^
Pasha Saheb,
There is no difference between the "dirty" deeds of India and Pakisan. Pakistan also invaded Balochistan after its independence, and denied Independence option to Pashtuns. Each Dominion tried to get control of as much territory as possible. The concern for natives was superficial. The main struggle was for the control of resources on their respective territories.
In Kashmir,the Raja was already weak, and his regime collapsing. Sh. Abdullah was immensely popular. Revolution had already broken.I am sure J&K would soon have gained independence. However, this was not in Pakistan's interest because of the stormy relationship between Quaid and Sheikh. Thus, the invasion by *kabaili lashkars *was launched from Pakistan, which incidentally also gave India the pretext that she needed to intervene. The rest, as they say, is history.
India is not disliked for playing dirty, she is disliked for outmaneuvering Pakistan every time in playing dirty.
This is not true . Pajistan didn't invade Baluchistan . They joined Pakistan themselves . Pashtones opted Pakistan through a referendum
Invade through Qabaili lashkar was a foolishness , They should have to leave it in local fighters who were doing it better .
This is not true . Pajistan didn't invade Baluchistan . They joined Pakistan themselves . Pashtones opted Pakistan through a referendum .
Circumstances surrounding Kalat's accession to Pakistan are even more murkier as compared to that of Kashmir to India. Similarly, Pakhtunkhwa's referendum was boycotted by the province's most popular political party and their tallest leader because of exclusion of "Independence" option. Still Pakistan only won it by a slight majority of 50.1%. Did it make the exercise legal ? Sure. But was it moral or ethical ? Decide for yourself.
Like I said before, Is hamam mein dono nange hain, no point in arguing who is carrying more dirt !
Now I am out of this thread, before I get banned :D
There is always troubles in matters like this . Khan of Qalat was double minded but he decided just himself without any military threat . I don't want to quote here the reason because that is immaterial . Our history is clean but later our army men started mistakes .
You are absolutely right every body is a liar and Neville Maxvell is the biggest liar - And look at the reviews of the book below…Even bigger lies. Neville is a scum.. LMAO…
Rest easy - We only believe and read Indian shistory its the absolute truth nothing but the truth.
Circumstances surrounding Kalat's accession to Pakistan are even more murkier as compared to that of Kashmir to India. Similarly, Pakhtunkhwa's referendum was boycotted by the province's most popular political party and their tallest leader because of exclusion of "Independence" option. Still Pakistan only won it by a slight majority of 50.1%. Did it make the exercise legal ? Sure. But was it moral or ethical ? Decide for yourself.
Like I said before, Is hamam mein dono nange hain, no point in arguing who is carrying more dirt !
Now I am out of this thread, before I get banned :D
When the referendum in NWFP was held the country was run by the Brits (therefore they decided the bits and pieces of the referendum), Congress was ruling the province, the khudai khidmatgars boycotted the elections as there was no option for independence. The result of the elections was in favour of Pakistan. If the Khudai khidmatgars were so popular why havent they been able to muster popular support in elections in the province, as far as I know ANP (previously NAP) is currently ruling the province for the first time since independence. As far as Balochistan is concerned, the whole province except Kalat state joined Pakistan. Some people raise doubts about the circumstances in which Kalat acceded to Pakistan.
