Yup, we were supposed to take in all those refugees kicked out of the 'erstwhile' EP and assimilate them without a protest. We didnt and we acted. The results are there for everyone to see. Accept it and move on. Else remain in that time warp, dreaming of what things could be.
The refugees came AFTER India had started supporting the terrorists and separatists - India bore blame for exacerbating the situation to that extent. As I have already pointed out, Indian support for the East Pakistani separatists and terrorists started in the sixties, long before any refugee exodus took place.
Accept the creation of Bangladesh we have - I have no ill will for Mujib or those who argued for an independent Bangladesh. The Indian role is another matter - India must some day apologize for supporting terrorism and separatism in East Pakistan to reject the ideology of hatred and non-acceptance of Pakistan personified by Indira Gandhi.
You people made it a disputed territory. For all intents and purposes, India considers Kashmir an integral part of the country. Period. You got a problem with that, you got to deal with it. Sorry bro, no help there, you invaded, considered it a disputed territory, you wanted to internationalize it, YOUR PROBLEM, not ours! See where that took you. Oh what a shame.
Does not matter what India thinks or Pakistan thinks - the fact is that the issue was taken to the UNSC, and the UNSC ruled it disputed territory, which was accepted by the international community, Pakistan and India, and still is by the former two.
The current Indian position of 'integral part of India' is really just one akin to that of someone who steal land, gets a judgment against him in court, but continues to forcibly occupy that land. The Indian position has no standing legally or morally. As I often point out, if one day India decides to include California in her constitution as an 'integral part of India' that does not make it so.
I do agree with you about East Pakistan. It was a sovereign undisputed Pakistani territory. But, you lost it due to your own policies, we just happened to be in the right place at the right time - for us i.e.
As I pointed out to Developereo - two issues - one Pakistan's internal tensions with respect to poor governance and devolution of powers. Two, the interference of an external state in those issues with the intent to exacerbate them through support for violence and terrorism.
The first does not justify the second - Indian intervention was wrong, and you know it, but you cannot admit it because it requires you admit India was wrong reject years of propaganda fed to you.
Treading on a country's sovereignty by issuing visas to tourists to visit areas which are "disputed" amounts to a provocation. Pakistan started it. Its very clear that Pakistan's policy is forever going to be seen though Kashmir tainted glasses. No wonder, the picture is so unclear.
It was disputed and there was nothing agreed between the two nations on issuing or not issuing Visa's - you cannot argue 'sovereignty' over Visa's for trekking. You could have issued your own visa's. You could have raised the issue diplomatically, instead you chose to violate the Simla Accord and covertly invade Siachen. Unprovoked Indian aggression.
Backstabbing, no sir, I prefer to call it tit-for-tat. You did pre-emptive strikes on India, we found an excellent opportunity to act and act we did. Followed by a resounding military and diplomatic victory. The Victorious write the History, sir.
What pre-emptive strikes occurred in Siachen? And the 'pre-emptive strike' in East Pakistan had occurred with Indian support for terrorism and separatism in EP. If you do not see that as 'aggression', then why should a similar attempt by the PA to stoke an insurrection in dispute Kashmir be considered 'aggression'? By that standard you started the 1965 war, not Pakistan, since the overt military strikes were initiated by India, not Pakistan.
You are not only 'writing history', you are inventing it as you go along.
now what lie were you talking about?
About India not being the initial aggressor in any conflict with Pakistan - East Pakistan, Siachen, Junagadh, Hyderabad - you have plenty of examples debunking that point.
No matter how you want to explain it, no matter what facts you want to post, the truth is that Pakistan wants/covets/wishes for/pines for KASHMIR! At what cost? Even if you lose everything, Pakistan will never let go of Kashmir issue, and till the time you will cling to that dead horse, Pakistan will not progress. That my friend is the naked truth.
Oh but the explanations are important, since history is being 'invented' as we go along, and lies about 'India never being the aggressor are bandied about.
kashmir is not Pakistan's down fall, and we do not have to let go of it. Why should we cave into injustice?
Hatred, Akhand Bharat, 'No country to split' - keep on harping on those tunes and you will end up writing a piece for a symphony orchestra. None of those words mean anything to Indians.
Hate Pakistan? What for? Why?
Akhand bharat - only some fringe elements - aka 'non-state actors' or fanatics dream of it. But hey, living in a democratic country with a secular constitution has its perks.
No country to split - believe in whatever fancies you or keeps you happy. truth is far from your wishes and dreams. Doesnt change anything.
You claim there was a 'country that was split' in 1947? What country was that, and what ideology does that represent if not the ideology of an "Akhand Bharat"? You yourself claimed that Indians were 'livid' over this 'split' - why were they 'livid' if not over 'Akhand Bharat'?
And the hatred is in Indira Gandhis' own words, it is in her actions, and those that eulogize them.
You wish. Wait and watch...its already begun.
Thanks, but neither is Indira Gandhi alive, nor are the circumstances of East Pakistan in existence in today's Pakistan.
Don't be absurd by bandying about ridiculous threats against a nation.
Excuses for not being able to keep your country intact. That's how everyone sees it. When a state cannot extend its writ in an area, more so when its own armed forces cannot exercise martial control, the state should not/cannot claim those lands as its sovereign territory.
Does not matter how its is viewed - the fact is that the attempts by India and Afghanistan to further break Pakistan have failed, despite your claims of India's 'clout and muscle'. Again, leave the inane threats for the third grade playground.
And we will claim what is ours and lay waste to those that seek to destroy it. Unfortunately for India, FATA and Baluchistan are not separated from Pakistan by thousands of miles of Indian territory, nor are any Indian armies stationed in Iran or Afghanistan to march into those lands, nor will Afghanistan have an army in the next several decades, if ever, to be able to accomplish that.
Why should Indians apologize for your incompetence? Pakistan provoked India into multiple conflicts, Indian found an opportunity to strike back and India did it. Whats there to apologize?
We provoked no one - you refused to settle Kashmir as agreed and committed to in the UNSC resolutions. You closed the doors to dialog. You chose to support terrorism and rebellion in East Pakistan, and chose to occupy Siachen in violation of Simla.
The apology is precisely for that - for supporting terrorism and separatism in East Pakistan, unprovoked, and rejecting Indira Gandhis ideology of hatred and non-acceptance of Pakistan.
Indian troop deployments post 26/11? India threatening to invade Pakistan? Sources or you are lying. Like I said, Rome burns while Nero plays his fiddle.
All in the threads here (which I'll dredge up if you truly have selective amnesia) - and the IAF Chief was himself quoted a few months ago admitting that India was considering strikes into Pakistan after the Mumbai attacks.
You need to look into why such a thing happened. Nothing happens out of the blue in international diplomacy.
And yes, Kashmir is an integral part of India. It was Pakistan who considers it as 'disputed' territory.
As for Shimla agreement, how much did Pakistan stick to its promises?
It happened because the Indian leadership acted like land grabbers. The entire international community considers J&K disputed, only India considers it 'integral', again, the example of declaring California to be 'an integral part of India'.
Ok, dont trust us. We are not the ones who are on the verge of losing things for which brave men laid down their lives. Its not our country that's on fire. Its not we who are suspicious of an 'impending' invasion when all actions point to the contrary. Its not us who are paranoid. Ludicrous? Dont think so.
But remember, your choices at this critical juncture will dictate as to how you will be perceived as a nation in the future and will be dealt with accordingly. Gotta earn it, my man.
The fires in our nation can be put out without trusting you, and in fact are being put out without trusting you. Trust for India will come when apologies for past wrongs are given, and the glorification of hate mongers such as Indira Gandhi and her actions is stopped.