Kashmir all-party meet: Modi discusses atrocities in Azad Kashmir, Balochistan

[Joe Shearer]

And Sir U shud take out a pinch of humanity if left in India and tell me wasnt that a startling truth I posted about? For love of humanity plz stop this tendency of always nodding head sideways on everything. So how about U award me a negative rating on this very post? U think I care about publicity?



Sir U ve totally disregarded the post of your countrymen that compelled me say so. Sorry Sir I dont need any award from anyone as I am what I am and m proud of it. Have U ever seen me spewing venom against Hindus bcz of their Religion?

I have corrected myself on the post where you were right in pointing out that I was harsh and lacked understanding.

However, on the first, I wish you had not posted what you did. I will delete the remark I made, as it is clear from these two posts that you have good intentions, but I continue to regret that post.

 

[MilSpec]

No thanks, I will keep out.

Sir - exquisite.

No other words to describe it will do justice.

@MilSpec @PARIKRAMA @scorpionx @nair

I tag you, gentlemen, to beseech you to give due credit to this exquisite post. A great summation worthy of a statement in any court of law. I, unfortunately, am bereft of the power to green. May I seek your indulgence?



I tag you all for a very informative post at #688. If you want the whole text please let know as some of the members may have earned the love of @Joe Shearer and may be excluded from the said love till further notice:

@ranjeet (you first, he simply loves you and windy)

@Stephen Cohen (you are ignored by @Joe Shearer hence I want you to read this post of his) @adil_minhas (for you too Adil) @Dash (the imperfect Indian bangs it up quite well eh?) @Levina @banvanaxl @OrionHunter @Rain Man @SrNair @cerberus @Soumitra @madokafc @Ankit Kumar 002 @Abingdonboy @Syama Ayas @jbgt90

@Star Wars @third eye @gslv @gslv mk3 @punit @Nair saab @Śakra

@PaklovesTurkiye (I know you enjoy his posts, so tagging you irrespective of your loyalties.)
@LadyFinger (this was the gentleman I told you the first time to interact with, He riles up both Indian and Pakistani members; but is dead straight on facts, howsoever unpleasant)

PS: others too who I may have forgotten to mention. My apologies, the RAM is low(absent) in this 8088 computer (me)

 

[M. Sarmad]

3.

Yikes. Under Chapter VI? Now you are tickling me. Stop

.

India is bound by word and deed to leave the future of Kashmir to the will of its people


1) UN maintains that "NO SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION CAN BE DESCRIBED AS UNENFORCEABLE."


2) There always has been a general inability of the Permanent Five to agree upon imaginative and expansive applications of Chapter VI ... In Somalia, the Security Council deployed the UN's first operation, UNOSOM I, in mid-1992 to separate warring combatants and help delivery of humanitarian relief ....

UNOSOM I entered and operated without invoking Chapter VII

Further Reading: http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/6/1/1305.pdf



3) India approached UN under Chapter VI of the UN charter , BUT the decision taken by UN reflected that its resolutions were not based exclusively on this chapter .... The resolutions , apart from chapter VI , are based upon other chapters , including chapter VII

The fact that there does not exist any provision for the deputing of UN peace keeping mission under chapter VI makes it obvious that UN resolutions were not exclusively based on chapter VI .... The interim measures which included cease fire and deputation of United Nations Military Observer Group were based on Article 40 of chapter VII ...

Besides chapter VI and VII , UN resolutions are based on other chapters also(i.e Article 1 , Chapter I (2) and Article 55 , Chapter IX) ...

^^ And this is not my personal opinion. That is Rosalyn Higgins' opinion on 'Kashmir Resolutions and under which chapter they were passed' .. Source: 'Higgins, Rosalyn. United Nations Peace Keeping 1946-67: Documents and Commentary. London, UK: Oxford University Press, 1970. (349-51)

(Rosalyn Higgins is an expert on International Law; a Doctor of Juridical Science. She has served as a Judge in the International Court of Justice for fourteen years (and was elected President in 2006). Her competence has been recognised by many academic institutions, having received at least thirteen honorary doctorates)




4) While a recommendation under Chapter VI by itself "may not" be binding, this is not the case in the Kashmir dispute. Here, the parties have consented to be bound by the resolutions of 13 August and 5 January. (13 M. WHITEMAN, DIGEST OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 360 (1968).



5) The UNSC Resolutions endorsed a binding agreement between India and Pakistan reached through the mediation of UNCIP, that a plebiscite would be held, under agreed and specified conditions. A letter dated December 23, 1948, from India's Secretary-General of the Ministry of External Affairs to the Representative of UNCIP, stated that the Indian Prime Minister's acceptance of the 5 January resolution was conditioned on Pakistan's acceptance of the resolution. By this letter, India consented to be bound by the resolution of 5 January and, through this, the resolution of 13 August as well. (Aide Memoire No. 1, Letter Dated 23 December 1948 From the Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations of the Government of India to Mr. Alfredo Lozano, Representative of UNCIP at 23, U.N. Doc. S/1196 (1949)




6) Self-Determination as a Binding Rule of International Law

Four instances may inform the principle of self-determination with a legal dimension.

(i) The principle of self-determination is binding upon the parties, whether they have adopted it as the basis or as a criterion for the settlement of a particular issue or dispute. In the peace treaties after World War I, and in the cases of Kashmir (after 1948), the Saar Territory (1955), and Algeria’s struggle for independence, the principle of self-determination was chosen as a basis for negotiation, and in the Agreement on Ending War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam (1973) the parties expressly recognized the South Vietnamese people’s right to self-determination.


http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e873





7) The binding nature of these UN resolutions (as acknowledged by Indian officials)



Finally some quotes from Indian officials on Kashmir exemplifying their commitment to plebiscite rather than forced accession as history has found them do :-

We adhere strictly to our pledge of plebiscite in Kashmir; a pledge made to the people because they believe in democratic government; We don't regard Kashmir as a commodity to be trafficked in -Krishna Menon (Press statement in London, reported in the Statesman, New Delhi, 2nd August, 1951)

The Government of India not only reaffirms its acceptance of the principle that the question of the continuing accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations, but is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a plebiscite should be created as quickly as possible -Letter from Govt. of India to UN Representative for India and Pakistan, 11th September, 1951

I want to say for the purpose of the record that there is nothing that has been said on behalf of the Government of India which in the slightest degree indicates that the Government of India or the Union of India will dishonour any international obligations it has undertaken.
-Krishna Menon (Statement at UN Security Council, 24th January, 1957)

The resolutions of January 17, 1948 and the resolutions of the UNICP, the assurances given, these are all resolutions which carry a greater weight; that is because we have accepted them, we are parties to them, whether we like them or not. -Krishna Menon, (Statement at UN Security Council, 20th February, 1957)

These documents (UNCIP reports) and declarations and the resolutions of the Security Council are decisions; they are resolutions, there has been some resolving of a question of one character or another, there has been a meeting of minds on this question where we have committed ourselves to it. -Krishna Menon, (Statement at the Security Council, 9th October, 1957)


India believes that sovereignty rests in the people and should return to them. -Krishna Menon, (The Statesman, Delhi, 19th January, 1962)

 

[DesiGuy1403]

As i told @scorpionx we should stop being hypocrites - if we are genuinely altruistic and kindred souls then conduct a referendum even if it is only in our part of Kashmir and then respect the wishes of people for once and for all. Why the hesitation? But if we believe Kashmir is an integral part of India then so be it - do away with Article 370, change the demographics, decimate the dissent - so what if rivers of blood is spilled

Hmmm...
Interesting. There are scores of Hindus who feel the need for a Hindu only country. Imagine if a few lakhs of these (RSS has crores) were to take up arms and start genocide of minorities(Parallel to Kashmiri pandits) all over India, would you be willing to concede their demand for a referendum for a Hindu nation?
What about the hypothetical terrorism, rape, genocide and general mayhem these Hindus committed in guise of a Hindu nation?
What about the displaced minorities due to these Hindus?
Do you think any normal sane Hindu anywhere would be able to freely express himself if there are lakhs of Hindus killing anyone who oppose their idea of a Hindu nation?

Imagine all this happens not under BJP rule but under Cong rule fully backed by RSS & BJP...

Me, I personally would tell which ever govt is in power to thrash these terrorist Hindus and restore the law of the land...
Hypothetically of course.

 

[Hellfire]

@Azlan Haider Ignored your post of UN. You are making me loose interest.

Three Qs before I bugger off:

1. Where exactly has Pakistan signed any agreement wherein the Kashmiri's have a right to self determination? Where is the reference to it in any of the UN resolutions?

2. Why did Pakistan accept the IB opposite Jammu-Katra-Sambha-RS-Pura? Why CFL from Manawar in 1949 thereby acknowledging the territories as Indian?

3. If you claim the Briggs statement as valid, why are you cribbing about us holding Valley when there was supposedly a loss of control by Maharaja as per you? On one hand you have used it to justify Gilgit, yet refuse the same in Valley?

Sir. Kindly post facts. Don't obfuscate.

If you want the whole principalities of P0K to be now challenged, the necessary steps will be taken by GoI at appropriate time.

You see, historically you have kept up a pretence of fighting for Kashmirir azadi yet at no point have you signed any document internationally for it. You, sir, and Pakistan, has been misrepresenting facts. That is all.

I find that ticklish. But somehow, that is now fading. A phenomenon associated with single nerve impulse.

Your whole position is bereft of any fact except for using it at one point and stating a diametrically opposite point subsequently. And blatantly refusing to acknowled it by laying the onus on others ability to comprehend. The art of communication dictates clarity as a mandatory requisite for the speaker to convey the message. Here, there is garbling of the same. Beautifully researched facts and points, yet gibberish if read contextually and as a whole.

Answer the questions I have asked specifically, don't side step, if you will.

 

[M. Sarmad]

@Azlan Haider Ignored your post of UN. You are making me loose interest.

Why Ignored it mate, read it and try to understand it.

Anyway, I have no interest in discussing anything with you or @Joe Shearer anymore

No need to tag/quote me

Good Day

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

Sir you misunderstand. A barb from a Pakistani musalman is the biggest form of honour for an Indian musalman. It reaffirms his faith in Allah. That he remains a good musalman. And never mutated into the type of musalman who butchers innocent musalmans in the name of politics, greed, sect and tribe. Do not feel bad for us sir. We feel bad for them. Cause we see in them the depths that can so easily be plumbed.
@PaklovesTurkiye @Areesh

Sir...ap dil pe lay gaye...Ab thandey hojaien.

Huh?
What the hell was that about?

You are one of my favourites from the new crowd. It's another thing that the others are mostly unspeakable louts. What did I do this time?
.

Hahaha....Sir, u did nothing. Its just me and my madness. Your way of talking makes me loose my confidence, don't know why. I may feel shy from you because you, along with hell fire are elders/very senior persons/members from across the border, knowing too much about which I don't have a slightest clue. Or may be I fell shy because I or we (young lads) can't operate freely on forum, when seniors, on top of hill, pointing their snipers towards us (So many senior professionals on thread at same time, ready to pick u up at any moment). I just can't feel relaxed and do trolling easily in front of so many senior members present on thread. Obviously not your and other gentlemen's fault.

I again, say, I m not blaming you or hellfire....Its just me and my self made feelings and madness.

Now again an antithetical point.

We also say the same. Good luck with that.

Anyways, I am curious, can you point out to me any place where Pakistan has signed a document allowing Kashmiris a right to self determination?

I couldn't find any. They signed all documents pertaining to question of accession either to India or Pakistan. And the dumb buggers in valley have no clue that they are up a creek of excreta without a paddle.

Yet I find Pakistanis here championing their right to independence .....

@PaklovesTurkiye your comment on last two lines?

Honestly speaking, Meray tou sar k upper se guzar raha hai sab. Never knew up til recently that Kashmir is that complex issue. I feel we are trapped.

 

[Joe Shearer]

India is bound by word and deed to leave the future of Kashmir to the will of its people


1) UN maintains that "NO SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION CAN BE DESCRIBED AS UNENFORCEABLE."

The UN cannot expand its powers beyond its own charter. There are legal precedents. As I am running a fever and a sore throat, I will have to do this slowly.

2)

There always has been a general inability of the Permanent Five to agree upon imaginative and expansive applications of Chapter VI ... In Somalia, the Security Council deployed the UN's first operation, UNOSOM I, in mid-1992 to separate warring combatants and help delivery of humanitarian relief ....

UNOSOM I entered and operated without invoking Chapter VII

Further Reading: http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/6/1/1305.pdf

Your argument is that if the UN can actually physically step in and arrange matters to its liking in a case like Somalia, it could have actually physically stepped in and arranged matters to its liking in a case like Kashmir.

The problem with this is two-fold:

1. Kashmir was not then, and is not now, Somalia. Parts of Karachi may be; most of Waziristan was. Not any part of India. The possibility of a recommendation being converted into an action is absent here.
2. Your whole argument has a pre-installed leak, as it were. Please see below.

3)

India approached UN under Chapter VI of the UN charter , BUT the decision taken by UN reflected that its resolutions were not based exclusively on this chapter .... The resolutions , apart from chapter VI , are based upon other chapters , including chapter VII

The fact that there does not exist any provision for the deputing of UN peace keeping mission under chapter VI makes it obvious that UN resolutions were not exclusively based on chapter VI .... The interim measures which included cease fire and deputation of United Nations Military Observer Group were based on Article 40 of chapter VII ...

On the contrary, they continued to be Chapter VI, until separately moved. Nothing can be implied about a resolution in retrospect. It is what the Security Council declares it is.

Besides chapter VI and VII , UN resolutions are based on other chapters also(i.e Article 1 , Chapter I (2) and Article 55 , Chapter IX) ...

^^ And this is not my personal opinion. That is Rosalyn Higgins' opinion on 'Kashmir Resolutions and under which chapter they were passed' .. Source: 'Higgins, Rosalyn. United Nations Peace Keeping 1946-67: Documents and Commentary. London, UK: Oxford University Press, 1970. (349-51)

(Rosalyn Higgins is an expert on International Law; a Doctor of Juridical Science. She has served as a Judge in the International Court of Justice for fourteen years (and was elected President in 2006). Her competence has been recognised by many academic institutions, having received at least thirteen honorary doctorates)

I am familiar with the work of Professor Higgins. You should know that her attempt was to bring into good order certain anomalous actions and situations between what the UN did and what it could do. Therefore she took the view that certain actions would be consistent with the charter IF and ONLY IF they were considered to have been taken under other articles and other chapters of the charter.

In effect, you leave part of your property to your son, and make no specific provision for your daughter. Your daughter will inherit a portion, provided that the law is read to mean that whatever is granted by a will is intact, and as for the rest, the law of dying intestate applicable for that community applies. Unless the law of intestate demise is considered, the executor will not be able to uphold his decision.

So the UN may have done things beyond its intentions, in a manner drawing on its own powers as described in more than one place. That can be justified only by assuming that it may be legal only if it is assumed that the UN knew the importance of other clauses and depended on it. To have to admit that the UN acted beyond its powers and beyond its authority would then cast the whole steaming mess back into the stew-pots.

4)

While a recommendation under Chapter VI by itself "may not" be binding, this is not the case in the Kashmir dispute. Here, the parties have consented to be bound by the resolutions of 13 August and 5 January. (13 M. WHITEMAN, DIGEST OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 360 (1968).



5) The UNSC Resolutions endorsed a binding agreement between India and Pakistan reached through the mediation of UNCIP, that a plebiscite would be held, under agreed and specified conditions. A letter dated December 23, 1948, from India's Secretary-General of the Ministry of External Affairs to the Representative of UNCIP, stated that the Indian Prime Minister's acceptance of the 5 January resolution was conditioned on Pakistan's acceptance of the resolution. By this letter, India consented to be bound by the resolution of 5 January and, through this, the resolution of 13 August as well. (Aide Memoire No. 1, Letter Dated 23 December 1948 From the Secretary General of the Ministry of External Affairs and Commonwealth Relations of the Government of India to Mr. Alfredo Lozano, Representative of UNCIP at 23, U.N. Doc. S/1196 (1949)

And guess what Pakistan did?

[ /quote]

More later
_________________________________________________________________________________________
6) Self-Determination as a Binding Rule of International Law

Four instances may inform the principle of self-determination with a legal dimension.

(i) The principle of self-determination is binding upon the parties, whether they have adopted it as the basis or as a criterion for the settlement of a particular issue or dispute. In the peace treaties after World War I, and in the cases of Kashmir (after 1948), the Saar Territory (1955), and Algeria’s struggle for independence, the principle of self-determination was chosen as a basis for negotiation, and in the Agreement on Ending War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam (1973) the parties expressly recognized the South Vietnamese people’s right to self-determination.


http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e873





7) The binding nature of these UN resolutions (as acknowledged by Indian officials)



Finally some quotes from Indian officials on Kashmir exemplifying their commitment to plebiscite rather than forced accession as history has found them do :-

We adhere strictly to our pledge of plebiscite in Kashmir; a pledge made to the people because they believe in democratic government; We don't regard Kashmir as a commodity to be trafficked in -Krishna Menon (Press statement in London, reported in the Statesman, New Delhi, 2nd August, 1951)

The Government of India not only reaffirms its acceptance of the principle that the question of the continuing accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir to India shall be decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations, but is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a plebiscite should be created as quickly as possible -Letter from Govt. of India to UN Representative for India and Pakistan, 11th September, 1951

I want to say for the purpose of the record that there is nothing that has been said on behalf of the Government of India which in the slightest degree indicates that the Government of India or the Union of India will dishonour any international obligations it has undertaken.
-Krishna Menon (Statement at UN Security Council, 24th January, 1957)

The resolutions of January 17, 1948 and the resolutions of the UNICP, the assurances given, these are all resolutions which carry a greater weight; that is because we have accepted them, we are parties to them, whether we like them or not. -Krishna Menon, (Statement at UN Security Council, 20th February, 1957)

These documents (UNCIP reports) and declarations and the resolutions of the Security Council are decisions; they are resolutions, there has been some resolving of a question of one character or another, there has been a meeting of minds on this question where we have committed ourselves to it. -Krishna Menon, (Statement at the Security Council, 9th October, 1957)


India believes that sovereignty rests in the people and should return to them. -Krishna Menon, (The Statesman, Delhi, 19th January, 1962)[/QUOTE]

 

[shah1398]

However, on the first, I wish you had not posted what you did.

Yes Sir I was wrong on that and I admit that. I tender my apology for that.

 

[Hellfire]

Honestly speaking, Meray tou sar k upper se guzar raha hai sab. Never knew up til recently that Kashmir is that complex issue. I feel we are trapped.

See, notwithstanding rhetoric and rants from either side, read. and study to collate. You have to understand and think.

There is absolutely nowhere where Pakistan has signed any agreement with India or UN where the Kashmiris have been given a right of self determination.

If you do find any international undertaking or agreement , let know. My concern remains against using the Kashmiris as pawns. It is, at the end an ideological battle. For Pakistan, a justification of two nation theory (Two States of Chetan Bhagat if you may have a tickle) and for India, a rejection of it.

We do have a larger muslim population in sheer numbers than Pakistan, you should be aware. That, is something which severely undermines the Pakistani ideological state, challenging the philosophy. So the contention.

In between, the price is being paid by Kashmiris. Pakistan stops interfering, maintains status quo, we get time to actually address the basic issues of people - food, shelter, job, security and peace, and Kashmir will quieten down. That, is not being allowed. And this time, the Pakistani policy makers have pushed India too far. What I have been saying for weeks now, of spread of conflict to Pakistan, is going to fructify. I had been warning Baluchistan will be tagged.

Now, I tell you, next step is our hardening of stand only on discussing P0K, I am told already happened. As an entity or as principalities. Also we will challenge the Baluchistani Accession, challenge NWFP, Sindh to follow. In short, we will hit you all over as a state policy - while telling you clearly that it is in response to your actions in Kashmir, and you know, no one will help you, not anyone including Chinese (they wont go to war over you). The same will continue till you back out, or you break.

There is now a question of Indian societal security. We can not afford a simmering Kashmir becoming a rallying point for ISIS converts in Indian society and allow that to rip our society. Your society pays the price, wont matter to us. It's a question of national survival for us now.


You see, our patience has been tested. We will escalate disproportionally. And at the end of the day, the dumbos armed to teeth in your nation need money ...we have loads to spare. We can literally throw billions of dollars and not blink. I, merely am, stating the next few steps as I predict will unfold. (Maybe wrong, but usually am not)

But this line will only further impose hardships on the mass in sub-continent as the cycle of violence is and will be never ending.

I suggest you read. You have an open mind. You will realise, the gravity of situation

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

See, notwithstanding rhetoric and rants from either side, read. and study to collate. You have to understand and think.

There is absolutely nowhere where Pakistan has signed any agreement with India or UN where the Kashmiris have been given a right of self determination.

If you do find any international undertaking or agreement , let know. My concern remains against using the Kashmiris as pawns. It is, at the end an ideological battle. For Pakistan, a justification of two nation theory (Two States of Chetan Bhagat if you may have a tickle) and for India, a rejection of it.

I know Kashmir is hell complex issue. We fought wars over Kashmir with you. We are attached with them in every manner unlike you. Pakistan may have caused damage to its Kashmir cause due to idiotic policy, i agree with it too to some extent but we never ever believed Kashmiris as pawns through whom we can needle India. Pakistan, since years have not been supporting Kashmir militarily just like it is used to in 1990s. Not to mention and forget, current unrest is due to India's killing of Burhan Wani, who was educated guy and with decent background. No? Correct me if i m wrong. The problem is no one criticizes Indian establishment. Right wingers are ruling your country unlike us. Here in Pakistan, establishment is almost get criticized daily by media and scholars.

We do have a larger muslim population in sheer numbers than Pakistan, you should be aware. That, is something which severely undermines the Pakistani ideological state, challenging the philosophy. So the contention.

Pakistan was built for rights and equality for Muslims. India having greater population of Muslims than us mean nothing. Muslims birth rate is high in every country of world and hence resulting in growing of community, India is no exception. It doesn't matter how much Muslims live in Pakistan or India, what matters is quality of life and opportunities. I have read somewhere, ratio of Muslim employees are too less in Asaam and other relate states despite they make up majority of those states. Pakistanis (especially My immigrant community aka called Muhajirs) are too happy in Pakistan and we have no regret of leaving India in 1947 for Pakistan.

In between, the price is being paid by Kashmiris. Pakistan stops interfering, maintains status quo, we get time to actually address the basic issues of people - food, shelter, job, security and peace, and Kashmir will quieten down. That, is not being allowed. And this time, the Pakistani policy makers have pushed India too far. What I have been saying for weeks now, of spread of conflict to Pakistan, is going to fructify. I had been warning Baluchistan will be tagged.

India is too late to tag Baluchistan. Situation is not that worse as it is used to be in past. people are flocking to Gwadar and other areas. Media has created awareness among people. It is just desperate attempt of India to highlight Balochistan, just to even score with Pakistan out of frustration. We will put Mumbai, Chennai in our flash light as well....But what would happen? Whole world will laugh at us that we are just claiming whole countries of each other. No body will take us serious. Pakistanis are too united now better than ever. India can do bomb blast in Baluchistan but we will make sure Kashmir, the root cause, remains the central/focal point. We just can't allow India to act in childish way ; claiming NWFP, SINDH etc. Pakistanis are not going to get frustrate and angry. India is too late now. I will appreciate if India gives it a try but also advice Indians to look after themselves after it. India is too big, too many options for us, too many choices.

Now, I tell you, next step is our hardening of stand only on discussing P0K, I am told already happened. As an entity or as principalities. Also we will challenge the Baluchistani Accession, challenge NWFP, Sindh to follow. In short, we will hit you all over as a state policy - while telling you clearly that it is in response to your actions in Kashmir, and you know, no one will help you, not anyone including Chinese (they wont go to war over you). The same will continue till you back out, or you break.

There is now a question of Indian societal security. We can not afford a simmering Kashmir becoming a rallying point for ISIS converts in Indian society and allow that to rip our society. Your society pays the price, wont matter to us. It's a question of national survival for us now.


You see, our patience has been tested. We will escalate disproportionally. And at the end of the day, the dumbos armed to teeth in your nation need money ...we have loads to spare. We can literally throw billions of dollars and not blink. I, merely am, stating the next few steps as I predict will unfold. (Maybe wrong, but usually am not)

But this line will only further impose hardships on the mass in sub-continent as the cycle of violence is and will be never ending.

I suggest you read. You have an open mind. You will realise, the gravity of situation

I agree. Indians have lot of money but still we won't get impressed by a rich cow boy who is pretending that Pakistan is a push over country can be white washed and overwhelmed so easily. Pakistan is correcting her course. War on terrorism hugely benefited India. Pakistan was somehow dragged in that war and got trapped but now, now, WE R BACK. Sounds of war have been reduced. We are far better than b4 in terms of economy and overall security. Pakistan does have shortage of money hampering our military procurements but for how long it remains? thats a question.

I doubt Pakistan will bent when he knows he doesn't need to. I hope Pakistan and India, while showing macho-ism, keeps nukes in options too as it will likely to reduce further madness, bringing MAD option....which may lead to prevailing of sense in shit heads of both countries.

 

[Azad-Kashmiri]

All the passages in red are true of J&K State as well.

Yes, the only truth is that you people are slaughtering the IOK Muslims and yet, the Pak forj is given salaams. in IOK there is a curfew and there is none here, rather people in the Azad Kashmir are celebrating yomal-Azad from Britania. Big difference from the two sides. If you doubt what I say, prove me wrong! Where is your evidence that we're oppressed like the IOK Kashmiri Muslims?

I know your Police are saints and that is why they have torture methods to date as reported by Human Rights:

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...ian-police-forces-come-to-light/1/435565.html

More cases of torture in Police custody:

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-interesting-facts-about-police-torture-in-India

And the list goes on...

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes Sir I was wrong on that and I admit that. I tender my apology for that.

No need for apologies. I am growing old and irritable, and sometimes fly off the handle and surprise myself. Don't take me too seriously

Yes, the only truth is that you people are slaughtering the IOK Muslims and yet, the Pak forj is given salaams. in IOK there is a curfew and there is none here, rather people in the Azad Kashmir are celebrating yomal-Azad from Britania. Big difference from the two sides. If you doubt what I say, prove me wrong! Where is your evidence that we're oppressed like the IOK Kashmiri Muslims?

I know your Police are saints and that is why they have torture methods to date as reported by Human Rights:

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...ian-police-forces-come-to-light/1/435565.html

More cases of torture in Police custody:

https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-interesting-facts-about-police-torture-in-India

And the list goes on...

What you fail to give is the other side of the conflict. Today is an auspicious day for Pakistan. I will reply day after tomorrow.

You see, you deserve a response befitting your posts, hence, abstaining from a comprehensive response as you require attention, and that needs time, which I don't have right now.


However:


1.

What is your issue here? I fail to understand.

(i) You don't accept the Instrument of Accession.

(ii) You don't accept the Sovereign's statement on the said accession.

(iii) You don't accept the accepted and proclaimed leader of the Kashmiris at the time - Sheikh Abdullah's acceptance of the Instrument of Accession. Indeed, you have now taken to denounce him, thereby insulting every Kashmiri of the time, who had full faith and backed him every move during the years leading up to 1947.

(iv) You ignore your own acceptance of the territories south of Manawar as International Boundary between India and Pakistan vide Karachi Agreement of 1949 (copy appended vide http://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/IN PK_490729_ Karachi Agreement.pdf).

This area, south of Manawar, is opposite Jammu-Katra-RS Pura-Sambha, all parts of J&K. By signing on the dotted lines that day, you have indeed accepted and recognized the same. So you mean to tell me, you are now backtracking from your agreement as signed by you as a legal sovereign nation? Please clarify that point. Don't side step the issue as you have been doing so far.

Other than the fact that you are sticking to the stand taken by GoP since 1947, I really am yet to see any point of relevance or facts here.

2.

By extension of the logic, so is the case of Gilgit, Baluchistan et al. Gilgit was a result of mutiny, show me your plebiscite/referendum.

Now, I am curious as to what is your position on the State of Jammu & Kashmir? Because your statements are contradictory, at times claiming it as an entity and at others, challenging the legal basis of the same as a princely state. Wgat do you think, should we take the whole question of J&K according to regions? If so, why have you refused to state as such in all the resoultions till date? You are merely indulging in a circumlocutory act.

By the ways @Joe Shearer has aptly pointed out the non-validity of your contentions on the aforementioned points. So, your points have no merit.

However, since you are talking of independently verifying, the same holds for all accessions done on either side, so meaning, should we now question the whole accession on both sides and merely allow China to move in?

My friend, are you Chinese? I could not come across a more ludicrous logic, as stated by you, other than to serve the aims of the Chinese, who have claims to every inch of earth where any one remotely a part of China even urinated! Lately they have included waters, so since their ships dispose off the waste by evacuation into ocean, you may as well hand them the oceans shortly.

3.

Yikes. Under Chapter VI? Now you are tickling me. Stop

4.

Interesting. So we occupied valley if we go by your logic so far. So why are you quoting the law which is again antithetical to your own position?

You see, your reading is tremendous, but your posting of facts in bits and pieces is merely a ploy at obfuscation ....

5.

Now again an antithetical point.

We also say the same. Good luck with that.

Anyways, I am curious, can you point out to me any place where Pakistan has signed a document allowing Kashmiris a right to self determination?

I couldn't find any. They signed all documents pertaining to question of accession either to India or Pakistan. And the dumb buggers in valley have no clue that they are up a creek of excreta without a paddle.

Yet I find Pakistanis here championing their right to independence .....

@PaklovesTurkiye your comment on last two lines?



Nah. Am on (s)troll mode. Got a bugger of an exam on 30 Sep (and should be off line now). Recertification. So avoiding engaging you.

He is enough. I am merely enjoying his wordplay. Amazing. Even his critics respect that!!! LOL

As for the underlined, we both are supposedly "imperfect" Indians, I getting bracketed with @Joe Shearer for talking of peace as opposed to war.

So, aim is to guide the disbelievers (they actually think @Joe Shearer is paid agent of Pakistan!!!) who would rather have us go down a war path as opposed to peace.

The whole question of what a princely state does or does not has been addressed in several learned volumes. However, when arguing about Kashmir, about Hyderabad and about Junagadh, it is useful to recall this 1831 judgement of the US Supreme Court on a parallel subject:

"Though the Indians are acknowledged to have an unquestionable, and, heretofore, unquestioned right to the lands they occupy, until that right shall be extinguished by a voluntary cession to our government; yet it may well be doubted whether those tribes which reside within the acknowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may, more correctly be denominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which must take effect in point of possession when their right of possession ceases. Meanwhile, they are in a state of pupilage. Their relation to the United States resembles that of a ward to his guardian."

@hellfire
@PARIKRAMA @nair @scorpionx @MilSpec

@ranjeet

@Stephen Cohen @adil_minhas @Dash @Levina @banvanaxl @OrionHunter @Rain Man @SrNair @cerberus @Soumitra @madokafc @Ankit Kumar 002 @Abingdonboy @Syama Ayas @jbgt90

@Star Wars @third eye @gslv @gslv mk3 @punit @Nair saab @Śakra

@PaklovesTurkiye
@LadyFinger

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/kashmir-...hmir-balochistan.443876/page-47#ixzz4HImlfon2

 

[Hellfire]

@PaklovesTurkiye What you wrote, now tone down the rhetoric and build from that. You will do wonders. When I tagged you, it is not to get into a 'you or I' issue. It is only on one point - the effing politicians on both sides are dumbos! And the only one who is a pawn, whether you like it or not, is the Kashmiri. And perpetuation of a cycle of violence just due to jingoism of both sets of people.

You can claim otherwise. As for right wings? You are absolutely wrong on the ability of Indians to check any kind of extremism. I have roamed in the streets of Islamabad (not yours, ours, behind Deoband Seminary). There is a bunch of zealots there, if I can surely point a place. I have been on ground, spoken to them. The Hindutva zealots gain from that. There is a social problem, thats why I said, our societal security is under threat. Will answer the points you raised someday else.

If you can, just go through my post #712. Three questions I have raised. Out of the three, just take your time to ponder over the first two, if you have time to, will wait for you to answer that.

@Joe Shearer pointed me to stating facts. @Oscar keeps repeating it. Am doing that.

@Joe Shearer (off topic) Sir, that is where my 'right wing extremist' mindset comes into play lol .... anyone who questions any part of accession can lump it.

(on topic) our friend Azlan has refused to engage. I told him I am ignoring his UN postings and he has taken it to his heart. Surprisingly, no one answer's my queries as posted in my post at #712!!!


Also, I see disturbing trends for our neighbour in future. I was afraid of it. Army being told to move onto streets in Kashmir is the thing which I was mentioning again and again - once more a whole generation of Kashmiris will be culled. If they now try and break peace on streets, its not CRPF or Police now. Army shoots and then speaks. And it has no compulsion to be merciful. Not it's job to be merciful.

 

[OrionHunter]

What you fail to give is the other side of the conflict. Today is an auspicious day for Pakistan. I will reply day after tomorrow.

Joe, don't bother to do that. it's a waste of time and effort. You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. The cocoons of denial they've built around themselves are thicker than a crocodile's skin.