Attack on CRPF bus in occupied J&K, 8 jawans killed; 2 freedom fighters shot dead

[SrNair]

I served during Kargil and i know more than what published.

@MastanKhan Khan also serviced in Kargil war If I am not wrong and had read a lots of valuable info in his post.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Every terrorist everywhere in the world need to killed in the most inhumane way possible.

Their deaths must be celebrated in the most elaborate way as possible. In fact I would suggest feeding of these terrorist dead bodied to pigs, shoot a video of it and send the video these terrorist groups orgs..

The fact is.. these vermin target innocent citizens all over the world, kill these innocents brutally and celebrate the deaths in macabre fashion.
Look at what these guys have done to Yezdi woman.

Anyone who says after death, these terrorists need to be accorded respect since they have a "cause" need to seriously introspect.
There is no "cause" that justifies the crippling fear these terrorist cause to innocents and anyone even sympathizing these scum after they die are.........

I felt it was my duty to say what I said. It is for you, each of you, individually to ponder over that and decide where you stand. I will not enforce it with negative ratings, or recognise good judgement shown with positive ratings.

And the armed forces in Kashmir targeting,killing etc innocent civilians should also be considered terrorists. Then, as per you, their deaths should be celebrated. Both sides have their own story to tell. It is better you keep quite.

With the greatest respect, I do not think that the dead should be insulted. I think that in the case of Kashmir, especially, if a native of Kashmir is found fighting with arms against the troops, he should be shot, and the remains disposed of, in a decent manner. If an outsider, the same should apply. We don't have anything to prove by insulting them. Their words and deeds will be judged by a higher judge, if at all; we can no longer do anything. Not by using coarse words, anyway.

 

[haviZsultan]

Two things - I am personally committed to struggle to ensure that Muslims - and Christians, and Sikhs, and Buddhists, and the Dalit, and tribals - live in India as absolutely equal citizens, with constitutional protections like the Dalit, if necessary, and that they are actively protected (the corollary being that I would condemn irresponsible behaviour just as readily, irresponsible behaviour such as the shameful riot in Mumbai during an agitation in support of the Rohingyas, the various agitations against Taslima Nasreen, who was herself not accorded the protection and the liberty of free speech that is a matter of such concern to Muslims).

The second is that I quite understand your sentiments about adhering to Pakistan, I understand the feelings of those Muslims who think of themselves as part of the Ummah, but while respecting your inner faith and belief, I insist that there should be a voluntary and a complete acceptance of and loyalty to the constitution. Supporting Pakistan is absolutely not acceptable, not while remaining an Indian citizen. So for those who are loyal to the constitution and to the rule of law, I would defend furiously their complete equality with all others; for those who are unable to be loyal from their hearts, they must go.

I am glad about your commitment to fight for Muslim rights in the region. But there are genuine reasons for muslims loyalty to Pakistan. The reality is none of us should not have to leave our land. We only do it because of severe oppression. Perhaps removing these oppressive policies may help in restoring faith in India as a whole. I have immense respect for Gandhi as he truly believed in Hindu Muslim unity. Even Jinnah did not want to break India at first (read jaswant singhs book) and even later vouched for the protection of minorities.

But it is unfair to ask the person to leave his land while creating an environment that forces the person to leave the land. This is what is being done. Our own land is being taken from us. A small example is the land taken during partition riots by Hindus still hasn't been returned. No muslim is a fool not to realize what seperatism brings with it. The problems for them become so severe that they have to vouch for independence, or merger with Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I am glad about your commitment to fight for Muslim rights in the region. But there are genuine reasons for muslims loyalty to Pakistan. The reality is none of us should not have to leave our land. We only do it because of severe oppression. Perhaps removing these oppressive policies may help in restoring faith in India as a whole. I have immense respect for Gandhi as he truly believed in Hindu Muslim unity. Even Jinnah did not want to break India at first (read jaswant singhs book) and even later vouched for the protection of minorities.

But it is unfair to ask the person to leave his land while creating an environment that forces the person to leave the land. This is what is being done. Our own land is being taken from us. A small example is the land taken during partition riots by Hindus still hasn't been returned. No muslim is a fool not to realize what seperatism brings with it. The problems for them become so severe that they have to vouch for independence, or merger with Pakistan.

I completely agree.

However, on a connected point that you raised: when you talk about the land taken during partition riots by Hindus, whom should it be returned to? What did you have in mind?

 

[SQ8]

I completely agree.

However, on a connected point that you raised: when you talk about the land taken during partition riots by Hindus, whom should it be returned to? What did you have in mind?

I see no sense in returning any land since it was meaningless the day the partition happened. Only the supposed "sons of the soil" still kept what they had; a lot of migrants lost , although some made a comeback.

The saddest bit of partition and moreover the death of the original generations meant that India is becoming more polarised communally and we are seeing the death of "Allah tero naam, Ishwar tero naam". Incidents like this are only speeding it up.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I see no sense in returning any land since it was meaningless the day the partition happened. Only the supposed "sons of the soil" still kept what they had; a lot of migrants lost , although some made a comeback.

The saddest bit of partition and moreover the death of the original generations meant that India is becoming more polarised communally and we are seeing the death of "Allah tero naam, Ishwar tero naam". Incidents like this are only speeding it up.

Bangladesh has handled it rather well. I understand that a lot of property left behind by Pakistani (later) owners has been recovered through legal action. This was a fact for the Fancy family, and the person who told me this said that they were entirely satisfied with the results of their litigation.

In India, the position is that there was no effort made at sorting out the ownership of property owned by Pakistani nationals, who had left their homes and settled in either East or West Pakistan in 1947. It was only in 1965, when there was an actual war fought between the two nations (in Indian eyes, 1947-48 did not really count as a war, and there was not much hostility towards Pakistan as there was after 1965), that the Enemy Properties Act was passed.

I thought @haviZsultan was referring to this act. While Pakistan has sought to acquire Jinnah House in Mumbai, the (Indian) son of Jinnah's friend, the Raja of Mahmudabad, has recovered his property from the Custodian.

 

[Pakistani E]

I have very strong feelings about Kashmir, primarily because of shared heritage, but even I on principle do not believe in insulting uniformed men fighting for their country and paying the ultimate price. I think this Kashmir business has gone too far, both countries need to understand that force will not solve anything, better to come and sit around the table and formulate a middle ground instead of sticking to our respective guns while the populace is caught in the cross fire and we spend billions of precious resources on tools of destruction.

The Indians need to understand that Kashmiris have been trying to get rid of the occupation yolk from centuries. It is nothing personal against India, India needs to respect the wishes of the people, just like Pakistani establishment needs to understand that sending religiously crazed people in to Kashmir will alienate more people. Kashmiris were never before religiously extremist to such an extent to drive out Hindu Pandits from their historical lands.

For me, Kashmiri Pandits/brahmins are my Kashmiri brothers and they should be allowed to return, but frankly I don't believe that the Indian government is even sincere in its efforts to placate the Kashmiri concerns. What you decided in 1947 with a tyrant is history as far as the Kashmiris are concerned, it is irrelevant what one Maharaja decided on paper with another occupying force decades ago. What matters now is that their concerns about self determination is respected. Every nation has the right to self determination, countries that seek to forcefully keep regions such as these will continue to hear news such as the one mentioned in OP.