Six countries support India in rejecting OHCHR report on Kashmir

[GumNaam]

Okay I'll wait. something tells me I'll be waiting a long time though, since Pakistan has been trying to get back Kashmir for 70 years with no success. As for Pakistan's supporters, you must have been reading something different, because not a single country openly supported its stance on Kashmir, whereas several openly supported India.



Then why don't you pass a UN resolution supporting a plebiscite in Kashmir and condemning India?

india has been trying tooth and nail for the last 70 years to get back the so called Pakistan "occupied" kashmir and has been miserably failing at it. there is already a un resolution demanding a plebiscite. And why should we waste our time playing "plebiscite plebiscite" when your own citizens are rebelling against you, we don't even have to invade any more, just gotta arm them and send them back home with a backpack full of arms and ammo, they're doing the rest. So keep waiting, slowly but surely india's side of kashmir is shrinking in size.

 

[LASER1]

the real question is that why didn't they voice their support for india? doesn't matter if they left it or not. And the report basically says what we've been saying all along so yeah, we got a heck of a lot more votes than you could ever get...

Guess you live in a cave. You didn't get a single vote in support. The motion went jack-squat. Now laugh on that.

 

[GumNaam]

Guess you forgot 1971, where we captured Turtuk and other villages in Pakistan Occuppied Balochistan. Whereas we have not lost an inch of Kashmir since 1947. Whereas you invaded us in 1965 and 1999 and failed miserably. So keep trying.
Now is anyone going to answere my original question?

you occupied villages in "balochistan" in 1971??????? man, that must be some potent dried gobar you're smokin'!!!

 

[aman_rai0007]

Every Pakistani here dogged the question of how many supported them in the council....
Says a lot about their mentality

 

[GumNaam]

Guess you live in a cave. You didn't get a single vote in support. The motion went jack-squat. Now laugh on that.

the UNHRC literally says what we have been saying and you think we didn't get jack squat? dude, you were supposed to smoke camel CIGS, not camel DIKS!!!

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Guess you live in a cave. You didn't get a single vote in support. The motion went jack-squat. Now laugh on that.

It's best that we let them live in their delusions. They can think the world supports Pakistan all they want, that does not mean it is true. In the meantime they will have to get an Indian visa to visit Srinagar.

the UNHRC literally says what we have been saying and you think we didn't get jack squat? dude, you were supposed to smoke camel CIGS, not camel DIKS!!!

And how many countries read the report? Or more specifically, which countries actually gave a shat? The UN has published countless reports condemning Myanmar, but they are supported by China, Russia, and India. When Countries like China, Turkey, the EU countries, and the U.S seriously make an attempt to introduce such a resolution, get back to me. In the meantime, answer the question already: Which countries openly support you?

 

[GumNaam]

It's best that we let them live in their delusions. They can think the world supports Pakistan all they want, that does not mean it is true. In the meantime they will have to get an Indian visa to visit Srinagar.

oh no no no, this ^^^ is a delusion...

 

[hussain0216]

Okay I'll wait. something tells me I'll be waiting a long time though, since Pakistan has been trying to get back Kashmir for 70 years with no success. As for Pakistan's supporters, you must have been reading something different, because not a single country openly supported its stance on Kashmir, whereas several openly supported India

The U.N report itself is complete affirmation of Pakistans stance on Kashmir

The Kashmiris have never been so anti indian, the rise of hindutva in india has created the awareness amongst Kashmiris of the hindu risk and complete and utter confirmation that Jinnahs two nation theory was totally right

Even democracy has fallen in Kashmir with india having no option except direct rule as Kashmiris stone indian soldiers and reject the state

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Sorry I meant Baltistan

Turtuk is a Village in Baltistan Occupied in 1971 by Indian Army. THank you for correcting me, but my point still stands.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/annexaion-of-turtuk-in-1971.473666/

You happy now?

I was thinking about Balochistan when I typed that, so I wrote the wrong thing. I admit I fcked up. Now will you answer my question already? How many countries support Pakistan on Kashmir?

 

[DarkPrince]

I'm surprised that Bangladesh is not on the list

 

[GumNaam]

Turtuk is a Village in Baltistan Occupied in 1971 by Indian Army. THank you for correcting me, but my point still stands.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/annexaion-of-turtuk-in-1971.473666/

You happy now?

I was thinking about Balochistan when I typed that, so I wrote the wrong thing. I admit I fcked up. Now will you answer my question already? How many countries support Pakistan on Kashmir?

pffrrtt, big deal, we were in the middle of a civil war on the eastern side that divided our forces and even then, india couldn't make a significant impact on basically any side aside from taking a couple of villages and posts along the loc just we took a couple of villages and posts. Hardly an accomplishment for the indians. if it was any other nation that actually had a "real" military worth its salt, the damage could've been significantly worse. The fact is india gained nothing. Whatever little it did gain it eventually lost in 1999 by loosing the strategic kargil peaks.

And don't pat yourself on the back just yet, it is you now how is in the middle of a civil war. We're just returning the favor.

 

[Cobra Arbok]

pffrrtt, big deal, we were in the middle of a civil war on the eastern side that divided our forces and even then, india couldn't make a significant impact on basically any side aside from taking a couple of villages and posts along the loc just we took a couple of villages and posts. Hardly an accomplishment for the indians. if it was any other nation that actually had a "real" military worth its salt, the damage could've been significantly worse. The fact is india gained nothing. Whatever little it did gain it eventually lost in 1999 by loosing the strategic kargil peaks.

And don't pat yourself on the back just yet, it is you now how is in the middle of a civil war. We're just returning the favor.

Okay so which "villages and posts" did you capture in 1971? nothing. And we did not lose territory in Kargil, we secured the territory we had and captured several strategic peaks. such as 5310 that was on your side of the Loc. I repeat, we have not lost an inch of Kashmir since 1947, we have only gained territory. And even if we are in a CIvil War, we are not losing 200 people in blasts.

Now is anyone going to answer the original question? Which Countries support Pakistan?

 

[GumNaam]

Okay so which "villages and posts" did you capture in 1971? nothing. And we did not lose territory in Kargil, we secured the territory we had and captured several strategic peaks. such as 5310 that was on your side of the Loc. I repeat, we have not lost an inch of Kashmir since 1947, we have only gained territory. And even if we are in a CIvil War, we are not losing 200 people in blasts.

Now is anyone going to answer the original question? Which Countries support Pakistan?

irrelevant to the discussion. But since you asked, here read one of your own:
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/spotlights/1971-assessment-of-campaign-in-the-western-sector/

Here's an excerpt:

The major Indian gains claimed in terms of area were about 3,200 square kilometres in the Ladakh region under Lt Gen Sartaj Singh and 1,200 square kilometres. under Lt Gen G G Bewoor in the Rajasthan Desert. In both regions these gains lay in farflung, desolate, uninhabited and difficult areas of negligible economic, strategic and political value which could hurt the rulers of Pakistan only in their prestige.

So you just took the territory where there was no population nor any military on account of us being bogged down in east Pakistan. Hey, this is one of your own exposing you.

On the other hand, Sartaj Singh lost the area of Chhamb, where the aftermath of the refugee problem still haunts the Jammu and Kashmir administration.

So when it came to actual fighting, your forces turned tail and ran away (again) giving us chamb!

Read more at:
http://www.indiandefencereview.com/spotlights/1971-assessment-of-campaign-in-the-western-sector/

But if you really want to know kargil's reality then here...
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/debunking-kargil-myths-how-pakistan-captured-point-5353.566442/
The fact is and remains that you lost point 5353 in kargil and its immediate peaks that are still under Pakistani control. You continue to feel nostalgic about your 50 year old victory that was induced by crooked Pakistani politicians who actually WANTED that 1971 debacle to happen so that they can keep their chairs. you continue to miss the point that it was NOT an indian military achievement by any stretch of the imagination since unfortunately our own politicians set india up to win. But fast forward to today and you see that that the tables have turned, all of indian assets have crashed and burnt and Pakistan basically calls the shots on the indian side of kashmir at will. You are bleeding and we are making you bleed. And when the time is right, we will behead you, at the moment and place of our choosing. Its the writing on the wall. But feel free to ignore the harsh reality that the days of getting our politicians to do your bidding for you are long gone and continue to fantasize in your 50+ year old fake victory that your military could not have achieved without the cooperation of crooked Pakistani politicians like bhutto.

 

[hussain0216]

Okay so which "villages and posts" did you capture in 1971? nothing. And we did not lose territory in Kargil, we secured the territory we had and captured several strategic peaks. such as 5310 that was on your side of the Loc. I repeat, we have not lost an inch of Kashmir since 1947, we have only gained territory. And even if we are in a CIvil War, we are not losing 200 people in blasts.

Now is anyone going to answer the original question? Which Countries support Pakistan?

Peaks overlooking Karhil were taken by Pakistan forces and remain in Pakistan control

Kargil was a humiliation for india,it was taken by complete surprise, surrendering the area as india troops ran

it was international pressure and a weak Pakistan government that gave India the carte Blanche to remove irregulars, but Pakistan to this day controls a number of peaks occupied during the incursion

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Peaks overlooking Karhil were taken by Pakistan forces and remain in Pakistan control

Kargil was a humiliation for india,it was taken by complete surprise, surrendering the area as india troops ran

it was international pressure and a weak Pakistan government that gave India the carte Blanche to remove irregulars, but Pakistan to this day controls a number of peaks occupied during the incursion

I really don't want to turn this into a Kargil discussion. but if Pakistan won, why did they vacate the posts? THe reason is they lost Tiger Hill. After that, it was hopeless. That is the reason Nawaz Shariff went crying to Clinton on July 4th, after Pakistan lost Tiger Hill. Meanwhile, India did not lose a single peak it had occupied. THis was a major military success for India because it was able to remove the millitants through conventional mountain warfare.
Here is an unbiases documentary.

Anyway, this thread was not about military, but diplomacy. India has already bested Pakistan militarily, so do any countries support Pakistan diplomatically?

Perhaps someone else should ask my question, because I have not gotten one coherent answer from GumNaam and Hussein.