Possibilty of Kashmir solution between Modi and Pak Army?
- Thread starter GreenFoe
- Start date
American Eagle
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 25, 2010
- Messages
- 3,288
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
Kashmir is a stale religious argument. It as an area is and has been since 1947 used by both Pakistan and India to distract the struggling for a better life masses from shortcomings that are holding the people back from sorely needed progress.
GreenFoe
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2013
- Messages
- 1,306
- Reaction score
- -7
Yes but thats not the point :|
American Eagle
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 25, 2010
- Messages
- 3,288
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
My time in Pakistan at the old US Embassy, 1963-65, later as an Asia Section of a major NYC bank officer of a vast area that included Pakistan, and from related 31 year active then reserve career at the Joint Chiefs of Staff level the last 10 years of so before retiring from the USAF Reserve, tells me that Kashmir is a political football for both Pakistan and India and does not represent a solution for the world at large as to how we can improve on governance that promotes international harmony.
Radical religion in and over Kashmir has gotten much worse since my time inside Pakistan, much worse.
The most simple solution we could hope for against use by both nations to bate the poor masses with shadow boxing issue of Kashmir would come from "open borders" for all parts of Kashmir, to include the third piece still held by Communist China.
Radical religion in and over Kashmir has gotten much worse since my time inside Pakistan, much worse.
The most simple solution we could hope for against use by both nations to bate the poor masses with shadow boxing issue of Kashmir would come from "open borders" for all parts of Kashmir, to include the third piece still held by Communist China.
Only one side uses the religion card in Kashmir. As far as India is concerned, religion is not the basis for being part of India. We are a secular democratic republic.
halupridol
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2013
- Messages
- 6,153
- Reaction score
- -32
- Country
- Location
is there anything left to discuss after Kargil.......
n discuss with whom????,,,,GOP,,PA,,TTP,,...
let them decide among themselves who is the boss,,,,then behave for a decade,,,,then GOI may consider a dialogue on Kashmir...
moreover we r content with d status quo,,,if they wanna discuss,,bring something to the table
GreenFoe
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2013
- Messages
- 1,306
- Reaction score
- -7
With PA!
American Eagle
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 25, 2010
- Messages
- 3,288
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
As one who uniquely lived and worked inside Pakistan 1963-65, and has watched Kashmir ever since....it is a unique situation, it is historically inaccurate to not admit that religion being the basis of division of Kahmir in 1947 established the fact that Muslims vs. Hindus was and remains the core of a fruitless and futile situation...until it may some day be dealt with with more open borders for a long period of time to try to get both nations to focus on the needs of all their peoples, nationwide.
Hyper focus on Kashmir in my singular view is akin to early US Articles of Confederation, fussing and fighting, killing over wht remains a religious issue.
There are Hindu extremists just as there a Muslim extremists.
Extremism is the core issue and neither nation has been able, and there continues to be genuine efforts at peace in Kashmir by both sides, but extremism on both sides is damn destabilizing and quickly erases small advances toward a better outcome.
Also both Pakistan and India should face up the third factor, Communist China, who have at least in the past used their part of Kashmir as a political tool to support Pakistan over India re only the Parkistan and Indian parts of Kashmir.
But face the facts in todays world. Kashmir offers nothing meaningful with or without settlement as an isolated, land locked, backward areas broken into Chinese, Pakistani, and Indian parts.
Religion was the basis for the division of India into India and Pakistan. But Kashmir was not divided on that basis, but because Pakistan invaded the sovereign kingdom of Kashmir in 1948, and the ruler quickly acceeded his kingdom to the Union of India. Indian forces then moved in to prevent the rest of Kashmir from being occupied by plundering Pakistani tribes and lashkars, mostly composed of Pashtoons from their north-west. There is no religious element to the conflict from an Indian POV. Hindus or muslims or anything else, everybody in Indian Kashmir are Indians, and we will protect and defend our territory and people from anybody who tries to steal it or harm them.
For Pakistan, it is a religious issue as they believe that just because it is a muslim majority state of India, they are entitled to take it. Absurd from our POV, because being muslim or christian does not preclude people from being Indians.
As for the statement that there are hindu extremists just like there are muslim ones - in the context of Kashmir, there has never been any hindu extremism involved. Only muslim terrorists and "non state actors" have tried to take our Kashmir by force (and failed).
If you think that religion plays any part in the conflict for Indians, please tell me how. For Pakistan, yes it does.
GreenFoe
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2013
- Messages
- 1,306
- Reaction score
- -7
Yes but there are solutions within that limit .
American Eagle
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 25, 2010
- Messages
- 3,288
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
Your recollection of history is flawed.
Example: The ruler at partition of India and Pakistan WAS a Muslim who chose affilation with Paksitan over India. The Muslim ruler of old Kashmir ruled over prior to 1947 partition a Hindu majority population.
But all this is a waste of words and time. Pointless.
Example: The ruler at partition of India and Pakistan WAS a Muslim who chose affilation with Paksitan over India. The Muslim ruler of old Kashmir ruled over prior to 1947 partition a Hindu majority population.
But all this is a waste of words and time. Pointless.
Errr ..The ruler was Hari Singh a Hindu . Hari Singh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ... It was a muslim majority state (77 %) at partition .
Here is Instrument of ascension to India ...
Sorry mate, it is your recollection that is not only flawed, but an inversion of reality. The reality is the exact opposite of what you just stated. Kashmir was and still is a muslim majority state. The ruler who ruled the princely state of Jammu-Kashmir before Pakistan attacked the kingdom was Hari Singh, a hindu. He acceded to India to stop the Pakistani tribals from raping and marauding his people, and the instrument of accession has been provided in the previous post by another member.
American Eagle
MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 25, 2010
- Messages
- 3,288
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
Errr ..The ruler was Hari Singh a Hindu . Hari Singh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ... It was a muslim majority state (77 %) at partition .
Here is Instrument of ascension to India ...
You are correct, I got it backward. Hindu ruler of J&K at partition, majority Muslim population then. My error. Should have refreshed memory on the Internet as I admonish young folks to do on his site regularly!
Fact remains J&K are not resolvable in my opinion. A waste of time to do more than seek more open borders and collaborative free trade zones there.
Yes, I just corrected myself. My opinion remains, despite my lousy memory, that J&K are not material to positive needs of the world. It is a pointless argument based on raw, backward religious prejudices on both sides, no matter which side had the population majority. Just absolutely pointless and useless to building a better more progress world full to more free democratic nations.
Similar threads
