and has killed and raped locals who have protested against this occupation. What does that make the Army?

If it commits rapes it is also criminal.

Killing locals who are armed and fighting them is not criminal, that is their job.

 

[IMMY69]

If it commits rapes it is also criminal.

Killing locals who are armed and fighting them is not criminal, that is their job.

and what about occupying their territory/land?

Hypothetically, how would you feel if you were in their position?

 

[jadaja]

and what about occupying their territory/land?

Hypothetically, how would you feel if you were in their position?

It is not their land, it is/was always part of India. Do you think Americans view their soldiers as criminals for fighting in Afghanistan.

 

[IMMY69]

It is not their land, it is/was always part of India. Do you think Americans view their soldiers as criminals for fighting in Afghanistan.

But thats simply not true.

On both counts.

 

[troodon]

Anyone who rebels against the Government and hurt their interests, will be treated like a Terrorist. Be it Kashmiri rebels or Stone Pelters or Naxalites. Its about time government showed some spine and deal with these anti-nationals with iron fist.

Going soft on these types of vermins actually created a bigger monster than it should have been.

 

[IMMY69]

Anyone who rebels against the Government and hurt their interests, will be treated like a Terrorist. Be it Kashmiri rebels or Stone Pelters or Naxalites. Its about time government showed some spine and deal with these anti-nationals with iron fist.

Going soft on these types of vermins actually created a bigger monster than it should have been.

Vermins?
Is that what you call the people of Kashmir who are fighting for their own land?

 

[JaDed]

Ok..what is the definition of terrorism?

 

[troodon]

Vermins?
Is that what you call the people of Kashmir who are fighting for their own land?

Separatists who try to break away from a progressive nation based on religion are vermin.

Its not about Jobs, development, economy which are real issues. Its about religion. Hence they are vermin.

 

[IMMY69]

There is no universally agreed definition of terrosim

 

[blackanhyellow]

Kashmiris have always wanted to be separate from India. If Bengalis can split from Pakistan to form their own country, why not Kashmiris from India? India did after all train and arm militant separatists throughout the 60s and and the war of 1971 in East Pakistan. Would you call that terrorism or is that morally justified?

This.

When you create a precedent of supporting freedom fighters, then others will do the same.

If mukhti bahini were freedom fighters, why are kashmiri separatists not freedom fighters?

Is one group's right to self determination more legitimate than the other's?

 

[blackanhyellow]

Separatists who try to break away from a progressive nation based on religion are vermin.

Its not about Jobs, development, economy which are real issues. Its about religion. Hence they are vermin.

Bhai progressive nations are canada, and some European countries. Not a country where you get killed for eating beef.

 

[IMMY69]

Separatists who try to break away from a progressive nation based on religion are vermin.

Its not about Jobs, development, economy which are real issues. Its about religion. Hence they are vermin.

I see.
So are hindu cow lynchers, murderers, rapists, Indian army who raped and killed vermin too?

 

[Napa]

Rebelling against a government which gives equal rights to Kashmiris as it does to other Indians, and then killing non-Muslim Kashmiris to drive them out of Kashmir is terrorism.

If a group of people took up arms against on the the myriad Mideast dictatorships, I would not call that terrorism. However, the attacks on Indian soldiers and the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits is straight up terrorism.

 

[jadaja]

Vermins?
Is that what you call the people of Kashmir who are fighting for their own land?

The same people will stop after realizing that it was due to external forces they are fighting against a govt who is trying to better their lives.Just like what happened in Punjab after 1984 it will happen in Kashmir too.

There are forces on both sides of the border who don't want peace that is what govt is fighting now.

 

[Napa]

Correct. Fighting against occupation isn't terrorism. Neither is separatism terrorism. Resisting armed combatants/non-civilians is self-defense.

The Indians who call Kashmiris terrorists are the same Indians who armed, supported and funded Bengali separatists in East Pakistan. Were they terrorist or separatists? If India was justified in arming and supporting militant separatism then Pakistan's support for Kashmiris is no different.

Kashmiris have always wanted to be separate from India. If Bengalis can split from Pakistan to form their own country, why not Kashmiris from India? India did after all train and arm militant separatists throughout the 60s and and the war of 1971 in East Pakistan. Would you call that terrorism or is that morally justified?

A fact Indians conveniently forget!

The fact that you are conveniently forgetting is the denial of his election victory to Mujib, followed by Operation Searchlight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocide

Yahya Khan "Kill three million of them, and the rest will eat out of our hands."

 

[the Great Khan]

Separatists who try to break away from a progressive nation based on religion are vermin.

Its not about Jobs, development, economy which are real issues. Its about religion. Hence they are vermin.

so what do you do to vermin?
and who decides who is defined as the vermin?

I find some of these posts beyond the pale.

Idiotic is the easy word to use..

But it does highlight the way intolerance and fascism has casually seeped into the mindset next door..

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

“One Man’s Terrorist Another Man’s Freedom Fighter”

also

“Freedom fighters do not need to terrorize a population into submission,”

Who's doing what; whole world knows. Indian army are the real terrorists inside the valley.

Pathetic Indian media is trying to taint Kashmiri freedom struggle into "terrorism".

 

[troodon]

I see.
So are hindu cow lynchers, murderers, rapists, Indian army who raped and killed vermin too?

Cow Lynchers are vermin too. They need to be put away just as harshly.

Murderers and Rapists are dealt by law.

Indian army raped and killed (if they did) should be punished. Why is Indian army not present in the other majority Muslim parts of the country? The reason is they are not demanding a separate country and hurt Indian interests.

I love how the terrorists and stone pelters are painted as these innocent rosy chubby cheeked kids. They are anything but that. They are completely brainwashed by religious nuts. They cannot see anything past the religion.

 

[troodon]

“One Man’s Terrorist Another Man’s Freedom Fighter”

also

“Freedom fighters do not need to terrorize a population into submission,”

Who's doing what; whole world knows. Indian army are the real terrorists inside the valley.

Pathetic Indian media is trying to taint Kashmiri freedom struggle into "terrorism".

What are the reasons for demanding freedom?

 

[Abdullah719]

Cow Lynchers are vermin too. They need to be put away just as harshly.

Murderers and Rapists are dealt by law.

Indian army raped and killed (if they did) should be punished. Why is Indian army not present in the other majority Muslim parts of the country? The reason is they are not demanding a separate country and hurt Indian interests.

I love how the terrorists and stone pelters are painted as these innocent rosy chubby cheeked kids. They are anything but that. They are completely brainwashed by religious nuts. They cannot see anything past the religion.

Why did they turn to extremism?

Why wasn't there any 'religious extremism' for the first few decades of the Kashmir struggle?

 

[troodon]

Why did they turn to extremism?

Why wasn't there any 'religious extremism' for the first few decades of the Kashmir struggle?

Until Pandits were kicked out.

No matter how you twist, the reason is obvious. Kashmir wants independence based on religion. Not happening in 2019.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Until Pandits were kicked out.

No matter how you twist, the reason is obvious. Kashmir wants independence based on religion. Not happening in 2019.

With hindutva politics rising in 2019, why cant people demand independence based on religion in 2019?

India is not as secular as it was, and it will continue to go in the opposite direction in 2019.

 

[blackanhyellow]

What are the reasons for demanding freedom?

Various reasons.

Religion is only one of the reasons.

The atrocities committed by indian army is another.

Various promises broken by india led to distrust. Now with removal of their autonomy is the greatest example of stabbing them in the back.

More reasons too, but ofcourse its convenient for you to blame religion only.

 

[blackanhyellow]

The fact that you are conveniently forgetting is the denial of his election victory to Mujib, followed by Operation Searchlight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocide

Yahya Khan "Kill three million of them, and the rest will eat out of our hands."

Didn't india just make an unconstitutional move without kashmiris consent?

Was kashmiri leadership not detained?

Are they not being shut in their homes, forcibly with 700,000 troops?

In the past were there not rapes, extra judicial murders of kashmiri youth, abductions, etc...

Like I said, if india goes around speaking proudly of how they liberated bangladeshis, then why is pakistan the bad guy when it wants to liberate kashmiris?

 

[Tiger96]

What are the reasons for demanding freedom?

They don't want to live with the idol worshipping infidels.

Muslims want to live in Secular India only in regions where they are minority.

 

[KingKhanWC]

This is common sense and obvious to anyone with half a brain.

The word terrorist has been used as a propaganda tool to demonise often legitimate and moral resistance.

Kashmiris have the right to defend themselves by any means against those who occupy them. People under occupation have the right to take the life of an intruder into their land just as someone does when his/her home is broken into in many places.

 

[IMMY69]

This is common sense and obvious to anyone with half a brain.

The word terrorist has been used as a propaganda tool to demonise often legitimate and moral resistance.

Kashmiris have the right to defend themselves by any means against those who occupy them. People under occupation have the right to take the life of an intruder into their land just as someone does when his/her home is broken into in many places.

Add that the Kashmiri’s are not attacking civilians but the military of an occupying army.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Add that the Kashmiri’s are not attacking civilians but the military of an occupying army.

Of course close to 500k oandits were roaming around with assault weapons, hence they were attacked,raped,killed and thrown out of their homes.

 

[Abdullah719]

Of course close to 500k oandits were roaming around with assault weapons, hence they were attacked,raped,killed and thrown out of their homes.

I think he was referring to the present situation.

 

[Napa]

Didn't india just make an unconstitutional move without kashmiris consent?

Was kashmiri leadership not detained?

Are they not being shut in their homes, forcibly with 700,000 troops?

In the past were there not rapes, extra judicial murders of kashmiri youth, abductions, etc...

Like I said, if india goes around speaking proudly of how they liberated bangladeshis, then why is pakistan the bad guy when it wants to liberate kashmiris?

If you think what is happening in Kashmir now in any way compares to what happened in 1971 in Bangladesh, you need to read a bit of history. Read about Operation Searchlight.

 

[blackanhyellow]

If you think what is happening in Kashmir now in any way compares to what happened in 1971 in Bangladesh, you need to read a bit of history. Read about Operation Searchlight.

Kashmiris had a period of rapes, mass graves, etc... as well.

Their pain is a lot more recent than 1971.

I am not going to sit here and argue about who committed worse atrocities.

My only point was if India is proud they liberated bangladeshis by training, arming, and funding freedom fighters, pakistan has every right to follow India's example of moral righteousness.

Why does India get the good deeds of liberating an oppressed society? Pakistan needs some good karma their way too.

 

[Napa]

Kashmiris had a period of rapes, mass graves, etc... as well.

Their pain is a lot more recent than 1971.

I am not going to sit here and argue about who committed worse atrocities.

My only point was if India is proud they liberated bangladeshis by training, arming, and funding freedom fighters, pakistan has every right to follow India's example of moral righteousness.

Why does India get the good deeds of liberating an oppressed society? Pakistan needs some good karma their way too.

You want to refer to Bangladesh to justify Pakistan's current interference in Kashmir, but then don't want to compare the two situations saying "I am not going to sit here and argue about who committed worse atrocities."

Only the wilfully blind and ignorant would not understand the huge differences between what happened in Bangladesh (where mass killings of intellectuals and Hindus took place in an attempt to behead the Bengalis) and what is happening in Kashmir.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocide

At some point there is no purpose in continuing a discussion, and that point is now. Bye.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

This is common sense and obvious to anyone with half a brain.

The word terrorist has been used as a propaganda tool to demonise often legitimate and moral resistance.

Kashmiris have the right to defend themselves by any means against those who occupy them. People under occupation have the right to take the life of an intruder into their land just as someone does when his/her home is broken into in many places.

I said this in another thread where a similar question was put. There probably is a legitimate use of the term terrorism, but these days it has basically been appropriated for the use of propaganda by governments to justify their own actions at home and abroad. This was first used widely as a practice by the US army when launching wars in foreign countries, notably in neighbouring countries, later on in the middle east.

Indian govts have swiftly adopted the term themselves for their own purposes. Eastern countries have built a reputation for lack of invention and being followers rather than leaders, and you can see this in most aspects of Indian life, western terminology being one of them.

 

[Kaptan]

Anyone ready to kill in the name of religion is terrorists in my view. Be it Muslims, Hindus or Christians.

Most Kashmiri muslims perfectly fall in this category.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Anyone ready to kill in the name of religion is terrorists in my view. Be it Muslims, Hindus or Christians.

Most Kashmiri muslims perfectly fall in this category.

Agree. Most BJP ministers fall in this category for me, and the Hindu supporters who voted for them are implicitly responsible as well for the thousands of deaths the BJP rhetoric has incurred.

 

[blackanhyellow]

You want to refer to Bangladesh to justify Pakistan's current interference in Kashmir, but then don't want to compare the two situations saying "I am not going to sit here and argue about who committed worse atrocities."

Only the wilfully blind and ignorant would not understand the huge differences between what happened in Bangladesh (where mass killings of intellectuals and Hindus took place in an attempt to behead the Bengalis) and what is happening in Kashmir.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocide

At some point there is no purpose in continuing a discussion, and that point is now. Bye.

Lol I meant both sets of events were horrible. But comparing which one was worse wasn't my point.

Freedom fighter is a freedom fighter regardless if one set of events is more horrible than the other set of horrible events.

You are skipping over my main point which is about freedom fighters.

Bye.

 

[Kaptan]

Agree. Most BJP ministers fall in this category for me, and the Hindu supporters who voted for them are implicitly responsible as well for the thousands of deaths the BJP rhetoric has incurred.

True, Pakistanis who support Kashmiri terrorists are also responsible for rapes, murders and exodus of Kashmiri Pandits.

 

[CRIC_FANtastic]

The delusion and self-righteousness on this forum is at a different level. Just take a look at the 'locals' actions against 'fascistic government: (you can google these dates for authentication)

'September 1989 - Pandit political activist, Tika Lal Taploo is shot dead by armed men outside his residence.
January 1990 - Massive crowds assemble in mosques across valley, shouting anti-india, anti-pandit slogans. The exodus of Kashmiri Pandits begins. In the next few months, hundreds of innocent Pandits are tortured, killed and raped. By the year-end, about 350,000 Pandits have escaped from the Valley and taken refuge in Jammy and elsewhere. Only a handful of them stay back.
March 1997 - Terrorists drag out seven Kashmiri Pandits from their houses in Sangrampora village and gun them down.
January 1998 - 23 Kashmiri Pandits, including women and children, shot in cold blood in Wandhama Village.
March 2003 - 24 Kashmiri Pandits, including infants, brutally shot dead in Nadimarg Village.

Does this read like rebel movement against 'fascist' government. Were the Kashmiri Pandit's not local? Or do they not have any claim to Kashmir?

Now these people are crying wolf for change in demography. Can they care to research the demography of Kashmir since 1900. How the Hindus are systematically massacred and wiped out from the valley.

What happened to Kashmiri Hindus is not only the definition of real 'Terrorism', but also proves the fact this is not a movement of 'locals' against any government.

 

[CRIC_FANtastic]

Lol I meant both sets of events were horrible. But comparing which one was worse wasn't my point.

Freedom fighter is a freedom fighter regardless if one set of events is more horrible than the other set of horrible events.

You are skipping over my main point which is about freedom fighters.

Bye.

Freedom Fighters don't kill the neighbors just because they belong to a different religion.

 

[IMMY69]

The delusion and self-righteousness on this forum is at a different level. Just take a look at the 'locals' actions against 'fascistic government: (you can google these dates for authentication)

'September 1989 - Pandit political activist, Tika Lal Taploo is shot dead by armed men outside his residence.
January 1990 - Massive crowds assemble in mosques across valley, shouting anti-india, anti-pandit slogans. The exodus of Kashmiri Pandits begins. In the next few months, hundreds of innocent Pandits are tortured, killed and raped. By the year-end, about 350,000 Pandits have escaped from the Valley and taken refuge in Jammy and elsewhere. Only a handful of them stay back.
March 1997 - Terrorists drag out seven Kashmiri Pandits from their houses in Sangrampora village and gun them down.
January 1998 - 23 Kashmiri Pandits, including women and children, shot in cold blood in Wandhama Village.
March 2003 - 24 Kashmiri Pandits, including infants, brutally shot dead in Nadimarg Village.

Does this read like rebel movement against 'fascist' government. Were the Kashmiri Pandit's not local? Or do they not have any claim to Kashmir?

Now these people are crying wolf for change in demography. Can they care to research the demography of Kashmir since 1900. How the Hindus are systematically massacred and wiped out from the valley.

What happened to Kashmiri Hindus is not only the definition of real 'Terrorism', but also proves the fact this is not a movement of 'locals' against any government.

Sorry mate but yes the move against the Pandits, however despicable it was, was just that, a move against the oppressing Indian Government.

 

[IMMY69]

Freedom Fighters don't kill the neighbors just because they belong to a different religion.

They shouldn’t, but they do.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

True, Pakistanis who support Kashmiri terrorists are also responsible for rapes, murders and exodus of Kashmiri Pandits.

True. Kashmiri pandits story is like much of Hindutva rewriting of history, grossly exaggerated in order to justify ethnic cleansing by state sponsored terrorism backed by Indian voters.

 

[IMMY69]

True. Kashmiri pandits story is like much of Hindutva rewriting of history, grossly exaggerated in order to justify ethnic cleansing by state sponsored terrorism backed by Indian voters.

That’s right.
100k to 300k Pandits displaced, and that was bad, but the Indians here talk as if it changed the demographics of IOK.

 

[CRIC_FANtastic]

True. Kashmiri pandits story is like much of Hindutva rewriting of history, grossly exaggerated in order to justify ethnic cleansing by state sponsored terrorism backed by Indian voters.

Classical Bigotry i.e. dismiss the ethical cleansing of a group because you have an agenda (and because that group does not belong to your religion). Do you have any data/facts to support your claim for ethnic cleansing?

Let me give you some facts. In 1961, Muslim population in J&K was 24.32 lakh. In 2011, the muslim population is 85+ lakh. Does this look like a cleansing to you?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Classical Bigotry i.e. dismiss the ethical cleansing of a group because you have an agenda (and because that group does not belong to your religion). Do you have any data/facts to support your claim for ethnic cleansing?

Let me give you some facts. In 1961, Muslim population in J&K was 24.32 lakh. In 2011, the muslim population is 85+ lakh. Does this look like a cleansing to you?

I was replying to Indian poster Kaptan, and provided precisely the same amount of data for my assertion as he did re Kashmiri terrorists. I am sure both statements were equally well researched and accurate.

 

[rhony]

Why did they turn to extremism?

Why wasn't there any 'religious extremism' for the first few decades of the Kashmir struggle?

Two reasons:
GOI rigged a state election angering the kashmiris.
Pakistan diverted jihadis from Afghan war to kashmir.

 

[rhony]

That’s right.
100k to 300k Pandits displaced, and that was bad, but the Indians here talk as if it changed the demographics of IOK.

Demographics matter. Yes, it was around 300k and it doesn't change the demographic in Kashmir much. Also yes, India is a hindu majority country. Now imagine if a few hindus threaten, kill and kick a few Muslims out in some place in Pakistan. What will happen then?

 

[IMMY69]

Demographics matter. Yes, it was around 300k and it doesn't change the demographic in Kashmir much. Also yes, India is a hindu majority country. Now imagine if a few hindus threaten, kill and kick a few Muslims out in some place in Pakistan. What will happen then?

Well your question is irrelevant.
We go back 71 years and there was no Pakistan.
So we start from 79 years ago and the notion that Muslim majority states would accede to Pakistan.

Kashmiris should have their plebecet and decide for themselves.
The result can include 1m votes to join India..

 

[IMMY69]

Demographics matter. Yes, it was around 300k and it doesn't change the demographic in Kashmir much. Also yes, India is a hindu majority country. Now imagine if a few hindus threaten, kill and kick a few Muslims out in some place in Pakistan. What will happen then?

One more thing, Pakistani’s won’t be asking them to move to India like India does to anyone who says anything remotely good about Pakistan

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

True. Stories of rape and murder of Kashmiris are grossly exaggerated in order to justify ethnic cleansing of Pandits by Kashmiri terrorists backed by Islamic terrorists sympathizers sitting in Pakistan and Britain.

This thread is turning into a superb example of how the term terrorism can be applied according to one's own bias and self interest. Thank you for supporting my first post in this thread #47 for proving my point most emphatically.

 

[rhony]

Kashmiris had a period of rapes, mass graves, etc... as well.

Their pain is a lot more recent than 1971.

I am not going to sit here and argue about who committed worse atrocities.

My only point was if India is proud they liberated bangladeshis by training, arming, and funding freedom fighters, pakistan has every right to follow India's example of moral righteousness.

Why does India get the good deeds of liberating an oppressed society? Pakistan needs some good karma their way too.

That's because India did not occupy East Pakistan. However, Pakistan occupied Kashmir and never allowed a plebisite. India did help EP at that time because it was a geographical nightmare for both countries and India didn't have the ability to feed tons of refugees from EP. Don't see any refugees from Kashmir going to Pak for assistance. EP movement was nationwide. Kashmir struggle is limited to a few districts.

 

[Kaptan]

This thread is turning into a superb example of how the term terrorism can be applied according to one's own bias and self interest. Thank you for supporting my first post in this thread #47 for proving my point most emphatically.

Your replies have shown excatly how some muslims play down sufferings of peoples from other religion (some even enjoy it) and then cry foul when they are subjected to the same behaviour.

As I have already said, one who kills for religion is a terrorists. Any one who sympathizes with such vile creatures are equally responsible for their deeds.

 

[CRIC_FANtastic]

Well your question is irrelevant.
We go back 71 years and there was no Pakistan.
So we start from 79 years ago and the notion that Muslim majority states would accede to Pakistan.

Kashmiris should have their plebecet and decide for themselves.
The result can include 1m votes to join India..

Isn't it fascinating to see a Pakistani asking for Plebiscite. I am sure this is not the first time this is mentioned on this forum, but none the less, let me shed some more light. Kashmir Plebiscite recommended as part of UN Security Council's Resolution 47 is a three step process:

1. Step 1- Pakistan to vacate the Occupied Kashmir. Essentially, you have to move out of Pakistan Side of Kashmir.
2. Step 2- India has to vacate their side of the Kashmir.
3. Step 3- UN Monitored Plebiscite.

Paksitan never agreed to Step 1, hence Step 3 never arrived. Now, the delusional Pakistani's are asking for step 3, bypassing step 1. Well my friend, that is not going to happen. You want Plebiscite, you first vacate your side.

 

[rhony]

Well your question is irrelevant.
We go back 71 years and there was no Pakistan.
So we start from 79 years ago and the notion that Muslim majority states would accede to Pakistan.

Kashmiris should have their plebecet and decide for themselves.
The result can include 1m votes to join India..

Look at history. Plebisite was dead long ago. Pak never moved their forces out in 70 years. That was the step 1 in plebisite process.

See India had accession letter, Pak had nothing. So technically Pak had no grounds to be in kashmir. However excellent diplomacy by Pak then and India's foolishness meant that kashmir was called a "disputed" territory. Even yesterday that's what Pak was arguing about. That's their best position. There is a reason why J&K was an Indian state earlier with autonomy and why Gilgit and AjK were not Pak provinces. That's because J&K people have accepted the accession letter. Pak tried to annex Gilgit last year and India actually did annex J&K this year. The common consensus in the world is Kashmir is settled. Pak will keep AjK and Gilgit and J&K will remain with India. That's why nobody cares about Kashmir except for Pakistan. The plebisite that kashmiris wanted was killed by Pak's occupation in the 40s and then Pak's reluctance to move it's army out in the last 70 years.

 

[rhony]

Isn't it fascinating to see a Pakistani asking for Plebiscite. I am sure this is not the first time this is mentioned on this forum, but none the less, let me shed some more light. Kashmir Plebiscite recommended as part of UN Security Council's Resolution 47 is a three step process:

1. Step 1- Pakistan to vacate the Occupied Kashmir. Essentially, you have to move out of Pakistan Side of Kashmir.
2. Step 2- India has to vacate their side of the Kashmir.
3. Step 3- UN Monitored Plebiscite.

Paksitan never agreed to Step 1, hence Step 3 never arrived. Now, the delusional Pakistani's are asking for step 3, bypassing step 1. Well my friend, that is not going to happen. You want Plebiscite, you first vacate your side.

Step 2 is India should have minimal forces to keep the peace.

 

[Greenstorm]

Isn't it fascinating to see a Pakistani asking for Plebiscite. I am sure this is not the first time this is mentioned on this forum, but none the less, let me shed some more light. Kashmir Plebiscite recommended as part of UN Security Council's Resolution 47 is a three step process:

1. Step 1- Pakistan to vacate the Occupied Kashmir. Essentially, you have to move out of Pakistan Side of Kashmir.
2. Step 2- India has to vacate their side of the Kashmir.
3. Step 3- UN Monitored Plebiscite.

Paksitan never agreed to Step 1, hence Step 3 never arrived. Now, the delusional Pakistani's are asking for step 3, bypassing step 1. Well my friend, that is not going to happen. You want Plebiscite, you first vacate your side.

There is step 2 in there as well. Ideally Pakistan and India should have discussed and agreed upon a practical framework regarding first two steps but India was never really interested on conducting talks on this issue. India's stance mostly has been that Kashmir is India's internal matter.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Your replies have shown excatly how some muslims play down sufferings of peoples from other religion (some even enjoy it) and then cry foul when they are subjected to the same behaviour.

As I have already said, one who kills for religion is a terrorists. Any one who sympathizes with such vile creatures are equally responsible for their deeds.

Again you are reinforcing my first post in this thread #47 with every reply you make.

"Them! Them!! It's always THEM!!!"

 

[Greenstorm]

Look at history. Plebisite was dead long ago. Pak never moved their forces out in 70 years. That was the step 1 in plebisite process.

See India had accession letter, Pak had nothing. So technically Pak had no grounds to be in kashmir. However excellent diplomacy by Pak then and India's foolishness meant that kashmir was called a "disputed" territory. Even yesterday that's what Pak was arguing about. That's their best position. There is a reason why J&K was an Indian state earlier with autonomy and why Gilgit and AjK were not Pak provinces. That's because J&K people have accepted the accession letter. Pak tried to annex Gilgit last year and India actually did annex J&K this year. The common consensus in the world is Kashmir is settled. Pak will keep AjK and Gilgit and J&K will remain with India. That's why nobody cares about Kashmir except for Pakistan. The plebisite that kashmiris wanted was killed by Pak's occupation in the 40s and then Pak's reluctance to move it's army out in the last 70 years.

Alleged letter of accession.

 

[rhony]

There is step 2 in there as well. Ideally Pakistan and India should have discussed and agreed upon a practical framework regarding first two steps but India was never really interested on conducting talks on this issue. India's stance mostly has been that Kashmir is India's internal matter.

Because of the accession letter that you don't acknowledge. However, it is a historical fact.

 

[Greenstorm]

Because of the accession letter that you don't acknowledge. However, it is a historical fact.

If India considers Kashmir its internal matter than all this nonsense by Indian posters regarding 'Pakistan forces should first vacate Kashmir' is useless. India was never really interested in holding a plebiscite.

 

[Kaptan]

Again you are reinforcing my first post in this thread #47 with every reply you make.

"Them! Them!! It's always THEM!!!"

I am just pointing out your hypocrisy if you think I am reinforcing your point then good for you.

 

[rhony]

If India considers Kashmir its internal matter than all this nonsense by Indian posters regarding 'Pakistan forces should first vacate Kashmir' is useless. India was never really interested in holding a plebiscite.

Look at the earliest UN resolutions. India tried but Pakistan never accepted step 1. It's only rhetorical now. However the fact remains that Pak has to vacate first. And that's never going to happen.

The frustration for Pakistan is that they need to keep the moral high ground or they will lose the Kashmiri support. They can't annex AJK. If they do, that will be the solution. Gilgit is almost in the bag because of Chinese pressure. I don't think there will be much noise if Pak annexes AJK. India has it's eyes on Gilgit though

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I am just pointing out your hypocrisy if you think I am reinforcing your point then good for you.

You are getting triggered good and hard, no doubt.

 

[Kaptan]

You are getting triggered good and hard, no doubt.

Lol I can understand you're having a meltdown after we threw article 370 in dustbin. Don't worry it will be over soon.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Lol I can understand you're having a meltdown after we threw article 370 in dustbin. Don't worry it will be over soon.

Even your own avatar is showing you how much you have been triggered. Dhoni says "this much!"

 

[Kaptan]

Even your own avatar is showing you how much you have been triggered. Dhoni says "this much!"

Its actually me giving you a hug after your meltdown.