New word of the day for you to learn, the definition of "invade".
When a sovereign sends a plea of help to his neighbors (which btw is his right and only his as per the rules of partition), its NOT considered an invasion but more an invitation.
The same way the population of kashmir "invited" the tribals to help them in there fight for "freedom" against a "brutal dictator".
We can hung up over the wording but its a bit pointless........you will see the indian army as "liberators" and i will see them as "occupiers".
Either we both start using neutral wording or we both keep correcting each other.
I have provided in my previous post to DesertFighter the quote from Tariq Ali that clearly states that the invasion of the tribals preceeded the patiala troops' entry into Kashmir. Please go through that before commenting.
I have quoted in my previous post that col ved prakash clearly states in book
Terrorism in Northern India: Jammu and Kashmir and the Punjab - Ved Prakash - Google Books
which clearly states that the Patiala soliders had "secured" the airport on the 17th of october while by all accounts the the tribals did cross over until the 22nd of october.
Sardar vallabhbhai patel correspondents also show that the indian govt had already laid the foundation for the planned invasion of kashmir by india well before any tribal invasion or the maharaja asking for help.
In addition, it is by the sovereign of the state of Kashmir that the troops came to the airport, NOT uninvited like the barbarians who you here are defending.
Well the invasion by the barbaric indian forces to help the continued massacres of muslim Kashmir by the maharajas goons had to be counted which the people kashmir did with the help of pakistan.
Indian logic.......... the dogra dictator can get outside help but the resistance cant do the same?
And if you are going to go the route of the "people" supporting the tribal invasion, then i would like to mention the overwhelming evidence available that states that the locals resisted the looters and rapists and were behind their leader Mr. Abdullah who supported the Indian Congress and joining the Indian state.
Reference for the above:
Aatish-e-Chinar by Sheikh Mohammed Abdullah, and My Life and Times, by Syed Mir Qasim, for the 1948 killings and the resistance by ordinary Kashmiris. in addition to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.
I hope the books also mention pre 47 events like
On November 5 and 6, 1947, more than 100 lories, loaded with women, children and old men were taken into the wilderness of Kuthua forests. Hindu extremists and armed gangs were let loose on these innocent people and an unparallel butchery was perpetrated,
British daily The London Times quoting its special correspondent in India stated that the Maharaja, under his own supervision, got assassinated 2,37,000 Muslims, using military forces in the Jammu area.
The editor of Statesman, Ian Stephen, in his book Horned Moon writes that till the end of autumn 1947, more than 200,000 Muslims were murdered in one go. Horace Alexander wrote in the Spectator (16 January 1948) that the killings had the tacit consent of State authority and put the figure at 2,00,000.
Times of London reported the events in Jammu with such a front page headlines: Elimination of Muslims from Jammu, and pointed out that Maharaja Hari Singh was in person commanding all the forces which were ethnically cleansing the Muslims.
Daily Telegraph of London dated 12 January 1948
The other aspect of the carnage was appropriation of properties of Muslims. The Muslim names were immediately erased to conform to new ownership. For instance Urdu Bazar became Rajinder Bazar and Islamia School became Hari Singh High School to conform to the new ownership. Almost 95 percent of left-over properties, which should have in the normal course been taken over by the State government were allowed appropriated by looters and rioters
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was so disgusted with the carnage that on two occasions (27 November and 25 December, 1947), he made mention of it in following words:
The Hindus and Sikhs of Jammu and those who had gone there from outside (referring to RSS goons from Gurdaspur and surrounding areas) killed Muslims there. Their women have been dishonored. This has not been fully reported in the newspapers. The Maharaja of Kashmir is responsible for what has happened there (Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, volume 90, page 115 and 298).
Not actually seen the above quote before so i dont use it.......if you want you can research it and tell us all on this forum if its a true quote or a false one.......you have even got the page numbers
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, volume 90, page 115 and 298
Quoted by Rajendera Sareen in his book Pakistan: The India factor, New Delhi, 1948, p-221) Government of India in order to justify their invasion on State of Jammu Kashmir launched a propaganda that there was no Poonch rebellion but that 1,00,000 ferocious Tribesman had invaded Kashmir at the instigation of Pakistan Government who looted and killed everyone coming in their way; and that they had been imparted training and supplied transport facilities by Pakistan Army.
[/quote]
Good, so you admit that your figures are hogwash....no need to waste time on that from my side.
So must also agree that the half million hindu kashmiri pandit refugee number is also hogwash?
United Nations Commission on Human Rights reports that there are roughly 1.5 million refugees
Refworld | Freedom in the World 2008 - Kashmir [Pakistan]
The 1947 carnage left several Muslim majority populated villages in Jammu district alone totally Hindu or Sikh populated. In Jammu district alone, which is a part of the larger Jammu province, Muslims numbered 158,630 and comprised 37 per cent of the total population of 428,719 in the year 1941. In the year 1961, Muslims numbered only 51,693 and comprised only 10 per cent of the total population of 516,932. The decrease in the number of Muslims in Jammu district alone was over 100,000. That there was a design to change the demographics.
Lastly, you being Kashmiri (based on the your previous comments on PDF) I would expect you to know the basics that the Kashmiri movement was never religiously motivated. Kashmir wanted to be a secular state post the maharajas rule much like India and hence was more closely aligned to the Indian state than Pakistan. The religious flavor to the Kashmiri movement has been a Pakistani masala (something that has actually hurt the Kashmiri cause more than helped it). So when you try to add a religious undertone to this conflict, you lose the sympathy of many world over.( to Indians and Pakistanis like yourself)
You are correct when say that the kashmir freedom struggle started as a secular movement and then post 1990 turned into a more religious oriented group with pakistan help.
You fail to mention the govt crackdown and massive rigging and killings what took place before the 90s which led to the kashmiris into pakistans arms.
