How Kashmir was stolen from Pakistan by Mountbatten

[Screambowl]

Again, distortion and less than stellar logic.

why should India compromise, just to prove some logic right? Why cannot Pakistan compromise and drop the claim. isn't this a simple logic.

Kashmir is Indian because of the Maharaja's accession, not because of some fanciful administration of the main economical zone. As if that is any measure of possession!

Why did Pakistan try to annex it with it's force before the imposition of plebiscite? What is the guarantee that Pakistan would not try to influence Kashmiris to join them again, as they are already influenced. Fate cannot be decided solely any more.

Secondly, favouring an independent Kashmir (either the whole of the erstwhile Kashmir state, or the Vale alone) is a view for the future. In no way does it contradict the facts of the doubly legitimate accession of Kashmir to India, through both the Maharaja's Instrument and the wishes of the political leadership. It is not clear why you are getting confused between the two.

What instrument does Pakistan hold to legitimate its administration of Kashmir(Azad Kashmir, Gilgit- Baltistan, etc) ???

 

[Rig Vedic]

BUt then you would notice how a section of the Muslim society [some names that immediately come to my mind include Owaisi, mj Akbar] holds an attitude that 'they' ruled over this land once upon a time and how 'they' added to India's culture, oversaw one of the biggest economies etc. Well if they are going to take ownership of the 'crests' what is the issue when people try to hoild them accountable for the 'troughs' too ?

This is where the secularist education system has failed. In their eagerness to appease minoritarianism they fail to present the simple historical facts. But distorting history leads to more virulent form of bigotry. I would like the books of savants like Ram Swarup and Sita Ram Goel to be made required reading in schools.

 

[Joe Shearer]

why should India compromise, just to prove some logic right? Why cannot Pakistan compromise and drop the claim. isn't this a simple logic.

No, it isn't simple logic; nobody argued that India should compromise. No such compromise is required to prove logic. Do you have a problem with comprehension of simple English?

There is no question of Pakistan compromising. If you bother to look up the word, You will find that a compromise involves two (or more) parties each giving up some part of its stand, in order to reach a solution. Since Pakistan has no legal standing, and never had one in the first place, talking about compromise is meaningless and misleading and implies that there is some legitimacy in the Pakistani position. There is none. So stop talking about a compromise.

Why did Pakistan try to annex it with it's force before the imposition of plebiscite?

What plebiscite are you talking about? None was imposed, or sought to be imposed.

Pakistan sought to annex Kashmir by force because it thought that was the only way to get Kashmir. What else did you imagine it was?

What is the guarantee that Pakistan would not try to influence Kashmiris to join them again, as they are already influenced.

There is no guarantee. When did it become a crime to influence people in favour of one's own side? Nobody, and nothing stops any move to influence Kashmiris to stay with India. What are you looking for, a pledge by the Pakistanis never to say what they want?

Fate cannot be decided solely any more.

Whatever this means. I am unable to understand who is supposed to decide whose fate, solely.

What instrument does Pakistan hold to legitimate its administration of Kashmir(Azad Kashmir, Gilgit- Baltistan, etc) ???

None whatever. They hold it by right of conquest.

When did this become a mystery to anyone? What is the point, actually?

 

[PAKBARBIE]

However does the instrument of accession legitimize Indian claim over Kashmir. Going by that logic Israeli occupation of Palestine is also justified. The prince obviously did not consider the will of the people before selling out. For those that claim that most Kashmiris r happy to be "Indian" why does india need More than half million troops there. Highest density of troops anywhere in the world. Why wud u call Kashmir an atoot ang of Bharat when u don't even give kashmiris indian passports. Back then yes it made sense for Kashmir to join Pakistan forget all the british red tape it was not their land to begin with. But now I guess we should stop speaking for them and Give them the plebiscite that was promised to them after India occupied the teritory. Whether they choose Pakistan or being independent should be upto them.

 

[danger007]

However does the instrument of accession legitimize Indian claim over Kashmir. Going by that logic Israeli occupation of Palestine is also justified. The prince obviously did not consider the will of the people before selling out. For those that claim that most Kashmiris r happy to be "Indian" why does india need More than half million troops there. Highest density of troops anywhere in the world. Why wud u call Kashmir an atoot ang of Bharat when u don't even give kashmiris indian passports. Back then yes it made sense for Kashmir to join Pakistan forget all the british red tape it was not their land to begin with. But now I guess we should stop speaking for them and Give them the plebiscite that was promised to them after India occupied the teritory. Whether they choose Pakistan or being independent should be upto them.

because of pak adventures like kargil, we deoployed those troops....

 

[MilSpec]

However does the instrument of accession legitimize Indian claim over Kashmir. Going by that logic Israeli occupation of Palestine is also justified. The prince obviously did not consider the will of the people before selling out. For those that claim that most Kashmiris r happy to be "Indian" why does india need More than half million troops there. Highest density of troops anywhere in the world. Why wud u call Kashmir an atoot ang of Bharat when u don't even give kashmiris indian passports. Back then yes it made sense for Kashmir to join Pakistan forget all the british red tape it was not their land to begin with. But now I guess we should stop speaking for them and Give them the plebiscite that was promised to them after India occupied the teritory. Whether they choose Pakistan or being independent should be upto them.

I keep hearing about this militarization of Jammu and kashmir state.

i hope pakistani members do realize that regiments of the army,Ladakh Scouts, J&K Rifles along with J&K light infantry are regiments from this state.

they will be stationed there because of their HQ's and then there is state sponsored terror mechanism so additional deployments have to be made.. so please stop this I billion military present in J&K state.
There will always be a heavier deployment in troubled states

The divisional head quarters of Northern Command which has 7 infantry divisions and with 5 armored divisions along with regimental HQ of J&K Rifles, J&K Light Infantry, all are located in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. So at any given day there will be 50000+ troops in the state.

The active deployments of troop is an outcome of state sponsored terrorism from pakistani establishments, due to which armed forces have to deploy in kashmir. the deployment of army in any place causes the restriction on democratic privileges.

 

[PAKBARBIE]

Kashmiri Stone pelting teenagers r Pakistan sponsored terrorists?

 

[neutral_person]

Kashmiri Stone pelting teenagers r Pakistan sponsored terrorists?

Give it up bro. Even your politicians have admitted to sending Jihadis to Pakistan.

Musharraf stopped it for a bit, but even then there is still funding for them.

 

[seethru]

Kashmiri Stone pelting teenagers r Pakistan sponsored terrorists?

no the people who incite them are.

 

[PAKBARBIE]

no the people who incite them are.

So Indian army is?

Give it up bro. Even your politicians have admitted to sending Jihadis to Pakistan.

Musharraf stopped it for a bit, but even then there is still funding for them.

I am speaking about current status quo there. The resistance to occupation has shifted from a violent one to a peaceful and more of a youth oriented movement. Pak terrorists r not needed to incite anything anymore. The mass graves and human rights violations r enough to get any peaceful youth or Kashmiri to stand up against occupation and for azaadi.

 

[Joe Shearer]

However does the instrument of accession legitimize Indian claim over Kashmir. Going by that logic Israeli occupation of Palestine is also justified. The prince obviously did not consider the will of the people before selling out.

'Selling out'? Do you understand the meaning of sovereign? What did he sell out?

And by what feat of the imagination did you figure out that he did not consider the will of the people? Are you aware that the people had been pressing him to join India? That the leading political organization, the People's Conference, was aligned to the Congress, not to the Muslim League? That the Muslim League was supported by the then Mirwaiz, and that Jinnah despised him?

Instead of allowing your imagination such indulgences, read post #270, particularly paragraphs 3 to 7.

For those that claim that most Kashmiris r happy to be "Indian" why does india need More than half million troops there.

Visit the local public library and look up Operation Gibraltar, also Grand Slam. People put in burglar alarms when they are in a larcenous neighbourhood.

Highest density of troops anywhere in the world.

That's a nice, round figure to roll around one's tongue, but the whole Indian Army numbers 1.1 million persons. Such a figure is possible only by clubbing together the troops on the border, the troops on the Chinese border, armed police, border security police, the state police, in fact, anyone and everyone wearing a uniform, including the postal service.

Why wud u call Kashmir an atoot ang of Bharat when u don't even give kashmiris indian passports.

And where did you get that impression? The only way Kashmiris travel is on Indian passports.

Also, 'atoot ang' and crap like that is language used by a section of the Indian political spectrum. Sometimes I read appeals by rational, logical Pakistanis not to be labelled or classified according to the language used by Zaid Hamid. So now you know it's an erratic fringe that uses this term, and you also know how representative it is.

Back then yes it made sense for Kashmir to join Pakistan forget all the british red tape it was not their land to begin with. But now I guess we should stop speaking for them and Give them the plebiscite that was promised to them after India occupied the teritory. Whether they choose Pakistan or being independent should be upto them.

For that to happen, you need to comply with the UN resolution, also printed at post number 270.

Read it.

 

[seethru]

So Indian army is?

security, law and order of the areas hit by miscreants in valley and of course watching the Border and infiltration of People(brainwashed Youth) form P O K.

 

[MilSpec]

Kashmiri Stone pelting teenagers r Pakistan sponsored terrorists?

Please look at the timeline of militancy in kashmir and understand the need for deployment.

 

[Screambowl]

No, it isn't simple logic; nobody argued that India should compromise. No such compromise is required to prove logic. Do you have a problem with comprehension of simple English?

There is no question of Pakistan compromising. If you bother to look up the word, You will find that a compromise involves two (or more) parties each giving up some part of its stand, in order to reach a solution. Since Pakistan has no legal standing, and never had one in the first place, talking about compromise is meaningless and misleading and implies that there is some legitimacy in the Pakistani position. There is none. So stop talking about a compromise.

Pakistan has to compromise and accept LOC as IB or move back.

What plebiscite are you talking about? None was imposed, or sought to be imposed.


Pakistan sought to annex Kashmir by force because it thought that was the only way to get Kashmir. What else did you imagine it was?

this is what you wrote >>> "Kashmir is Indian because of the Maharaja's accession, not because of some fanciful administration of the main economical zone. As if that is any measure of possession!"

so Maharaja should have not annexed it to India?? Your tone seems to be very unhappy about it. Instead according to you Plebiscite should be imposed right?

There is no guarantee. When did it become a crime to influence people in favour of one's own side? Nobody, and nothing stops any move to influence Kashmiris to stay with India. What are you looking for, a pledge by the Pakistanis never to say what they want?

Influencing means to interfere and brainwash people against a Nation, which is indeed a crime. Seems like you do support Pakistan influencing Kashmiris. Are you a Pakistani, or Pro Pakistani?

None whatever. They hold it by right of conquest.

kindly tell me in which book of world this right of conquest is written? If you steal some one's wife, does she belong to the stealer? lol ... do not quote crap.
So if Ravana had stolen Sita, Ram had no right on her, she became Ravana's wife???

man you speak utter rubbish.

 

[Joe Shearer]

So Indian army is?

This sort of wit and word play is entertaining when used to lighten things after a Complex piece of writing. Not when used to cover up an embarrassing mistake.

No, it isn't simple logic; nobody argued that India should compromise. No such compromise is required to prove logic. Do you have a problem with comprehension of simple English?

There is no question of Pakistan compromising. If you bother to look up the word, You will find that a compromise involves two (or more) parties each giving up some part of its stand, in order to reach a solution. Since Pakistan has no legal standing, and never had one in the first place, talking about compromise is meaningless and misleading and implies that there is some legitimacy in the Pakistani position. There is none. So stop talking about a compromise.

Pakistan has to compromise and accept LOC as IB or move back.

I suggest you get someone to explain to you what I wrote, since you seem not to be able to follow.