Kashmir - Think the Unthinkable

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You mean to say East and West Pakistan were contiguous ??

They were two massive blocks of Muslims who chose to separate - in hindsight, East Pakistan should have come about as a separate nation.

Now you are being ridiculous ..Pakistan is Islam .few Muslims( not all ) couldn't accept the diversity ..and choose to break a nation on their narrow communal identity ..
There are more Muslims in India then in Pakistan and they dint believe in communal segregation .

Rubbish -every segment constituting the Federation of Pakistan chose to join it in a representative manner.
And it was by far an overwhelming majority of Muslims in those areas. The Muslims in India who chose to stay are not the ones who count, nor the ones I am referring to - they chose their life differently, good luck to them.

As I said you are being ridiculous .. We decided to fight for independence not because we are against the oneness of humanity .. but my dear because we belive in existence of societies with equal respect and dignity English were exploiting India and its people and thriving on our misery ..

what a pathetic argument ..

More rubbish - You could have chosen to struggle for an equal society like MLK and the African Americans, who went through far worse than any in South Asia. Instead you chose to segregate and separate yourself on the basis of race/civilization or whatever.

The Muslims of South Asia who chose to live independently of both the British and the 'Indians' also chose to separate precisely because they wanted to create a society where they could live with equal respect and dignity, and they did not believe that woudl be possible if they chose to join India.

 

[Flintlock]

And this goes back to RR's argument of invading states incorporating territories into their constitutions and then proclaiming a self serving 'high and mighty' attitude of 'we believe in our constitution'.

What can I say....our hands are tied by our constitution and our democracy. You don't really have a choice in the matter.

It will take a catastrophe for India to willingly give up the region.

 

[Pankaj]

^^ Thats the best argument
should put an end to the useless debates over Kashmir

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

What can I say....our hands are tied by our constitution and our democracy. You don't really have a choice in the matter.

It will take a catastrophe for India to willingly give up the region.

You don't have to say anything - RR and I have merely pointed out that India has an illegal, unethical and immoral position on Kashmir. What you posted above is essentially the GoI's default position, so its nothing new - a regurgitation of irrational nationalism.

It merely legitimizes what Pakistan has been saying all along - that the only argument that India has going for it on Kashmir is 'might is right'.

Catastrophe or another 15 percent of its population realizing that their governments position is immoral and unethical - we shall wait and see. As I said, I personally am not in favor of either insurgency or war to settle the issue.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Excerpts from an article by Arundhati Roy - may many more like her blossom, for whom the concepts of freedom and democracy and tolerance are not confined within the realm of nationalism, but truly interpreted as universal values:

"Everywhere there were Pakistani flags, everywhere the cry, Pakistan se rishta kya? La ilaha illa llah. What is our bond with Pakistan? There is no god but Allah. Azadi ka matlab kya? La ilaha illallah. What does Freedom mean? There is no god but Allah.
For somebody like myself, who is not Muslim, that interpretation of freedom is hard—if not impossible—to understand. I asked a young woman whether freedom for Kashmir would not mean less freedom for her, as a woman. She shrugged and said, "What kind of freedom do we have now? The freedom to be raped by Indian soldiers?" Her reply silenced me.
Standing in the grounds of the TRC, surrounded by a sea of green flags, it was impossible to doubt or ignore the deeply Islamic nature of the uprising taking place around me. It was equally impossible to label it a vicious, terrorist jehad. For Kashmiris, it was a catharsis. A historical moment in a long and complicated struggle for freedom with all the imperfections, cruelties and confusions that freedom struggles have. This one cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account for—among other things—the brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of almost the entire community from the Kashmir Valley.

As the crowd continued to swell, I listened carefully to the slogans, because rhetoric often clarifies things and holds the key to all kinds of understanding. I'd heard many of them before, a few years ago, at a militant's funeral. A new one, obviously coined after the blockade, was Kashmir ki mandi! Rawalpindi! (It doesn't lend itself to translation, but it means—Kashmir's marketplace? Rawalpindi!) Another was Khooni lakir tod do, aar paar jod do (Break down the blood-soaked Line of Control, let Kashmir be united again). There were pleko khoon se seencha, woh nty of insults an Ay jabiron ay zalimon, Kashmir hamara chhod do (Oh oppressors, Oh wicked ones, Get out of our Kashmir). Jis Kashmir d humiliation for India: Kashmir hamara hai (The Kashmir we have irrigated with our blood, that Kashmir is ours!).

The slogan that cut through me like a knife and clean broke my heart was this one: Nanga bhookha Hindustan, jaan se pyaara Pakistan (Naked, starving India, More precious than life itself—Pakistan). Why was it so galling, so painful to listen to this? I tried to work it out and settled on three reasons. First, because we all know that the first part of the slogan is the embarrassing and unadorned truth about India, the emerging superpower. Second, because all Indians who are not nanga or bhookha are—and have been—complicit in complex and historical ways with the cruel cultural and economic systems that make Indian society so cruel, so vulgarly unequal."

 

[Flintlock]

^Ridiculous article. Arundhati Roy is a self-hating pessimist who cannot see beyond the negatives.

But thanks to her for confirming the "freedom struggle" as an Islamic one.

She seems to have nothing to say of the obvious truth that Pakistan is in fact poorer than India in many ways, and that Kashmiris are a brainwashed bunch who believe Pakistan to be some sort of heaven.

She sees the "truth" in the hate-filled slogans but cannot see the obvious lies.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

She seems to have nothing to say of the obvious truth that Pakistan is in fact poorer than India in many ways, and that Kashmiris are a brainwashed bunch who believe Pakistan to be some sort of heaven.

She sees the "truth" in the hate-filled slogans but cannot see the obvious lies.

Ahh yes - as if India was far better off than the British (economically, industrially or scientifically) when she seceded from them. Didn't stop you guys from demanding freedom did it- utter hypocrisy.

Now apparently you know better what is good for the Kashmiris, rather than the Kashmiris themselves. Good or bad, it is their decision to make. It is the promise of building a society for themselves, free of any other entity controlling them, or to whom they owe allegiance, that drives the Kashmiris.

The only 'lies' were the ones about Kashmiris loving India, shot down after the recent events.

 

[roadrunner]

Excerpts from an article by Arundhati Roy - may many more like her blossom, for whom the concepts of freedom and democracy and tolerance are not confined within the realm of nationalism, but truly interpreted as universal values:

"Everywhere there were Pakistani flags, everywhere the cry, Pakistan se rishta kya? La ilaha illa llah. What is our bond with Pakistan? There is no god but Allah. Azadi ka matlab kya? La ilaha illallah. What does Freedom mean? There is no god but Allah.
For somebody like myself, who is not Muslim, that interpretation of freedom is hard—if not impossible—to understand. I asked a young woman whether freedom for Kashmir would not mean less freedom for her, as a woman. She shrugged and said, "What kind of freedom do we have now? The freedom to be raped by Indian soldiers?" Her reply silenced me.
Standing in the grounds of the TRC, surrounded by a sea of green flags, it was impossible to doubt or ignore the deeply Islamic nature of the uprising taking place around me. It was equally impossible to label it a vicious, terrorist jehad. For Kashmiris, it was a catharsis. A historical moment in a long and complicated struggle for freedom with all the imperfections, cruelties and confusions that freedom struggles have. This one cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account for—among other things—the brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of almost the entire community from the Kashmir Valley.

As the crowd continued to swell, I listened carefully to the slogans, because rhetoric often clarifies things and holds the key to all kinds of understanding. I'd heard many of them before, a few years ago, at a militant's funeral. A new one, obviously coined after the blockade, was Kashmir ki mandi! Rawalpindi! (It doesn't lend itself to translation, but it means—Kashmir's marketplace? Rawalpindi!) Another was Khooni lakir tod do, aar paar jod do (Break down the blood-soaked Line of Control, let Kashmir be united again). There were pleko khoon se seencha, woh nty of insults an Ay jabiron ay zalimon, Kashmir hamara chhod do (Oh oppressors, Oh wicked ones, Get out of our Kashmir). Jis Kashmir d humiliation for India: Kashmir hamara hai (The Kashmir we have irrigated with our blood, that Kashmir is ours!).

The slogan that cut through me like a knife and clean broke my heart was this one: Nanga bhookha Hindustan, jaan se pyaara Pakistan (Naked, starving India, More precious than life itself—Pakistan). Why was it so galling, so painful to listen to this? I tried to work it out and settled on three reasons. First, because we all know that the first part of the slogan is the embarrassing and unadorned truth about India, the emerging superpower. Second, because all Indians who are not nanga or bhookha are—and have been—complicit in complex and historical ways with the cruel cultural and economic systems that make Indian society so cruel, so vulgarly unequal."

A good article. Someone who doesn't use flawed, fallacious arguments, like "Kashmir is written in our Constituion, therefore it is ours".

I will write to Zardari (with 10% of everything going to him naturally), suggesting he write Nepal is part of Pakistan. That would make it permissible and legal for Pakistan to invade and forcibly occupy it..right...right? hello?

 

[Flintlock]

Ahh yes - as if India was far better off than the British (economically, industrially or scientifically) when she seceded from them. Didn't stop you guys from demanding freedom did it- utter hypocrisy.

Huh? I'm talking about the Kashmiris referring to Indians as "nanga bhookha" when the same thing can be said about Pakistan.
This, along with the Islamic slogans, simply confirm that the movement is built upon religious hatred and outright lies.

Now apparently you know better what is good for the Kashmiris, rather than the Kashmiris themselves. Good or bad, it is their decision to make. It is the promise of building a society for themselves, free of any other entity controlling them, or to whom they owe allegiance, that drives the Kashmiris.

Indeed, I do. Kashmiris are busy shoving themselves into a religious abyss, and its high time that someone puts a stop to it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"I asked a young woman whether freedom for Kashmir would not mean less freedom for her, as a woman."

RR:

I don't think you can quantify freedom, as India argues it should be.

"We offer you a secular constitution, a trillion dollar economy, business" etc. etc.

The desire for freedom is so much more complex and intangible - at its heart it is simply the desire to only owe allegiance to that which one wants to, to that which one respects, and it is clear that whatever it is that the Kashmiris want to owe allegiance to (Islam, Pakistan, Kashmiriyat ...), it is not India.

Just as I see red when some Indians say that 'partition took something away from India', because it signifies that they had some control or claim to Pakistan's land and people, similarly do I think that the approach of India claiming 'India's territorial integrity', and calls for demographic change, impose upon Kashmiris India's sovereignty and 'ownership', and therefore inflame sentiment against them.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Huh? I'm talking about the Kashmiris referring to Indians as "nanga bhookha" when the same thing can be said about Pakistan.
This, along with the Islamic slogans, simply confirm that the movement is built upon religious hatred and outright lies.

See my post to RR. India cannot understand Kashmir because it seeks to quantify the desire for freedom.

Indeed, I do. Kashmiris are busy shoving themselves into a religious abyss, and its high time that someone puts a stop to it.

You are not Kashmiri, it is not your decision to make, and I would say that your irrational hatred for religion, specifically Abrahamic religions, is something most people need to be saved from, not the Kashmiris by you.

 

[Flintlock]

I will write to Zardari (with 10% of everything going to him naturally), suggesting he write Nepal is part of Pakistan. That would make it permissible and legal for Pakistan to invade and forcibly occupy it..right...right? hello?

Sure, please do so. But can you implement it?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Sure, please do so. But can you implement it?

Unfortunately not - since we really do not want to follow India's example.

 

[Flintlock]

See my post to RR. India cannot understand Kashmir because it seeks to quantify the desire for freedom.

Ultimately, these are the things that matter - food, job and family. If you cannot get these things, no freedom can save you.

These guys will win their "freedom" and then become yet another tiny country with no hope and no future. What a brilliant end.

Its much better to be a part of India.

You are not Kashmiri, it is not your decision to make, and I would say that your irrational hatred for religion, specifically Abrahamic religions, is something most people need to be saved from, not the Kashmiris by you.

I'm an Indian, so it is my decision to make.

Also, my "hatred" for religion is completely rational, and not irrational. Irrational is the hatred that religions reserve for one another. Especially abrahmic ones.

Kashmiris are free to shout their slogans, but their suicide-wish cannot be granted.

 

[Flintlock]

Unfortunately not - since we really do not want to follow India's example.

So basically you can't. So lets just stop dreaming and look at realities.

Nepal has zilch in common with Pakistan.