UN resolution on Kashmir (The strong Indian case)

[cricketjoshila]

again, fact remain the fact, My ancestors who were Muslims demanded new countries and their demands were met and 3 countries were created out of one, initially against the will of 1 but then that 1 country had to no choice. fact remain the fact, 3 countries were created out of 1 no matter how were they created. so yea, my ancestor being Muslims, used to be Hindu, but now Muslims forced 3 countries out of 1.

1.Their demand meant nothing as they didnt have the power to do anything.

2.The British Parliament created 2 countries not one.British India didnt belong to Hindu or British it was a slave nation to the British.

3.The polity of both countries accepted partition.As leaders of both countries wanted to be the PM.

4.The third country was created when one country lost a war to another country.And for the record Muslims fought among themselves to separate and one group of muslims havocked the worst genocide since WW2.

 

[Moh@n]

1.Their demand meant nothing as they didnt have the power to do anything.

2.The British Parliament created 2 countries not one.British India didnt belong to Hindu or British it was a slave nation to the British.

3.The polity of both countries accepted partition.As leaders of both countries wanted to be the PM.

4.The third country was created when one country lost a war to another country.And for the record Muslims fought among themselves to separate and one group of muslims havocked the worst genocide since WW2.

It does not become a "fact" because he says so. Let him live with his delusions, why are you feeding the troll?

 

[cricketjoshila]

It does not become a "fact" because he says so. Let him live with his delusions, why are you feeding the troll?

Have some free time.

Btw most people in either nation dont even know that we were not given freedom in 1947.We were made dominions and allowed to make our own laws.

Using that very act of 1947 passed by a British Parliament and drawing its power from that very law did India in 1950 and Pakistan in 1956 declared themselves republic and Islamic republic respectively.Neither constitution was ever ratified by its people as the power to frame these connstitution didnt come from the people but from the said act.

 

[hussain123]

One thing I can't understand is how does the cultural and ethnic identity of a region get diluted when it becomes a part of a bigger country?

Personally I think if and when the referendum happens, I don't think the independence option would receive the majority votes, rather it would be in favour of accession to Pakistan. So that would definitely play in the minds of the Dogra hindus, buddhists, and probably even the Shias and the Ahmedis to an extent.

I kinda understand your central asian argument but there are definitely many perks to being a part of a bigger sovereign nation. And it's not like all the central asian nations are all doing great (except Kazakhs probably).

And I don't know what your friends in fb are saying but they seem to have been brainwashed with communist propaganda. TN is one of the top 3 performing states in India and it is doing relatively better in most indices. Secessionist movement happening in TN is whataboutery of the highest order.

Personally I haven't heard of the kashmiri pundits experiencing much difficulties in other parts of India, or sikhs for that matter. This is again news to me. And there are a lot of conservative muslims in India as well who find no difficulty in living in India.

Imo the independence rhetoric is just used to bolster the secessionist movement in Kashmir. If push comes to shove, I think Pakistan will get a major share of votes. Pakistan going through a lean patch in their history with respect to security and law order issues may be the only factor that may play a role for independence. Otherwise it won't even be a question imo. Anyway I don't expect a referendum to happen as well. It's upto the two nations to find an amicable solution.

Being a part of bigger sovereign country isn't always a good thing kashmir,tibet,xinjiang,etc are examples of that.i would say kashmir with total economic independence has huge potential to explore its resources like tourism,hydel power,horticulture exports,carpets(that it can trade internationally)etc.and that is just the economic aspect of it.about the tamil nadu stuff it was just a reference it wasn't what i could have with full authority announced as truthbits.i don't have much clue about the eelam movement and even if i say i do it will be pretentious of me.since you have cleared it there cannot be any furthur debate about it.like i said in the post it was just a reference.
And stuff about un resolutions and plebiscite that is unnecessary as i don't think they will ever be implemented and if one an odd day black snow falls and they get implemented then pakistan is a clear cut winner bcoz there is no option of opting for independence.

 

[hussain123]

One thing I can't understand is how does the cultural and ethnic identity of a region get diluted when it becomes a part of a bigger country?

Personally I think if and when the referendum happens, I don't think the independence option would receive the majority votes, rather it would be in favour of accession to Pakistan. So that would definitely play in the minds of the Dogra hindus, buddhists, and probably even the Shias and the Ahmedis to an extent.

LoL.There is no Eelam movement in India.LTTE wanted a separate nation out of Lanka and not India.Seems you mistook Tamil Separatists from Lanka for Indians.

So you are totally wrong.

I didnt say eelam movement is in tamil nadu.i just said they have support amongst indian tamilians.and i can be wrong on that front too as i don't have much clue about that movement.

 

[rexbamezai]

Both the Indian and Pakistani governments waste so much money on the military. All that money should instead be spent on providing education and healthcare, and development of this region. Corruption is rampant in South Asia. Then there's poverty. Overpopulation. We should be working on improving the quality of life in South Asia, but here we are, fighting over issues like these!

Not to mention so many Kashmiris, Indians and Pakistanis lose their loved ones every year due to this conflict! These "non-issues" mask the real issues and this is what those greedy politicians are thriving on.

I know I may sound very childish here, but I feel all this fighting is extremely stupid. It needs to stop.

If accepting the LOC as the international border ensures peace in this region, I'm all for it. I think it is the most practical solution at the moment. Neither India nor Pakistan would be willing to give up the territory they have under their control.

P.S. I'm a Kashmiri.

 

[Ind_Yeah]

Being a part of bigger sovereign country isn't always a good thing kashmir,tibet,xinjiang,etc are examples of that.i would say kashmir with total economic independence has huge potential to explore its resources like tourism,hydel power,horticulture exports,carpets(that it can trade internationally)etc.and that is just the economic aspect of it.about the tamil nadu stuff it was just a reference it wasn't what i could have with full authority announced as truthbits.i don't have much clue about the eelam movement and even if i say i do it will be pretentious of me.since you have cleared it there cannot be any furthur debate about it.like i said in the post it was just a reference.
And stuff about un resolutions and plebiscite that is unnecessary as i don't think they will ever be implemented and if one an odd day black snow falls and they get implemented then pakistan is a clear cut winner bcoz there is no option of opting for independence.

The best case scenario for a hypothetically independent Kashmir would be Nepal, which itself is a basket-case. The other scenario is Bhutan, which completely accepts Indian control of its foreign policy and defense. Thanks to Pakistan's repeated interventions, the Bhutan option is now permanently off the table.

IN any case, Kashmiris should be thankful that it was India that gained control over J&K and not China or Pak. Else whatever "uniqueness" that they have would have been wiped off a long time ago. While Article 370 has kept the demographics on the Indian side of J&K pretty much as it was decades ago, That is not the case on the other side of the LoC. And the less said of China's takeover of East Turkestan and Tibet, the better.

 

[Ind_Yeah]

Both the Indian and Pakistani governments waste so much money on the military. All that money should instead be spent on providing education and healthcare, and development of this region. Corruption is rampant in South Asia. Then there's poverty. Overpopulation. We should be working on improving the quality of life in South Asia, but here we are, fighting over issues like these!

Not to mention so many Kashmiris, Indians and Pakistanis lose their loved ones every year due to this conflict! These "non-issues" mask the real issues and this is what those greedy politicians are thriving on.

I know I may sound very childish here, but I feel all this fighting is extremely stupid. It needs to stop.

If accepting the LOC as the international border ensures peace in this region, I'm all for it. I think it is the most practical solution at the moment. Neither India nor Pakistan would be willing to give up the territory they have under their control.

P.S. I'm a Kashmiri.

Extremely Well said.

 

[Saeed]

Both the Indian and Pakistani governments waste so much money on the military. All that money should instead be spent on providing education and healthcare, and development of this region. Corruption is rampant in South Asia. Then there's poverty. Overpopulation. We should be working on improving the quality of life in South Asia, but here we are, fighting over issues like these!

Not to mention so many Kashmiris, Indians and Pakistanis lose their loved ones every year due to this conflict! These "non-issues" mask the real issues and this is what those greedy politicians are thriving on.

I know I may sound very childish here, but I feel all this fighting is extremely stupid. It needs to stop.

If accepting the LOC as the international border ensures peace in this region, I'm all for it. I think it is the most practical solution at the moment. Neither India nor Pakistan would be willing to give up the territory they have under their control.

P.S. I'm a Kashmiri.

Agreed, actually it is not childish. This is the only mature post in this thread. But demilitarization is only possible if both countries are no threat to each other. With conservative Pakistani society and right wing government in India, that is not possible.

 

[rexbamezai]

Agreed, actually it is not childish. This is the only mature post in this thread. But demilitarization is only possible if both countries are no threat to each other. With conservative Pakistani society and right wing government in India, that is not possible.

You are right. Looking at the current situation, I'm afraid this isn't going to end soon and people will continue to suffer.

 

[www787]

Have some free time.

Btw most people in either nation dont even know that we were not given freedom in 1947.We were made dominions and allowed to make our own laws.

Using that very act of 1947 passed by a British Parliament and drawing its power from that very law did India in 1950 and Pakistan in 1956 declared themselves republic and Islamic republic respectively.Neither constitution was ever ratified by its people as the power to frame these connstitution didnt come from the people but from the said act.

You always need a leader for the followers to follow. Muslim demanded separate land for the majority of the Muslims.
Now look at the fact. It was a one country which was divided into three because Muslims of India didn't want to be govern by the majority of the Hindus. How the country was divided was never my comment, a country was made into two then three.

"Partition" means divided into certain amount of pieces. again, who authorized that "Partition" or who made it permanent was never my comment" I simply stated the country was made into three because my ancestors (muslims) demanded it to be.
Let's say if All India Muslim League had not demanded for a "separate" nation then British would probably never considered to turn a single nation into two then three.

"The All-India Muslim League (popularised as Muslim League) was a political party established during the early years of the 20th century in the British Indian Empire. Its strong advocacy for the establishment of a separate Muslim-majority nation-state, Pakistan, successfully led to the partition of India in 1947 by the British Empire.[1] The party arose out of a literary movement begun at The Aligarh Muslim University in which Syed Ahmad Khan was a central figure." -wiki

To me it sound like demanding or you can use what wording you want to satisfy your ego, it doesn't change the fact that India or British India was divided because Muslims "asked or demand or request" for it.
[MENTION=23911]Moh@n[/MENTION], please explain how am I trolling?

 

[cricketjoshila]

You always need a leader for the followers to follow. Muslim demanded separate land for the majority of the Muslims.

And did that leader pass any law to get Pakistan?

Now look at the fact. It was a one country which was divided into three because Muslims of India didn't want to be govern by the majority of the Hindus.

British divided their colony into two parts.Is that hard to get?They were the rulers,they had options and they chose one.How is what British did to their colony anything to do with your ancestor or Islamic Republic of Pakistan(Came into being in 1956) or Republic of India(Came into being in 1950)?

How the country was divided was never my comment, a country was made into two then three.

Made into two by British(there was no existence of present Nations of India and Pakistan then).But Islamic Republic of Pakistan was made into two by Republic of India.

"Partition" means divided into certain amount of pieces. again, who authorized that "Partition" or who made it permanent was never my comment" I simply stated the country was made into three because my ancestors (muslims) demanded it to be.

Your demand meant zilch.The British played out their last hand of divide and rule and partitioned their colony to give the two British Educated,sophisticated,elite people their power centers.

Let's say if All India Muslim League had not demanded for a "separate" nation then British would probably never considered to turn a single nation into two then three.

Heard of Divide and Rule policy of British?

"The All-India Muslim League (popularised as Muslim League) was a political party established during the early years of the 20th century in the British Indian Empire. Its strong advocacy for the establishment of a separate Muslim-majority nation-state, Pakistan, successfully led to the partition of India in 1947 by the British Empire.[1] The party arose out of a literary movement begun at The Aligarh Muslim University in which Syed Ahmad Khan was a central figure." -wiki

Find better sources not some Random enteries.

To me it sound like demanding or you can use what wording you want to satisfy your ego, it doesn't change the fact that India or British India was divided because Muslims "asked or demand or request" for it.

British India was divided because British wanted it to be.Your ancestors and mine as well were slaves of the British empire they didnt have the authority to do anything.

And what has British India's division got to do with the present situation of Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan?

For a brief moment even if i agree to your delusions,

Your ancestors didnt divide Republic of India because that came into being in 1950.Whatever division etc etc came was from British India over which Republic of India had no control.

But my ancestors divided Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1971 and took 90k POWs.

Read history and its context from neutral sources.

[MENTION=23911]Moh@n[/MENTION], please explain how am I trolling?

He also said you may be delusional.

 

[KingKhanWC]

You are putting cart before the horse. My point was blame of plebicide not happening lies on Pakistan. Right now the plebicide is not possible as large pakistani population has migrated in POK. Further Kashmiri pandits were forced out.

It's possible and it's still valid. There is no horse or cart. As soon as India announce to hold a plebiscite Pakistan would happily remove their forces because everyone knows the Kashmir's do not want to live under Indian rule.

 

[www787]

And did that leader pass any law to get Pakistan?


British divided their colony into two parts.Is that hard to get?They were the rulers,they had options and they chose one.How is what British did to their colony anything to do with your ancestor or Islamic Republic of Pakistan(Came into being in 1956) or Republic of India(Came into being in 1950)?



Made into two by British(there was no existence of present Nations of India and Pakistan then).But Islamic Republic of Pakistan was made into two by Republic of India.



Your demand meant zilch.The British played out their last hand of divide and rule and partitioned their colony to give the two British Educated,sophisticated,elite people their power centers.



Heard of Divide and Rule policy of British?


Find better sources not some Random enteries.



British India was divided because British wanted it to be.Your ancestors and mine as well were slaves of the British empire they didnt have the authority to do anything.

And what has British India's division got to do with the present situation of Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan?

For a brief moment even if i agree to your delusions,

Your ancestors didnt divide Republic of India because that came into being in 1950.Whatever division etc etc came was from British India over which Republic of India had no control.

But my ancestors divided Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 1971 and took 90k POWs.

Read history and its context from neutral sources.


He also said you may be delusional.

again, when and where did I claim that Muslims of Pakistan had authority.

Let me repeat it again, MUSLIMS OF INDIA "ASKED, REQUEST, DEMAND, PLEADED, WANTED", or whatever term you want to use to fit your fragile ego of Patriotism. Had it was not "ASKED, REQUESTED, DEMANDED, PLEADED, WANTED, or again whatever term you want to use to fit your fragile ego of Patriotism then probably India would have been consist of all of Pakistan and Bangladesh. <--- that was my initial comment and I stand by it. How hard it is to understand?
When was it divided or when Indian and Pakistan came into existence was never my comment.
What legal route was taken by British was never my Comment

As I understand your ego got hurt when I said "My ancestors, happened to be Muslims, again not to hurt your fragile ego again so i let you pick out the proper term _______" read it carefully again because I do not want you to miss out on raising an Indian flag some where by commenting some stuff that really isn't related to my comment....If Muslims of India did not wanted a separate land to govern and call it their own country then Indian and Pakistan would probably been a one country. Please tell me where am I loosing you? I don't think i could explain clearer than this.

Yea i may be delusional to replying you the same thing over and over but you are delusional enough to keep trying tell me something that i have already know and most of the people know but again let me repeat it and again whatever term you would like to use to not hurt your fragile ego____. If it was not for the Muslims of India then India, Pakistan and Bangladesh would have been a one country.

About Bangladesh, I never claimed that India was not involved to give them their independence but again if it wasn't for Muslims of India, INDIA, PAKISTAN AND BANGLADESH would probably been a one Country.

Now re- read it before you reply, and I apologize if i have hurt your fragile EGO

 

[ftbno1]

How can plebicide happen when you gifted a part of kashmir to china??
How can plebicide happen when their was influx nonckashmiris in POK??
How can plebicide happen when a significant portion of population (kashmiri pandits) were forced to migrate from the state??
You are being too simple minded.
If indian government say we will have plebicide. Do you really think Pakistan army will withdraw from POK on our words??

 

[ftbno1]

again, when and where did I claim that Muslims of Pakistan had authority.

Let me repeat it again, MUSLIMS OF INDIA "ASKED, REQUEST, DEMAND, PLEADED, WANTED", or whatever term you want to use to fit your fragile ego of Patriotism. Had it was not "ASKED, REQUESTED, DEMANDED, PLEADED, WANTED, or again whatever term you want to use to fit your fragile ego of Patriotism then probably India would have been consist of all of Pakistan and Bangladesh. <--- that was my initial comment and I stand by it. How hard it is to understand?
When was it divided or when Indian and Pakistan came into existence was never my comment.
What legal route was taken by British was never my Comment

As I understand your ego got hurt when I said "My ancestors, happened to be Muslims, again not to hurt your fragile ego again so i let you pick out the proper term _______" read it carefully again because I do not want you to miss out on raising an Indian flag some where by commenting some stuff that really isn't related to my comment....If Muslims of India did not wanted a separate land to govern and call it their own country then Indian and Pakistan would probably been a one country. Please tell me where am I loosing you? I don't think i could explain clearer than this.

Yea i may be delusional to replying you the same thing over and over but you are delusional enough to keep trying tell me something that i have already know and most of the people know but again let me repeat it and again whatever term you would like to use to not hurt your fragile ego____. If it was not for the Muslims of India then India, Pakistan and Bangladesh would have been a one country.

About Bangladesh, I never claimed that India was not involved to give them their independence but again if it wasn't for Muslims of India, INDIA, PAKISTAN AND BANGLADESH would probably been a one Country.

Now re- read it before you reply, and I apologize if i have hurt your fragile EGO

If religion is only criterion to have a nation state. Why don't you merge with Afghanistan and Iran. Pakistan was created due to shortsightedness of your founding fathers. Muslim league instigated the violence by calling for direct action which led to terrifying riots. Pakistan happened because Iqbal did not get noble prize and Mr. Jinnah lost leadership of the indipendence movement to Gandhi ji.
The biggest proof of failure of two nation theory was creation of Bangladesh.
But make no mistake hardly anyone in India are nostalgic about partition. Infact creation 21 century nation state on basis ofa religion is selfcontradictory

 

[Hornbill]

Even in kerala where hindus forms over 50% population BJP won only 1 seat out 144 assembly seats but in JK they are part of ruling goverment so one easily imagine the strength of so called brotherhood jammuites, Ladakhis and kashmiris shares.

 

[www787]

If religion is only criterion to have a nation state. Why don't you merge with Afghanistan and Iran. Pakistan was created due to shortsightedness of your founding fathers. Muslim league instigated the violence by calling for direct action which led to terrifying riots. Pakistan happened because Iqbal did not get noble prize and Mr. Jinnah lost leadership of the indipendence movement to Gandhi ji.
The biggest proof of failure of two nation theory was creation of Bangladesh.
But make no mistake hardly anyone in India are nostalgic about partition. Infact creation 21 century nation state on basis ofa religion is selfcontradictory

Calm down buddy, no need to get emotional here.

So, I was not into existence when Partition happened. I just simply stated "My ancestors forced 3 countries out of 1. What criteria was used at that time was decided by ancestors not me.

 

[cricketjoshila]

again, when and where did I claim that Muslims of Pakistan had authority.

Let me repeat it again, MUSLIMS OF INDIA "ASKED, REQUEST, DEMAND, PLEADED, WANTED", or whatever term you want to use to fit your fragile ego of Patriotism. Had it was not "ASKED, REQUESTED, DEMANDED, PLEADED, WANTED, or again whatever term you want to use to fit your fragile ego of Patriotism then probably India would have been consist of all of Pakistan and Bangladesh. <--- that was my initial comment and I stand by it. How hard it is to understand?
When was it divided or when Indian and Pakistan came into existence was never my comment.
What legal route was taken by British was never my Comment

As I understand your ego got hurt when I said "My ancestors, happened to be Muslims, again not to hurt your fragile ego again so i let you pick out the proper term _______" read it carefully again because I do not want you to miss out on raising an Indian flag some where by commenting some stuff that really isn't related to my comment....If Muslims of India did not wanted a separate land to govern and call it their own country then Indian and Pakistan would probably been a one country. Please tell me where am I loosing you? I don't think i could explain clearer than this.

Yea i may be delusional to replying you the same thing over and over but you are delusional enough to keep trying tell me something that i have already know and most of the people know but again let me repeat it and again whatever term you would like to use to not hurt your fragile ego____. If it was not for the Muslims of India then India, Pakistan and Bangladesh would have been a one country.

About Bangladesh, I never claimed that India was not involved to give them their independence but again if it wasn't for Muslims of India, INDIA, PAKISTAN AND BANGLADESH would probably been a one Country.

Now re- read it before you reply, and I apologize if i have hurt your fragile EGO

India still has as many muslims as Pakistan.So this idea of "Muslims of India' wanted Pakistan is wrong.Some Muslims of the British colony British India wanted partition.It has got nothing to with Republic of India which came into being in 1950,3 years after partition.It also has nothing to do with Islamic Republic of Pakistan which lost a war with Republic of India in 1971 and lost half its country.

Secondly your ancestors,my ancestors had no say to demand,request,plead anything.They had to do with what was decided by the British Parliament.I know you are taught that your ancestors divided British India,lol they didnot.Britishers divided British India.

So your ancestors had no role in dividing British India.Also even if they did,British India has nothing to do with Republic of India which came into being in 1950 and where your ancestors had nothing to do with.

But 1971 war was between Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan both of which exist today.And one of them lost a war to another and lost half its country.

 

[captain.hansolo]

This is where Indians who defend the occupation of Kashmir struggle to understand a simple point.

Pakistan will only consider removing it's forces ONCE India agrees to holding the plebiscite.

Does India agree to hold a plebiscite if Pakistan removes it's troops?

well keep your forces deployed. India is using the cold war strategy that worked for the united states - starve out your enemy with greater economy.

do you see india trying to deploy forces against china in arunachal pradesh? no. why? because in a war of economies, china would outlast india.

but india will outlast pakistan if there is a stare down contest - thanks to a more robust economy, india will outlast pakistan.

of course this does not help resolve the kashmir issue. no resolution is on the horizon. india wont grant kashmir freedom as it would then become a massive propaganda weapon against india; whereas pakistan wont renounce its greatest propaganda agenda to keep its people distracted.

the solution, or rather the most plausible solution is if both countries progress economically and have open, and free borders. a democratic, economic partner in pakistan is best for the security of the region and for india.

 

[giri26]

India’s big message to Imran Khan-led PTI government in Pakistan

India on Thursday voiced its hope that the new government in Pakistan under the leadership of Prime Minister Imran Khan “will work to build South Asian region terror-free” rather than indulging in polemics. Speaking at UN Security Council, India’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Syed Akbaruddin said, “We hope the new government of Pakistan will, rather than indulging in polemics, work constructively to build a safe, stable, secure and developed the South Asian region, free of terror and violence.”

While addressing the UN Security Council’s open debate mediation and settlement of disputes confronting Pakistan’s repeated references to the disputed territories, Akbaruddin said, “We remind Pakistan, the one isolated delegation that made unwarranted references to an integral part of India, that pacific settlement requires pacific intent in thinking and Pacific content in action. Regurgitating a failed approach, which has long been rejected, is neither reflective of pacific intent nor a display of Pacific content.”

On August 20, Pakistan’s newly-appointed Foreign Affairs Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi had claimed that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi wrote a letter to Prime Minister Imran Khan indicating the beginning of a dialogue between the two nations but later Pakistan denied making any such claim and blamed Indian media for misquoting Qureshi. Denying Qureshi’s claim, sources in India had also emphasised that there was no fresh proposal for the resumption of dialogue between the two countries.

https://www.financialexpress.com/in...pti-government-in-pakistan-read-here/1297056/

 

[IMMY69]

Sorry are India and Pakistan disputing a territory in the Pacific?

 

[Asim_khan]

Indian politicians & diplomatic staff have this great ability of saying a lot of words without really saying anything.

 

[IAJ]

Indian politicians & diplomatic staff have this great ability of saying a lot of words without really saying anything.

So they say it best when they say nothing at all?

 

[Josh]

So they say it best when they say nothing at all?

Love playing this song on my guitar