Kashmir - Think the Unthinkable

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well, then don't expect the conflict to end anytime soon.

If you cut the fuel line, the fire will die down. But since you refuse to do so, you have to take the moral responsibility for the damage.

Not at all - you are suppressing a fundamental human right of the Kashmiris - the responsibility for damage is all yours, so long as Pakistan does not support the violent groups.

Sure....let the Taliban decide that they want to establish what they feel is the right society for Pakistan.

You guys have drawn your line, we have drawn ours.

You cannot allow your country to become radicalized, and we cannot allow ours to be fragmented on religious grounds.

As I said, you cannot undermine my country without doing the same to yours. Think about it.

Oh please - the world is not black and white, where its either pure secularism or Talibanism. Religion does not mean talibanism, and this is just a continuation of your disappointing descent into an Islam hater and baiter.

Our line and goal is a moderate, progressive Islamic state, with equality and justice for all regardless of faith or ethnicity - not Saudi Arabia, Iran or the Taliban - and Kashmir isn't part of your country, it is disputed and forcefully occupied. That is what our support for the Kashmiris must accomplish, convince another 15 percent of Indians of the immorality of their jingoism.

And no - my countries position is not undermined, since the people of all its constituent units chose Pakistan through some sort of representative process.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Really? Lets look up wikipedia:
1. The guy was elected on more than one occasion.

Yes he was - shameful appeasement of the Tribal Sardar's by the GoP to keep their loyalty.

2. Most of the kashmiri 'Moderates' have violent pasts. Shall we kill them?

If they continue to subscribe to violence - it would be expected you would. Bugti was leading an armed campaign against the state at the time he was killed.

Any more can go to the Balochistan thread.

 

[Flintlock]

Not at all - you are suppressing a fundamental human right of the Kashmiris - the responsibility for damage is all yours, so long as Pakistan does not support the violent groups.

All we are suppressing is the fundamentalist urges of Kashmiris, which have been continuously stoked by Pakistan since 1947.

Supporting a radical ideology is as bad as giving guns to militants.

Oh please - the world is not black and white, where its either pure secularism or Talibanism. Religion does not mean talibanism, and this is just a continuation of your disappointing descent into an Islam hater and baiter.

Religion doesn't mean talibanism, but it is always vulnerable to talibanism, and tends to have a good number of people within its ranks with such thinking, mostly within the priestly profession.

Our line and goal is a moderate, progressive Islamic state, with equality and justice for all regardless of faith or ethnicity - not Saudi Arabia, Iran or the Taliban

That's exactly what I am saying. You have your principles, and we have ours.

Would you approve of it if an Islamic revolution happened in Pakistan on the lines of the Iranian one, or would you want to fight against it?

- and Kashmir isn't part of your country, it is disputed and forcefully occupied. That is what our support for the Kashmiris must accomplish, convince another 15 percent of Indians of the immorality of their jingoism.

You will simply make Indians more determined to fight for the unity of their country. You already have.

And no - my countries position is not undermined, since the people of all its constituent units chose Pakistan through some sort of representative process.

That's not what I'm taking about, but never mind.

 

[Flintlock]

Already done, and a negligible number making it over in the absence of our support.

Doesn't seem like it.

 

[roadrunner]

Kashmiris have always resisted being part of India. I think you need to look at what came first. The suppression or the fundamentalism. The suppression has been going on from 1947. Fundamentalism flairs up where suppression exists. The suppression was that they perceived India stole their land by making it part of India without asking them.

So, while what you say, India is suppressing fundamentalism is true, India also is suppressing the rights of the Kashmiri people, that is creating this fundamentalism. If you remove the suppression the fundamentalism will disappear. If you remove the fundamentalism, the suppression will not disappear. Therefore, the cause of the fundamentalism can only be the suppression, or the stealing of their land by making it part of India.

 

[Pankaj]

When the Afgans were freed from Soviet suppression, did the fundamentalism disappeared?

 

[Spring Onion]

When the Afgans were freed from Soviet suppression, did the fundamentalism disappeared?

RSS, Bajrangdal and VHP are in a "secular" country India did their the fundamentalism disappear ?

 

[roadrunner]

When the Afgans were freed from Soviet suppression, did the fundamentalism disappeared?

Fundamentalism usually takes time to disappear when it has been stoked. It's not like an on-off switch.

 

[ashfaque]

Fundamentalism usually takes time to disappear when it has been stoked. It's not like an on-off switch.

Some times its in root and never goes, I hope you know better...

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Some times its in root and never goes, I hope you know better...

No clue what you are on about - unless you are referring to Islam as 'roots'.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Doesn't seem like it.

No support from our part - the rest is your responsibility - as RR pointed out, suppression and occupation is what results in extremism, so if it continues its because India refuses to allow the Kashmiris to exercise their fundamental rights.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

All we are suppressing is the fundamentalist urges of Kashmiris, which have been continuously stoked by Pakistan since 1947.

Supporting a radical ideology is as bad as giving guns to militants.

Oh please - you are suppressing their right to choose where their sovereignty lies - their legal right (under the IoA and UNSC resolutions) and their human and moral right.

"Supressing their fundamentalist urges?" This discussion is really bringing forth an extremely ugly side of some Indians, stereotyping and denigrating millions of people because they do not agree with your irrational jingoism and need to prevent your 'feelings from getting hurt'.

Religion doesn't mean talibanism, but it is always vulnerable to talibanism, and tends to have a good number of people within its ranks with such thinking, mostly within the priestly profession.

Anything is vulnerable to an extremist interpretation, the trick is keeping proper checks and balances in the system. Pakistan, despite all of Zia's efforts, and the subsequent rise of the Taliban, has remained a primarily moderate country, with its people largely moderate. I think that shows the resilience of Pakistanis to Talibanization and the Kashmiris woudl be no different.

That's exactly what I am saying. You have your principles, and we have ours.

Would you approve of it if an Islamic revolution happened in Pakistan on the lines of the Iranian one, or would you want to fight against it?

Our principles also include settling a territorial dispute on the basis of human dignity and allowing the people of that territory decide which nation they belong to.

Your analogy makes no sense - the equivalent would be whether you approved of a Hindu revolution in India. Trying to equivocate a changing political system with the immoral and illegal occupation of a people is just ludicrous.

You will simply make Indians more determined to fight for the unity of their country. You already have.

Nothing to lose - Pakistan stepped back from militarily supporting these groups, and the anti-India sentiment has exploded, and been expressed more strongly than when we were supporting those groups. On top of that, the fact that 40 percent of Indians now support a referendum, realizing that 'development' and relative peace hasn't done much to dampen the sentiment.

That is what the future roadmap of Pakistani support should be, and I am not surprised that the IA is coming up with these ceasefire violations that the PA has no clue about, since the aim now is to reignite the impression that Pakistan is causing this through support of militant groups.

 

[Pankaj]

Fundamentalism usually takes time to disappear when it has been stoked. It's not like an on-off switch.

Afganistan had gone from bad to worse after soviet oppression with no sign of returning into normalcy until American intervention. wonder why?

What was the suppression in NWFP region of Pakistan, why that region is facing fundamentalism?

Fundamentalism can be fomented without suppression as is the case of Kashmir.

 

[Neo]

Really? Lets look up wikipedia:

1. The guy was elected on more than one occasion.

2. Most of the kashmiri 'Moderates' have violent pasts. Shall we kill them?

You contradict yourself with the second point. Bhugti might have a clean past but at the time he was killed he qualified to be called a terrorist by all standards.

 

[roadrunner]

Just to clear this up. Bugti was elected to represent 1 tensil of the National Assembly's 400 something seats. He did not have any popular support.