Kashmir | News & Discussions.

[Valiant_Soul]

no. how can this be a source? this can be hacked.
There's only one source. zaid hamid. he know everything. he even know how to make omelette.

I am astonished at the fact that they are unable to see that by tying Kashmir with India-Pakistan relations they are treading an inevitable dangerous road. They are simply unable to figure what is more important for them. But then so be it, perhaps Kashmir to them is more important than Pakistan itself.

 

[karan.1970]

I still think same .loc make border finish whole matter india or pakistan can't take now 1 metter by force of each other.to hell with this issue its distroy us much much just for nothing.pakistan has to stop freedom fighter (by india terrarsts) and india has to widrow troops stop humen rights voilations make soft borders for poor people of both side give more power to kashmiris.solve it forever and let us live a humen life without load sheding and shortage of gas suger and wheat.our main issue then will be powerty we can fight with it and earn more respect in international comunity.both side should agreement also for not to spread propegenda or media war blame game against each other.its major issue finishing time.

wah wah.. What sentiments. 100% agree. Make Imran Bhai the President/PM of Pakistan and me the PM of India for i week. We will solve this within that week.

 

[karan.1970]

I agree with most your post, however, WHY would or should Pakistan support an Indian presence or inclusion int eh Afghan Matrix. It is not as though India shares a border with Afghanistan. This will strategically and tactically be a disaster for Pakistan with a two front threat posed.........Like I have said earlier, India is a country we just do not trust

SO do you mean that a country can only have a good relationship with countries it share a border with?? Thats so wierd.. You need to come out of the mindset of treating Afghanistan as a country which needs to be dominated by someone. It is an independent country that can handle its own decisions and relationships. Why should it need to take approval from India or Pakistan for that..?

 

[Gazzi]

SO do you mean that a country can only have a good relationship with countries it share a border with?? Thats so wierd.. You need to come out of the mindset of treating Afghanistan as a country which needs to be dominated by someone. It is an independent country that can handle its own decisions and relationships. Why should it need to take approval from India or Pakistan for that..?

.....I said, why should Pakistan support Indian presence, support, let me repeat SUPPORT...once again SUPPORT....its like drawing blood from stone with you.

It is not in Pakistan's interest, but obviously whoever is in power in Afghanistan at the time, whther Karzai today or Taliban tomorrow, they will decide.

Pakistan will not be comfortable with this and will try and avoid this by different options of talking with its neighbour.

 

[karan.1970]

Such a soln is not acceptable in return for what is suggested ..! The Kashmiri should have the right to decide their future acc to UN ..!

You can no longer define/identify Kashmiris as per the definition of 1947. So the issue of referundum is a moot point..

On top of that redefining boundaries in 21st century is no longer a practical possibility. The only way India will agree to this is if it has been beaten down to ground militarily and its survival is at question. Else it will be a political and physical suicide for any leader to allow that to happen. Understand that solving issues with Pakistan at the cost of giving up Kashmir is simply not worth it for India. And annexing Kashmir forcably either militarily or thru proxy war is too rocky a road for any country to travel. The country trying to do this will have to go thru too much of a retaliatory loss before it can defeat India (if at all) to a state where it gives up Kashmir.

So any hope of solving Kashmir has to begin with Pakistan climbing down from its stand of trying to get the whole of Kashmir.

 

[karan.1970]

Do you actually go out to be stupid or does it just come naturally with you.....I said, why should Pakistan support Indian presence, support, let me repeat SUPPORT...once again SUPPORT....its like drawing blood from stone with you.

It is not in Pakistan's interest, but obviously whoever is in power in Afghanistan at the time, whther Karzai today or Taliban tomorrow, they will decide.

Pakistan will not be comfortable with this and will try and avoid this by different options of talking with its neighbour.

No need to get personal Mr Gazzi.. Try and keep the discussion at a civilized level unless that's too difficult a concept for you to understand..

Please read the post carefully. The intent is to say that how does sharing a border defines whether a country should have a role in the development of another country.

 

[FireFighter]

believe me the cost of holding Kashmir has never been even close to being unbearable...an indicator of this is the flat refusal on our side to even engage in bilateral,trilateral or UN-lateral talks on the matter...
had we been facing problems of escalating daily expenses in Kashmir we'd have accepted if not initiated a way to settle the matter...
Asim...this is not the 90s...the world opinion has had a paradigm shift...the world has grown absolutely intolerable to Islamic violence...and I stress on the word 'Islamic'.
be it Russia ,america or China...they want none of it...
to put it in simpler words...the righteousness of a war is decided by global opinion...and it won't be difficult to sway it in our favor...the world has started seeing Kashmir through our eyes...

World opinion is fickle when it comes to the issue of Kashmir to Pakistan. We never bowed down to world opinion in regards to Kashmir.

Now that Pakistan is a Nuclear state since then we never allowed our policy to be dictated on the Kashmir front.


World opinions are not constant but are a changing phenomenon. Once America pulls out of ****** theatre, that would signal the end of WOT, and therefore policy changes would be demanded in the new decade era considering the shifts in balance of powers.


Speaking of Paradigm shifts, have you ever thought what would happen once China becomes the world's next Superpower?

And how China would pull the strings on world opinions on regional/world/eco/political issues that it favours? Ever questioned what that would mean for India?

That day is not very far, 2020 would mark a new beginning, whilst New Delhi is in sleep, there would be a major geo-political change in Kashmir.

Don't you wonder why your think tanks the likes of Bharat Verma are literally panicking at the American withdrawal from ****** theatre?


You will no longer have the western backing, so better pull out your forces before the world will make you pay for your misdeeds in Kashmir.

huh! ? Please compare the security situation in the so called disputed area of Jammu and Kashmir vs Pakistan occupied Kashmir. In this year itself there have been more attacks and deaths in the so called Azaad Kashmir which is supposed to be a heaven on earth as against the opressed and terrorized J&K.

Also pl go and check the development activities & growth in both parts..

Are you kidding me buddy?


We have no where near the amount of your soldiers in Azad Kashmir. Things are 100% better in Azad compared to Indian Occupied Kashmir which is literally like the Gaza strip, road blockades, curfews, random police searches, killings and political assissnations, etc. are the norm of day.

If you want to be honest then pick up any neutral unbiased source and compare Azad with Occupied and you'll find that there's a world of a difference.

 

[Gazzi]

No need to get personal Mr Gazzi.. Try and keep the discussion at a civilized level unless that's too difficult a concept for you to understand..

Please read the post carefully. The intent is to say that how does sharing a border defines whether a country should have a role in the development of another country.

I am having problems with people like yourself who just don't seemto read the posts and jump into the reply box and click submit reply like yourself.....anyways.

It doesn't but when the country which happens to be your biggest enemy wants to step in to the other side of you it doesn;t go down so well....see how that works........hence why Pakistan will not be supporting such a move or taking it lightly with the Afghan powers

 

[jalip]

World opinion is fickle when it comes to the issue of Kashmir to Pakistan. We never bowed down to world opinion in regards to Kashmir.

Now that Pakistan is a Nuclear state since then we never allowed our policy to be dictated on the Kashmir front.


World opinions are not constant but are a changing phenomenon. Once America pulls out of ****** theatre, that would signal the end of WOT, and therefore policy changes would be demanded in the new decade era considering the shifts in balance of powers.


Speaking of Paradigm shifts, have you ever thought what would happen once China becomes the world's next Superpower?

And how China would pull the strings on world opinions on regional/world/eco/political issues that it favours? Ever questioned what that would mean for India?

That day is not very far, 2020 would mark a new beginning, whilst New Delhi is in sleep, there would be a major geo-political change in Kashmir.

Don't you wonder why your think tanks the likes of Bharat Verma are literally panicking at the American withdrawal from ****** theatre?


You will no longer have the western backing, so better pull out your forces before the world will make you pay for your misdeeds in Kashmir.




Are you kidding me buddy?


We have no where near the amount of your soldiers in Azad Kashmir. Things are 100% better in Azad compared to Indian Occupied Kashmir which is literally like the Gaza strip, road blockades, curfews, random police searches, killings and political assissnations, etc. are the norm of day.

If you want to be honest then pick up any neutral unbiased source and compare Azad with Occupied and you'll find that there's a world of a difference.

oh bahi Azad kashmiri most of them are far richer then rest of pakistan they have house u naver find any where else in pakistan more then 50% of them have relative out side pakistan specially in Uk
for you information Pound are traded more then rupee in kashmir
they have school and hospitals in all towns far batter then pakistan
i will not compare it with IOK
let have vote in pakistani side of kashmir and indian side of kashmir if pakistan side wants to go towards india they are most well come to go will india do the same
India A shame democracy

 

[karan.1970]

I am having problems with people like yourself who just don't seemto read the posts and jump into the reply box and click submit reply like yourself.....anyways.

It doesn't but when the country which happens to be your biggest enemy wants to step in to the other side of you it doesn;t go down so well....see how that works........hence why Pakistan will not be supporting such a move or taking it lightly with the Afghan powers

If you have a problem with folks like me.. too bad.. Its still your problem and i really dont care...

Coming back to point..

I see what you are saying here.. But then H2O3C4 is trying to say something else.. He is not advocating India being allowed to encircle Pakistan by militarily supporting Afg. If I get it right, he is talking about trade and development which not only reduces tensions but also makes entry barriers for conflicts much higher..

 

[Mister X]

oh bahi Azad kashmiri most of them are far richer then rest of pakistan they have house u naver find any where else in pakistan more then 50% of them have relative out side pakistan specially in Uk
for you information Pound are traded more then rupee in kashmir
they have school and hospitals in all towns far batter then pakistan
i will not compare it with IOK
let have vote in pakistani side of kashmir and indian side of kashmir if pakistan side wants to go towards india they are most well come to go will india do the same
India A shame democracy

Propaganda busted

Stop your propaganda.

Large number of Pakistanis mainly Punjabi Pakistanis have migrated to Azad Kashmir

India have maintained the status of 1947.

Indians from rest of India are not allowed by Govt. of India to settle, buy houses, property or marry in Kashmir.

The Jobs and resources of Kashmir are for Kashmiri people only.

Ever herded of Mirpur.


Mirpuris (people originating from the Mirpur district in Pakistani Kashmir), form about 70% of the British Pakistani population of about 747,000.

Cultural Dislocation

The reasons for the large proportion of Mirpuris in the UK is historical. In the late 1950’s & early 1960’s, the Pakistani Government planned the Mangla Dam, which was to be built in the Mirpur area. They asked several thousand locals to leave the land. At that time, the British needed man-power mainly for their textile factories. Many of the Mirpuris moved to Britain and started working in factories, mostly in the so called “black country” and the area of Bradford, England. In some villages, more than half the village population moved to the UK to settle in the industrial towns. This rural, impoverished district provided cheap, unskilled labour for Britain in the 60’s and 70’s.

Most immigrants were from subsistence farming communities and had had little or no schooling. They made a huge cultural and geographical leap to settle in the UK. The profound cultural dislocation experienced by the Mirpuris is hard to imagine. Most Mirpuris speak Pothowari, a language related to Punjabi. The prominent clans among them include Rajputs (Janjua), Sudhans, Khokhars, Gakkhars, Awans, Jats, etc.


Proof of my statements

ARE MIRPURI PUNJABI OR KASHMIRI - punjabi net forum discussions

Mirpuri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Muslim Mirpuris in Britain cultural dislocation : Loving Muslims Through Prayer | www.30-days.net

The reason of Azad Kashmir's prosperity in comparison to rest of undeveloped Pakistan are immigrant Punjabi who migrated to Britain as cheap and unskilled labors and are now sending pounds back home.

Their so called prosperity is nothing to do with the work or development by Pakistani govt.

 

[karan.1970]

Are you kidding me buddy?


We have no where near the amount of your soldiers in Azad Kashmir. Things are 100% better in Azad compared to Indian Occupied Kashmir which is literally like the Gaza strip, road blockades, curfews, random police searches, killings and political assissnations, etc. are the norm of day.

If you want to be honest then pick up any neutral unbiased source and compare Azad with Occupied and you'll find that there's a world of a difference.

So more soldiers in J&K should provide more targets of opportunity.. Dont you think..

Dude, you can call J&K as Gaza strip. I can call NWFP as a terrorist cess pool and Pakistan occupied Kashmir as a backward exploited area.. Crux of the matter is you cant convince me and vice versa.

On your china theory, you guys similarly celebrated when USSR got split. At that time, USA was your dear friend and people in Pakistan THINK TANKS were similarly jumping with joy on how now USA will pressurize India on Kashmir.. Its been a few decades and now you are having to look for another backer for your claims on Kashmir as your earstwhile dear friend is now one being blamed by your population for being oblivious to Pakistan's interests..

Sir, as long as you are dependent on external forces to counter India on Kashmir, you are destined to fail..

 

[hembo]

And what has India done to Pakistan to be in the wrong? I am sure that you are aware that Pakistan wants to tear away Kashmir from India with the tool of cross-border terrorism that is world renowned now.

What has India done to Pakistan ??? Are you kidding or you are so much naive ???

So what was 71 ?? East Pakistan teared apart by support of Indian State Terrorism.

And when we pay you back in the same coin, you guys start crying foul.

Pathetic.

Ahem, sorry to have popped in.

Perhaps you're confusing terrorism with military aggression. 71 was a official war between the Military forces of India and Pak (just like 65), which Pakistan happen to loose. However, the instrument of terrorism the poster was referring to was, perhaps, to the non-military goons, who had been (mind it I used had, not has) armed and trained covertly by Pakistani Govt agencies and allowed to use Pakistan's soil to wage a so called Jihad against India.

First of all there is no Counter Insurgency Opn (COIN) involved in this case at all. Even the methodology too is definitely not similar to India's 71 methology. I am also more then 100% certain that PA will not wage another offensive like IA did back in 71. May be a Kargil here and there, but definitely not a all out offensive.

You guys can carry on now. Good luck.

 

[karan.1970]

India A shame democracy

Atleast it has been a democracy always.. in good health and bad.. We dont run away to alternate methods (or get forced by our generals) at the first sign of problems..

Please have as many votes as you want in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. We just have state and national elections as per our Election commission guidelines and constitution..

 

[tiger1313]

I think India must take this one seriously. I say this b'coz of the following reasons-
1 Pak would like to divert jehadi energies at this stg to india.
2 Hamid Gul's presence may point towards renewed Pak int push to rejuvinate a dying movement.
3 Hafiz Syed presence - is it an indication to india/ us. Otherwise given the fact that we are thinking of talking would make it an inwise move.
Keeping the above in mind, IA would be well advised to look for any new signs on ground, a new stratagy etc