What's new

Something about kashmir war

The Kashmiri movement to join Pakistan died long time ago. It was orphaned to begin with and the prevalent idea among Pakistani army that upon being attacked, the Kashmiris would join them against India has been proved wrong thrice in a row. The indigenous militancy also died a decade back. Most of the terrorists that got killed in last ten years are youth from Pakistani Punjab belonging to lower economic strata. Even that has reduced to almost none.

Whatever political support is present for freedom struggle is led by an 80 year old man, whom govt. of India has preserved very carefully, so that he may not die any sort of unnatural death. Interestingly, his doctor is a Kashmiri pandit whose family was evicted due to communal violence in the early 90s. There is no other single prominent leader from the youth indicating that political support is dying as well.
And I would not worry about raising Pakistani flags. That's merely a publicity stunt. The protesters have learnt that it draws media attention quickly. Otherwise, it's entirely laughable that someone would raise a Pakistani flag, while the rally is for demanding an independent Kashmir.
Kashmiri indigenous armed struggle is improving day by day. Still Geelani hurriats are snatching insas rifles from government forces and raising anti indian slogans. Weekly ambush strikes on government forces are examples of strong opposition.
 
. .
Another thing to add; the muslim majority areas of Kashmir would have totally liberated, had the Koshur speaking proper Kashmiris of Srinagar Valley joined their pahari-potohari neighbours of Azad Kashmir in open rebellion. Had regions surrounding Srinagar rebelled, Indians would have given up as they did in case of Bhimber.

They are suffering now because of the mistake they made then.

An Indian author, Brig Amar Cheema writes in his book what tribals exclaimed: "loot lo Hindu ka zar, mussalman ka ghar aur sikhoun ka sar!".

LOL! As if Tribals of 1947 knew how to speak in urdu. Jhoot bolna koi in baniyoun se seekhay.
 
.
Nahi non state actors is used in a diff sense from what i know.they are the civilians who challenge the state's authority,acha iwill recheck the broader meaning of it.

But idont see anything wrong with it , civilians of any country can assist their army in event of a conflict ,how shud it be taken as unethical.?

oh just shut it and dont troll here. Just cut it out u indians.
They werent mercenaries, they were pakistan's civilians. Unlike india who uses ttp mercenries in afganistan.

Is this supposed to be a civil way to reply when you don't like the answer you get? Pathetic!!! Pure Baiting.

Isn't this frowned upon in pdf? Mods???
 
.
Kashmiri indigenous armed struggle is improving day by day. Still Geelani hurriats are snatching insas rifles from government forces and raising anti indian slogans. Weekly ambush strikes on government forces are examples of strong opposition.

You clearly came out of a time capsule. If you don't have any substantial data/statistics to contribute then better not quote me.

Another thing to add; the muslim majority areas of Kashmir would have totally liberated, had the Koshur speaking proper Kashmiris of Srinagar Valley joined their pahari-potohari neighbours of Azad Kashmir in open rebellion. Had regions surrounding Srinagar rebelled, Indians would have given up as they did in case of Bhimber.

They are suffering now because of the mistake they made then.

An Indian author, Brig Amar Cheema writes in his book what tribals exclaimed: "loot lo Hindu ka zar, mussalman ka ghar aur sikhoun ka sar!".

LOL! As if Tribals of 1947 knew how to speak in urdu. Jhoot bolna koi in baniyoun se seekhay.

There was nothing to join. A militia was raised which was provided training and logistics by elements from within the newly formed Pakistani army. The militia was organized by the army. The objective was to turn it into a people's movement, which never happened. The amusing part is, Pakistan tried the same formula two more times, each and everytime with the assumption that any external action by militia will be supported by the locals. Each time it failed.

It's Indian propagandists who blame the entire Kashmir conflict on tribals from FATA, and don't mention the reality that it was locals who started the uprising. The uprising actually started in Rajouri and Poonch by Sudhans and muslim rajputs. The muslim rajputs of Kotli and Rajauri were persuaded to start an armed conflict by ex-Indian army men like Raja Sakhi Daler and Raja Habib-ur-Rahman Khan. Tribals fought in Muzaffarabad region mostly, which is the north. It was Jinnah, who persuaded tribals to assist the local rebels.

The fighters in Bhimber, Mirpur and Kotli, who were mostly the local muslim rajputs fought without any tribal help, but Indians still blame "tribals" for that. They are said to have robbed and pillaged hindu villages, and killed Dogra soldiers.

Wrong. The plan was drawn by mid-level officers of Pakistani army with lack of foresight and juvenile enthusiasm. The plan expected the locals to rise, which never happened.
Many relate it to the war-veterans of Poonch, some 60,000 were there. If 50% or even 25% would have joined the uprising, Indian army wouldn't have been able to contain the situation. That's something never happened. The history is very well documented. Refer to Shuja Nawaz's writings on the topic.
 
.
The Partition was the best thing to happen to India. Do you think we would have survived unscathed living among Zarvans and Syedali73s?

This was Nehru's one big success - agreeing to a Partition.
Are we living 'unscathed' now?.......the 'incomplete' partition only made the problem perpetual......kept open the possibility of a second and subsequent partitions!
 
Last edited:
.
Pashtuns , mostly from FATA areas of Khyber, Waziristan and Mohmand. NWFP Pashtuns , mostly fighters of nawab of dir and some fighters from Afghanistan, of ghilzai tribe, also volunteered. Pakistan army entered into Kashmir war very late, in May 1948 while Pashtun warriors fought in Kashmir from october 1947 upto the end of war and their war was coordinated with local freedom fighters. The ex-faujis of Sudhans had contacts with Khyber and waziristan when they had served there under British.

The tribal lashkars were recruited and organized by political administration of FATA and Pakistani army officers were present among them to direct their war. At Baramullah the Pakistani army officers wanted to seize the state treasury but Tribals didnt allow that and seized the treasury for themselves, ignoring the protests of Pakistani faujis. From this incident comes the charges of looting. The rest is Indian propaganda to justify their intervention in Kashmir.
Who was nawab dir, as in what region he belonged to

The Partition was the best thing to happen to India. Do you think we would have survived unscathed living among Zarvans and Syedali73s?

This was Nehru's one big success - agreeing to a Partition.
Oh just shut it sartak , dont attack syedali73, leave him alone. What the hell is wrong with you indians going after him. U terribly need self introspection.
 
. . .
Guys ihave to ask something abt the tribals who had fought alongside pak army to free kashmir and jammu in 48. Who were those tribals? To be honest several times on the forums and even recently in some thread it happened that some indian said that it were those afghani tribals who had fought along our forces.

So well how on earth we got afghani tribes?? It is pre 70s era. Or is it again indians peddling outright lies everywhere to say whatever suits their narratives ?
Who were those tribals? Where did they come from?


they were from Waziristan and currently settled in Azad Kashmir. Even The Azad Kashmir's so called illegal president is a Khan, I don't know how Kashmiris became Khans. But Now they are settled and have taken the Kashmiri domicile under illegal Karachi Agreement as every internal matter and foreign policy of Azad Kashmir is governed by GHQ in Islamabad.

Seriously very much Azad(sarcasm)
 
.
Death of Ranjit Singh, Hari Singh Nalwa and Rajput warlord Zorawar Singh kalhuria coincided with British Gaining power in the subcontinent ... Was the worst thing happened to Kashmir otherwise Kashmir would have been a free country/monarchy called Dogristhan.
How do you know about Zorawar Singh he was a rajput from my Homeland,a great military commander known for his invasion of Baltistan ..Tibet Campaign ...capturing the fort of Skardu and Astor... Died in a field with Honour (Tibet)

zorawar.jpg


His
fort in Laddakh
500px-Zorawerfort (1).jpg

And you are right on one count if it wasn't for British and downfall of Sikhs and Pahari Rajas Kashmir would've a Monarchy under a Dogra king.

Pathans were long kicked out from Kashmir valley by Dogras and Sikhs that they didn't dared to show up until 1947 even though there were only few thousand Dogra left in King's service as most of them employed by British Indian Army since 1870s.

Finally Nehru was a Coward kashmiri pandit who was only happy with the annexation of Resource Rich Kashmir valley.
 
.
India attacked Hyderabad and Junagarh and anexed the pricely states against the will of their governments.
In Kashmir the officials of kashmiri administration rebelled agaisnt their own government. Read more please before commenting
For Hyderabad, India had to intervene because of the attrocaciies of muslims Rajakars over the hindu population not just in the state of hyderabad but in the Indian sides as well..

In the 1936-37 Indian elections, the Muslim League under Muhammad Ali Jinnah had sought to harness Muslim aspirations, and had won the adherence of MIM leader Nawab Bahadur Yar Jung, who campaigned for an Islamic State centred on the Nizam as the Sultan dismissing all claims for democracy. The Arya Samaj, a Hindu revivalist movement, had been demanding greater access to power for the Hindu majority since the late 1930s, and was curbed by the Nizam in 1938. The Hyderabad State Congress joined forces with the Arya Samaj as well as the Hindu Mahasabha in the State.[16]

Even as India and Hyderabad negotiated, most of the sub-continent had been thrown into chaos as a result of communal Hindu-Muslim riots pending the imminent partition of India. Fearing a Hindu civil uprising in his own kingdom, the Nizam allowed Qasim Razvi, a close advisor, and leader of the radical Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM) Party, to set up a voluntary militia of Muslims called the 'Razakars'. The Razakars - who numbered up to 200,000 at the height of the conflict - swore to uphold Islamic domination in Hyderabad and the Deccan plateau in the face of growing public opinion amongst the majority Hindu population favouring the accession of Hyderabad into the Indian Union.[citation needed]​

As the manpower and arsenal of the Razakars grew, there was an escalation of violence between the Razakars and Hindu communities. In all, more than 150 villages (of which 70 were in Indian territory outside Hyderabad State) were pushed into violence. In Telangana, large groups of peasants, aided by the Communist Party of India and Andhra Mahasabha, revolted against local Hindu and Muslim landlords, and also came into direct confrontation with the Razakars, in what became known as the Telangana Rebellion. “From the beginning of 1948 the Razakars had extended their activities from Hyderabad city into the towns and rural areas, murdering Hindus, abducting women, pillaging houses and fields, and looting non-Muslim property in a widespread reign of terror." [17]

On 4 December 1947, Narayan Rao Pawar, a member of a Hindu nationalist organisation called the Arya Samaj, made a failed attempt to assassinate the Nizam outside his palace.[18]


Sources

16. Noorani 2014, pp. 51-61.
17. Jump up^ By Frank Moraes, Jawaharlal Nehru, Mumbai: Jaico.2007, p.394
18. Jump up^ "Boloji.com - Analysis". Retrieved 12 September 2014.​
 
.
they were from Waziristan and currently settled in Azad Kashmir. Even The Azad Kashmir's so called illegal president is a Khan, I don't know how Kashmiris became Khans. But Now they are settled and have taken the Kashmiri domicile under illegal Karachi Agreement as every internal matter and foreign policy of Azad Kashmir is governed by GHQ in Islamabad.

Seriously very much Azad(sarcasm)

abhe bhangi bili Azad Kashmir president name is Sardar Muhammad Yakoob Khan and sardar is used by Sudhans who are natives of AJK. And AJK PM is some jatt from Mirpur named Chaudhry Abdul Majeed.

President

Sardar-Muhammad-Yaqoob-Khan.jpg


PM

MLA2.jpg
 
.
For Hyderabad, India had to intervene because of the attrocaciies of muslims Rajakars over the hindu population not just in the state of hyderabad but in the Indian sides as well..

In the 1936-37 Indian elections, the Muslim League under Muhammad Ali Jinnah had sought to harness Muslim aspirations, and had won the adherence of MIM leader Nawab Bahadur Yar Jung, who campaigned for an Islamic State centred on the Nizam as the Sultan dismissing all claims for democracy. The Arya Samaj, a Hindu revivalist movement, had been demanding greater access to power for the Hindu majority since the late 1930s, and was curbed by the Nizam in 1938. The Hyderabad State Congress joined forces with the Arya Samaj as well as the Hindu Mahasabha in the State.[16]

Even as India and Hyderabad negotiated, most of the sub-continent had been thrown into chaos as a result of communal Hindu-Muslim riots pending the imminent partition of India. Fearing a Hindu civil uprising in his own kingdom, the Nizam allowed Qasim Razvi, a close advisor, and leader of the radical Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM) Party, to set up a voluntary militia of Muslims called the 'Razakars'. The Razakars - who numbered up to 200,000 at the height of the conflict - swore to uphold Islamic domination in Hyderabad and the Deccan plateau in the face of growing public opinion amongst the majority Hindu population favouring the accession of Hyderabad into the Indian Union.[citation needed]​

As the manpower and arsenal of the Razakars grew, there was an escalation of violence between the Razakars and Hindu communities. In all, more than 150 villages (of which 70 were in Indian territory outside Hyderabad State) were pushed into violence. In Telangana, large groups of peasants, aided by the Communist Party of India and Andhra Mahasabha, revolted against local Hindu and Muslim landlords, and also came into direct confrontation with the Razakars, in what became known as the Telangana Rebellion. “From the beginning of 1948 the Razakars had extended their activities from Hyderabad city into the towns and rural areas, murdering Hindus, abducting women, pillaging houses and fields, and looting non-Muslim property in a widespread reign of terror." [17]

On 4 December 1947, Narayan Rao Pawar, a member of a Hindu nationalist organisation called the Arya Samaj, made a failed attempt to assassinate the Nizam outside his palace.[18]


Sources

16. Noorani 2014, pp. 51-61.
17. Jump up^ By Frank Moraes, Jawaharlal Nehru, Mumbai: Jaico.2007, p.394
18. Jump up^ "Boloji.com - Analysis". Retrieved 12 September 2014.​
Had to do this Had to do that
And thrown Wikipedia copy past on my Face :-/
You attack you annex two whole states that is justified. Hyderabad wanted to remain indipendant, Junagarh wanted to be Part of Pakistan.
The Gilgit administration rebelled against Srinagar (Thats not a conspiracy like your ATTROCITIES bullshit) and Pakiatani intervention in favour of Gilgit and Muslims areas of Kashmir is terrorism.
No part of Hyderabad and Junagarh Government rabelled and supported Indian army.
Even Goa. India Attacked and Annexed Goa from Portugese.
And who can forget 71 blatant invasion of india in troubled East Pakistan.
But Yes of course Mother India is a Holy cow and their is always a valid JUSTIFICATION for all those invasions. Jay hind. Now go amd dance and dont reply with more wikipedia. Stay Blessed
Sada kutta kutta twada kutta tommy.
Hypocricy at its best.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom