UN to help resolve Kashmir when India and Pakistan both ask: Sec. Gen. Ban

[Xeric]

Xerics is still busy finding THE snub in the news (other than the failed attempt by the opener by highlighting/emboldening the text)...

 

[Areesh]

UN to help resolve Kashmir when India and Pakistan both ask: Sec. Gen. Ban

Now that's more factual and much better. So much for the snub.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

I know what level and class Bharati and your country belong to but anyways...

I never knew Bharat and my country was different and about the class..whatever makes you happy.

Be careful about identifying people or else things might go very difficult for you.

No need to explain I think.

dont tell me about difficulties..get your nation out of its current difficulties first..then rant here.

 

[roach]

I'm surprised at the level to which this thread has fallen. Looks like the Mods are on vacation..........

 

[Areesh]

dont tell me about difficulties..get your nation out of its current difficulties first..then rant here.

First go and identify people and than rant here.

 

[DGMO]

What's the big deal or news here?

Isn't the UN just parroting what's been previously said? We all know India's stand that this is a bilateral dispute, and Kofi Annan himself said that the plebiscite is more or less redundant back in 2005.

So if we're looking at the UN to stand up and talk of plebiscites (what many on here are hoping), then that isn't going to happen.

If the US has its offer of mediation over Kashmir turned down time and time again by India, then face reality. India doesn't see this through an international lense, and considers it a bilateral affair.

We can pick as many holes in that stance all day long, but it's not going to change the ground realities.

And our begging of the US and UN to get involved hasn't achieved the desired results. Therefore, Musharraf was sensible and realistic to move away from our previous stance back in 2006:

‘‘We (Pakistan and India) are into a bilateral dialogue. We don’t want to make it trilateral or multilateral,’’ he told CNN-IBN in an interview​

If we're going to resolve Kashmir, it will have to be a discussion between both countries, and the Kashmiris.

Clearly we were making headway over Kashmir just 5 years ago. It was the most intense and sustained level of discussion in decades. Where was the UN? Where was the US?

We did it bilaterally, and we can do it again.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

First go and identify people and than rant here.

is that what you had to say ??

 

[Areesh]

is that what you had to say ??

:

No I have to say many other things but than I fear you would start crying.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

No I have to say many other things but than I fear you would start crying. Bachai ka khayal kar raha hoon main.

its ok..no need to explain

 

[Srinivas]

goood! this shows the double standards of the world! when EAST PAKISTAN was clearly an internal matter the world let india intervene! and did nothing this time around they just twist words to save india or israel! but the positive side of it all is that this time around the kashmiris are rebelling against india without any "help" from pakistan!

sometimes i think Ahmednidjad of Iran isn't an airhead after all!

East pakistan is a different matter altogether. Pakistan has massacred millions of mohajirs (bengalis). This forced lot of refugees into India making the situation critical for India.
India intervened officially and liberated for a cause and in the process trained Mukti Bahni to defend them selves. India clearly stated that it had no intentions for territory or resources in that war. Terrorism in Kashmir is different it was sponsored to make the Kashmir issue burning as long as Pakistan exists in the process making life of kashmiris difficult.
The recent rallies show that they are organized by foreign hand to create unrest in the valley. If Kashmir wanted to be independent then pakistan would have received the support from the local back in 1948. Here you are coming after 2 generations and saying Kashmiris want independence which is laughable .
Kashmir and Bangladesh are two different contexts Bangladeshis are denied equal status with pakistanis

 

[third eye]

So is the subject, but i was trying finding that connection which exists between Kashmir, stones, HR violations, the india military, P. Musharraf, his military background (especially he being a commando) and the possible misquote of his text.


P.S. Whenever Kashmir would form part of a discussion, the stones - the freedom movement and the aggression would automatically fit in.

BTW, i didnt see the word snub either nor did i see a quote suggesting a 'snub' in the news piece. Neverthless, thanks for quoting an indian link using the word.

This is the reason why the word snub is in inverted commas in my post.

On the P.S. above, it would be a waste of time & effort as nothing has or shall change on the ground.Something this thread also brings out.

 

[Areesh]

But where is the snub? Poor thread starter got snubbed himself.

 

[Frankenstein]

I see a lot of cat fight goin on here

 

[Srinivas]

I think India should with draw the reference to UN in 1948 as it is internal matter of its integrity and talk about pakistan occupied Kashmir and chinese occupied parts according to the agreement between Maharaja of Kashmir and India.

 

[karan.1970]

What's the big deal or news here?

Isn't the UN just parroting what's been previously said? We all know India's stand that this is a bilateral dispute, and Kofi Annan himself said that the plebiscite is more or less redundant back in 2005.

So if we're looking at the UN to stand up and talk of plebiscites (what many on here are hoping), then that isn't going to happen.

If the US has its offer of mediation over Kashmir turned down time and time again by India, then face reality. India doesn't see this through an international lense, and considers it a bilateral affair.

We can pick as many holes in that stance all day long, but it's not going to change the ground realities.

And our begging of the US and UN to get involved hasn't achieved the desired results. Therefore, Musharraf was sensible and realistic to move away from our previous stance back in 2006:

‘‘We (Pakistan and India) are into a bilateral dialogue. We don’t want to make it trilateral or multilateral,’’ he told CNN-IBN in an interview​

If we're going to resolve Kashmir, it will have to be a discussion between both countries, and the Kashmiris.

Clearly we were making headway over Kashmir just 5 years ago. It was the most intense and sustained level of discussion in decades. Where was the UN? Where was the US?

We did it bilaterally, and we can do it again.

Very astute sir.. Wish we have more of your kind on both sides.. If nothing else, atleast in the political leadership