Arundhati Roy calls for end to Indian ‘occupation’ of Kashmir

[Birbal]

Like Arundhati Roy, many Indians actually want justice for Kashmir. Most of the Indians here are nationalist jingoists, but they aren't really a representative sample of Indians.

 

[Developereo]

India will allow plebiscite in Kashmir, once Pakistan allows plebiscite in Balochistan

Predictable derailment attempt.

just like what your forces are doing in Balochistan and Waziristan??? a spade is a spade.

Ditto.

Which law is violated by India's accession of Kashmir, that makes Indian sovereignty over Kashmir 'illegitimate'.?

The need for 700,000 troops to subjugate the locals. If that's not an 'occupying force', I don't know what is.

 

[KS]

Like Arundhati Roy, many Indians actually want justice for Kashmir. Most of the Indians here are nationalist jingoists, but they aren't really a representative sample of Indians.

The Indians over here are a better representative sample than A Roy. That is for sure.

 

[LiberalAtheist]

We have Balouchis and Pashtuns that live in these areas saying otherwise, stop trying to hate.

Kaka gal sun, tu Punjabi an te Hindustan tey ghod vich baan nu tyar an. Sharam auni chaiydi tinu. India ney kinay Sikh maray te fevi tinu koi sharam ney. Lanat ah twade vargay lokhan nu.

on the payroll of security forces or gov't or maybe threatened to say the false statements? i have proof that completely contradicts the first half of your post

what happened in the 1980s was the result of a once pure Granthi turned radical extremist trying to separate a state from the union and a corrupt autocrat along with her political party that played divisive and dirty politics since the early 90s Punjab has been peaceful and prosperous the majority of Indian Sikhs think the same look below

Say 'NO' to KHALISTAN. - The Voice of Indian Sikhs - YouTube

Khalistan Will Never Be Created - An Indian Sikh - YouTube

 

[Developereo]

Democracy doesn't give the right to secede. National integrity comes before Democracy.

Famous example - American civil war. South seceded..North defeated the secessionary forces. They did not sit tight saying its a democracy. What you say is Anarchy.

Actually democracy provides precisely for such a situation. That is why I mentioned Quebec. Also look up referendums in Puerto Rico, if you are interested.

As for history, lots of things were done differently in the past. That is no excuse to deny people's rights in the 21st century.

I dont see how it was addressed.

OK, I expanded above.

 

[nForce]

What stakes do the Pakistanis have if Kashmir gets liberated?
Why dont they liberate their part of Kashmir first?

I guess Arundhati Roy meant that too.

 

[Developereo]

What stakes do the Pakistanis have if Kashmir gets liberated?

1. It's unfinished business from 1947.
2- It is our moral duty to support them as long as they keep asking for our support by flying our flag.

Why dont they liberate their part of Kashmir first?

I guess Arundhati Roy meant that too.

We don't need to keep 700,000 troops in our Kashmir to quash any independence movement.

 

[KS]

Actually democracy provides precisely for such a situation. That is why I mentioned Quebec. Also look up referendums in Puerto Rico, if you are interested.

And that is why I mentioned US civil war in which secession was dealt with the way it should be.

You think Quebec model is good, I think US model is good.

As for history, lots of things were done differently in the past. That is no excuse to deny people's rights in the 21st century.

I guess then artificial UN stamp should not be a hinderance in Pakistan conducting a referendum in Balochistan ? Surely they are also humans.

1. It's unfinished business from 1947.

True. They should do what the millions of UP,Bihari, Punjabi, Hyderabadi,Sindhi, Bengali Muslims did during Partition. Pack their bags and migrate to Pakistan. I absolutely have no problem with that.

2- It is our moral duty to support them as long as they keep asking for our support by flying our flag

The latest Chatham house polls say less than 2% of Kashmiris want to join Pakistan. So I guess you should stop supporting them.They dont want you.

 

[nForce]

1. It's unfinished business from 1947.
2- It is our moral duty to support them as long as they keep asking for our support by flying our flag.



We don't need to keep 700,000 troops in our Kashmir to quash any independence movement.

Yeah yeah..we know all too very well about that attitude.The Pakistani leadership has this attitude of biting more than they can chew.They are involved in military activities against Soviets(providing bases to US),they are present in Afghanistan,they are present in war against Israel,they are present in the form of Occupation force in Gulf war,they think Palestine is their problem as well,they think Kashmir to be their birth rights etc etc...Not many Pakistanis show the same zeal and enthusiasm when it comes to working for their own country.They just like to poke their nose in others' business,and try to have a stake at matters beyond their means.

We keep a lot of troops there because there has been wars for that region in the past and not to mention we had a problem with insurgency until recently.Thats a logical deduction.Now how much cautious we will be,thats upto us,not you,isnt it?

 

[Developereo]

And that is why I mentioned US civil war in which secession was dealt with the way it should be.

You think Quebec model is good, I think US model is good.

It's not about Canadian or US model. They are both the same: Quebec in Canada and Puerto Rico in US.

It's about how modern democracies handle these situations.

I guess then artificial UN stamp should not be a hinderance in Pakistan conducting a referendum in Balochistan ? Surely they are also humans.

Once again, Baluchistan is not the subject of discussion. I only mentioned Quebec and PR because you guys claimed that national sovereignty trumps democracy. US and Canada showed that, for true democracies, it does not.

True. They should do what the millions of UP,Bihari, Punjabi, Hyderabadi,Sindhi, Bengali Muslims did during Partition. Pack their bags and migrate to Pakistan. I absolutely have no problem with that.

This is not 1947 and the situation on the ground is not the same. Therefore, that 'solution' is not relevant.

What is relevant is India's claim to be a democracy. As an area under India's control, these people are entitled to democracy and I just showed how real democracies handle these situations.

The latest Chatham house polls say less than 2% of Kashmiris want to join Pakistan. So I guess you should stop supporting them.They dont want you.

A British poll telling us what our own citizens want? When there is no independence movement of comparable magnitude to the one in Indian held Kashmir? Once again, we don't need an occupying force of 700,000 men to hold on to our Kashmir.

 

[Soumitra]

Lets have a deal. You take Arundhati and give us Veena Malik

 

[Developereo]

We keep a lot of troops there because there has been wars for that region in the past and not to mention we had a problem with insurgency until recently.Thats a logical deduction.Now how much cautious we will be,thats upto us,not you,isnt it?

Do you honestly think the 700,000 troops are there to repel a Pakistani invasion? Do you think Pakistan will pour a million men into Kashmir and leave the rest of the country undefended?

Let's face it: the Indian army is there to subdue the ordinary population. It is there to demoralize and terrorize the population into submission. To break their spirit by a show of force.

 

[RazPaK]

Pakistan is ready to hold a plebiscite as soon as Indian troops leave the region. It's just you Indians that are too butt-hurt to hold a plebiscite even when Pakistan was ready to hold one in the state of Junagadh.

 

[nForce]

Do you honestly think the 700,000 troops are there to repel a Pakistani invasion? Do you think Pakistan will pour a million men into Kashmir and leave the rest of the country undefended?

Let's face it: the Indian army is there to subdue the ordinary population. It is there to demoralize and terrorize the population into submission. To break their spirit by a show of force.

conclusions can be drawn in various ways.Let us say,your version differs from what the Indian military thinks

 

[Paan Singh]

Pakistan is ready to hold a plebiscite as soon as Indian troops leave the region. It's just you Indians that are too butt-hurt to hold a plebiscite even when Pakistan was ready to hold one in the state of Junagadh.

plebiscite can only take place if kashmir is united..wat about chinese occupied?