What's new

India Claims that LOC is not international border But indian territory

Status
Not open for further replies.

Centurion2016

BANNED
Joined
Jun 4, 2016
Messages
864
Reaction score
-31
Country
India
Location
United Kingdom
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...art-rathore/story-dAZIthakeew1ElDNkJS49L.html


India has justified the cross border operation today as NOT crossing the Pakistani border suggesting the territory is acvtually indian land held illegally.

India seemns to pushing the Pakistanis fromm all angles

Endangering IWT
claiming the LOC is not the border but indian territory
and carrying out raids into Azad Kashmir on pretext of knocking out launching pads.

This seems a escalation and change in attitude on a maasive scale from restraint to complete confrontation and challenge to pakistan on all fronts
 
It is a muslim majority state that is part of Pakistan

This is why you have a uprising even after 70 years and why Kashmiris throw stones at your soldiers but will pray for ours
 
Haystack claims Modi is a vegetable not a human being.
Does it prove anything? Anyone can claim anything. Indian government and Army is under tremendous pressure from their populace, so now to cool them down they've started a series of lies. It's good for the region actually, now bhartis will stay calm and drift into their lalaland.
 
india also claims that the pigeons or any other bird who fly across the border is a secret agent of Pakistan Army, so should the world accept or believe it ???
 
Last edited:
Bharti jabronis have lost their mind completely
 
Now is the perfect time for Pakistan to drop their nuclear bombs on UP and Bihar.
 
How Indian Deceives the Kashmir's in 1948 and how strong Pakistan Case of Kashmir is if Pakistan take it to International Level

Between the Dominions

The difference between India''s and Pakistan’s approach to J&K can be gathered by their respective constitutions

Adv Asrar Ali
Srinagar, Publish Date: Sep 25 2016 10:26PM | Updated Date: Sep 25 2016 10:26PM


Representational Pic

On the eve of Indian Independence, the British Govt. made it clear that Paramountcy would lapse and whatever rights and privilege comprised paramountcy would revert to the state simultaneously with the coming into existence of the two dominions of India and Pakistan. One important issue remained unresolved:-

Whether the rights of paramountcy reverted to autocratic ruler of the state or to the people of state. This was the first stage when India played dual character, Indian leadership at that point of time was knowing it that most of the princely states have Hindu majority ruled by a Muslim Ruler as a result of which Indian Leadership pleaded vehemently that on departure of the British sovereignty vested in the King should revert to the people of the state. Though Muslim League was initially opposing it but later on compelled by the circumstances did not remain adamant on it as the Jammu & Kashmir was live example before them for doing so. So, undoubtedly the paramountcy rights after independence were reverted back to the people of every princely state as was desired by the Indian leadership, so the question arises that how come Indian leadership in one breath held it right that the people of every princely states shall be provided the rights of paramountcy and on the other hand signed an instrument of accession with the ruler of J&K which was a big hypocrisy on their part.

Very little could be done by Pakistan’s shocked Governor General M. A. Jinah whose army general Douglas Gracy preferred to act on the orders received from Governor General of India Lord Mountbatten. On the other hand the Indian Leadership were continuously hoodwinking the Maharaja Hari Singh and Sheikh Abdullah with false promises and dream of secular India that proved to be a mirage and were busy in creating the circumstances that would constrain the Maharaja to sign an instrument of Accession though for a temporary period and with a certain limitations, but India was sure that once instrument would be signed then India can forcibly retain it. And by playing fraud and deceit which is still continuing till date.

Pakistan’s good faith can be seen from the very beginning when Muslim League was in favour of the rulers of princely states by reverting them the rights of paramountcy which was vehemently denied by Indian leadership. Secondly, the good faith can be witnessed when the Pakistan signed standstill agreement with Maharaja of J&K but India did not.

The difference between India and Pakistan’s intention viz-a-viz J&K can be gathered by their respective constitutions:-

• Article 1 of J&K Constitution narrates that the state of J&K is and shall be an integral part of the union of India.

• Article 5 of J&K Constitution states that the executive and legislative powers of the state do not extend to matters except those with respect to which parliament has power to make laws for the state under the provisions of constitution of India.

While Pakistan have taken a soft stance on the issue. As per the constitution of Pakistan:-

• Article 257 utters that when the people of state of J&K decide to accede to Pakistan, the relationship between Pakistan and the state shall be determined in accordance with the wishes of the people of the state.

• The stance of Pakistan Administered Kashmir is very much close to the reality means that Pakistan have not forced those people to carry forward the will and stance of Pakistan. The constitution of Azad J&K in its preamble enunciates as:

This shows that India is deceitful towards J&K from the very begging and the present leadership of India is carrying forward the same legacy.


Asrar Ali is practices in J&K High Court, Srinagar
 

Attachments

  • kashmir.jpg
    kashmir.jpg
    76.5 KB · Views: 30
  • kashmir.jpg
    kashmir.jpg
    76.5 KB · Views: 36
This is a perfect example of "lene ke dene pada" or "I went for wool and came back shorn"

For almost 45 years India has proposed converting LOC as IB but the wise Generals of Pakistan would not listen...
 
It was freed by Pakistan Army in 1948 from Indian Occupation. Thats why we call it Azad Kashmir. Simple!!!!!:coffee:
Is this what they teach you in text books?
India had not even got into the part which you call Azad Kashmir lol.

Your operations were haulted as soon as India came into theater. You were not able to move further. You had already captured what you call "Azad Kashmir" before India got into theater.
 
Meanwhile
Virendra Sehwag: Boys played really well. :partay:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom