'Roof of the World' rebels against Pakistan

[Screambowl]

bhai Aink ke andhe ko rasta deka sakte hai ....magar aqal ke andhe ko nahi ......

yaar all these arguments we have already done... in 2 different threads. you can go through.

Kashmiris concerned by plans for Hindu satellite cities | Page 40

 

[toxic_pus]

Who many times do I have to remind you people about the Karachi agreement (link from UN website to download the full document) dated 29th July, 1949 under the supervision of UN truce committee in which India agreed with Pakistan's right to stationed troops in AJK, in addition to this in this agreement India agreed to consider the Part -II (truce Agreement ) UN resolution of 13 August, 1948 separately, the point to be noted here that Karachi agreement is signed under the supervision of Truce Committee which mean under this agreement any troops deployment of Pakistan in accordance of conditions agreed b/w India and Pakistan in Karachi agreement is not the violation of of UN resolution of 13th Aug, 1948.

View attachment 37771
Now ask your Government to tell the complete truth to your Nation.

DUH!!

Karachi Agreement is relevant to Part I of the UN resolution of 13th August, 1948. Part I is called 'Truce Agreement' not Part II which deals with demilitarization.

"The cease-fire line is a complement of the suspension of hostilities, which falls within the provisions of Part I of the Resolution of 13 August, 1948, and can be considered separately from the questions relating to Part II of the same Resolution." Karachi Agreement, Para A/3; Pg 2​

This Karachi Agreement established Cease Fire Line (CFL) which both the countries undertook not to violate (and which Pakistan dutifully violated 1965 rendering this whole UN resolution void). But in order to hold plebiscite in Kashmir, Pakistan had to withdraw, completely and unconditionally, handing over the administration to the 'Local Government'.

Part I, which is the 'Truce Agreement', is seperate from Part II.

 

[Screambowl]

DUH!!

Karachi Agreement is relevant to Part I of the UN resolution of 13th August, 1948. Part I is called 'Truce Agreement' not Part II which deals with demilitarization.

"The cease-fire line is a complement of the suspension of hostilities, which falls within the provisions of Part I of the Resolution of 13 August, 1948, and can be considered separately from the questions relating to Part II of the same Resolution." Karachi Agreement, Para A/3; Pg 2​

This Karachi Agreement established Cease Fire Line (CFL) which both the countries undertook not to violate (and which Pakistan dutifully violated 1965 rendering this whole UN resolution void). But in order to hold plebiscite in Kashmir, Pakistan had to withdraw, completely and unconditionally, handing over the administration to the 'Local Government'.

Part I, which is the 'Truce Agreement', is seperate from Part II.

UN resolution is no more in the picture. If this was the case, Kargil would have had not happened.

 

[HRK]

DUH!!

Karachi Agreement is relevant to Part I of the UN resolution of 13th August, 1948. Part I is called 'Truce Agreement' not Part II which deals with demilitarization.

"The cease-fire line is a complement of the suspension of hostilities, which falls within the provisions of Part I of the Resolution of 13 August, 1948, and can be considered separately from the questions relating to Part II of the same Resolution." Karachi Agreement, Para A/3; Pg 2​

This Karachi Agreement established Cease Fire Line (CFL) which both the countries undertook not to violate (and which Pakistan dutifully violated 1965 rendering this whole UN resolution void). But in order to hold plebiscite in Kashmir, Pakistan had to withdraw, completely and unconditionally, handing over the administration to the 'Local Government'.

Part I, which is the 'Truce Agreement', is seperate from Part II.

My dear no personal interpretation just post relevant doc......

 

[toxic_pus]

My dear no personal interpretation just post relevant doc......

First, drop this patronizing tone.

Second, my earlier post had all the references as 'End Note' and in this post I have quoted Karachi Agreement only. Obviously you haven't even read the full text of Karachi Agreement.

 

[A1Kaid]

All that needs to be done is infrastructure and economic development.

 

[toxic_pus]

UN resolution is no more in the picture. If this was the case, Kargil would have had not happened.

True. But there is a twist. May be later.

 

[HRK]

First, drop this patronizing tone.

Second, my earlier post had all the references as 'End Note' and in this post I have quoted Karachi Agreement only. Obviously you haven't even read the full text of Karachi Agreement.

Wht patronizing tone .... ???

'My dear' don't you like to be respected ......

BTW has you read the complete Karachi Agreement ...... ??? nad my previous post .....

 

[toxic_pus]

Wht patronizing tone .... ???

'My dear' don't you like to be respected ......

I am not your 'dear'.

BTW has you read the complete Karachi Agreement ...... ??? nad my previous post .....

Yes I have.

 

[Pulsar]

UN resolution is no more in the picture. If this was the case, Kargil would have had not happened.

Right! It's the Simla Agreement that has superseded the UN Resolutions. Period!

Relevant text of the Agreement:

"Both governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations."

But in spite of this signed agreement, Pakistan keeps harping on the defunct UN Resolutions!

 

[HRK]

I am not your 'dear'.


Yes I have.

u cant be I am straight .....

 

[shuntmaster]

Gilgit-Baltistan demands azadi..

 

[HRK]

Right! It's the Simla Agreement that has superseded the UN Resolutions. Period!

Relevant text of the Agreement:

"Both governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of durable peace and normalization of relations, including the questions of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations."

But in spite of this signed agreement, Pakistan keeps harping on the defunct UN Resolutions!

read again ful doc. is shared at this thread few pages back ....

 

[toxic_pus]

u cant be I am straight .....

Since my last post on the subject you have quoted me thrice but none addressed the point made in that post.

No more arguments?

Done?

But in spite of this signed agreement, Pakistan keeps harping on the defunct UN Resolutions!

That's because of a boo-boo left behind my Ms Gandhi. Simla Agreement actually permits Pakistan to do that.

 

[Screambowl]

read again ful doc. is shared at this thread few pages back ....

we have read it several times. The issue of jammu and Kashmir is no more under UN resolution, rather under bilateral talks.