Pakistan would like to keep the Kashmir issue alive by supporting insurgency in the region. However, facts on the ground are that people want development and a better life for themselves more than anything else. Hopefully the new Kashmiri govt of Omar Abdullah will provide them that and the issue of separate state would go on the backburner.
And those who are desperate to join Pakistan can cross over even now....
Kashmir belongs to Pakistan and that's the truth- one day the world will acknowledge the same and Kashmir will be a province of Pakistan.. Inshallah. This guy Omar looks like he's lost all the time. It was due to the ghaddari of his grandfather that we have this problem. Kashmiris wanted to join Pakistan back then and they want to join Pakistan much more now.
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
You seem to be talking for Kashmiris without any context. If they wanted to join Pakistan much more now, why did the ordinary Kashmiri defy the militant's call for boycott and vote. It helps to take a chill pill at times.
Kashmir belongs to Pakistan and that's the truth- one day the world will acknowledge the same and Kashmir will be a province of Pakistan.. Inshallah. This guy Omar looks like he's lost all the time. It was due to the ghaddari of his grandfather that we have this problem. Kashmiris wanted to join Pakistan back then and they want to join Pakistan much more now.
Muslim Kashmiris "might" have wanted to join Pakistan in 1947. However, instead of being patient, the Pakistanis were greedy and sent tribals + armed forces into Kashmir which freaked out the Maharaja and he decided to go with India.
That was 1947. Seeing how the Pakistan has gone downhill since then, I am sure Kashmiris are not too keen on joining Pakistan now.
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
why not give 10 years and both side of Kashmir should be educated enough to take their own decision.. by education means not just writing their name but technical, scientific and other levels.. Once we achieve 100% literacy level let them vote and decide what they want. Until then there is much possibility that India-Pakistan can influence general population (or claimed by each other)..
Creating state based on religion will not be solution, Britishers creates pakistan (east and west) both on Islamic foundation still can't stay together for long...
India is secular and and is not Hindu country as many of members of this forum like to think... (the author of original article is insene to think of mass conversion or migration.. how they will convert? Hindu can only be by birth, so will they convert to buddism??)
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
I dont' think kashmiri's wanted to join pakistan else they would have revolted when pakistan army supported kabayalees entered J&K in 1948 and 1965..
but sitting at a/c office, we can't decide on their fate or even think of what they feel after seperating from their relatives (PoK and J&K) or being forced out of homes and living life in shelter (in case of kashmiri pandits)...
If given option i think they might wanted to be left alone ...
the author of original article is insene to think of mass conversion or migration.. how they will convert? Hindu can only be by birth, so will they convert to buddism??)
That is nonsense. Anyone can become a "Hindu" - this is not Judaism where your mother has to be a Jew. How else do you explain all the "Hare Krishna's" in the US? Have you read any "Hindu" text that says you cannot convert to "Hinduism"? And anyway, what is "insene"? What dictionary are you using?
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
Why don't you give the Kashmiri people the chance to voice their own opinion? A bunch of ****ing sitting in the west speaking on behalf of the Kashmiri people in Indian Occupied Kashmir.
You know for so damn certain that they don't want to join Pakistan, give them their legal, moral and internationa right to vote as per the UNSC.
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
^The UNSC resolution could never be implemented as Pakistan failed to withdraw its forces from Kashmir in time which was the first step in implementing the resolution.
Now that resolution is obsolete since the geography and demographics of Kashmir have been permanently altered.
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
Regardless of what happened or didn't happen, I don't give a crap. At this point, this whole situation is costing the entire region way too many lives, and way too many people delusions about jihad and shahadat and 72 virgins, to the point that the lives of common Pakistani families are being destroyed when their kids get recruited to join organizations that are now flipping out and backstabbing the Pakistani people and also spreading false messages of what Islam is all about. If Kashmir is at the root of all the problems on the subcontinent, even if its a fueling factor, the only way for peace is to resolve Kashmir. Scrap all the old crap, sit down, get the two countries and their militaries and militias and guerrillas out of the Kashmir/Jammu region, hold a fair election, and give them what they frikkin want. Anyone who doesn't get their way is free to pick up their bags and move to whatever country they want.
Of course, people here will come up with a bunch of counterarguments, but its all bullcrap in the end. At the end of the day, its really boiling down to land and old pride which neither country can set aside. Fine, the British played Pakistan and that was unfair, and we can boohoo all we want about how its always us muslims who get victimized, but the last time I checked, we weren't being all that wise about coping with our global problems either. There really isn't anything holding anyone back from peace in Kashmir except the egos of two governments more than anything else. And who suffers? The people stuck in between. Don't lay sole blame on the Indians. We've made life hell for Kashmiris with our Jihadi crap that's infiltrated their lands. Its not fair to have a family in Kashmir knowing that your kids will grow up to take up arms for a living, to defend an age old war that two governments don't have the brains to just sit down and settle. Same crap problem in Israel and Gaza/West Bank - it boils down to resources and land. If I control this area, I have more power, and I will stop at nothing to get it, even if it means annhiliting an entire population to get it.
Kashmirs. The poor Kashmiris. Rich how Pakistanis feel so bad about them, and I post an video of life being complete morbid sick hell in Swat and no one sheds a friggin tear for the people of Swat and those people are muslim too AND they fall under the jurisprudence of your national boundaries.
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
Please point out where Pakistan failed to implement he UNSC. Please do. Some Indian started a thread in World Affairs and then failed to respond to my counter points. Do a search.
You state "in time". Where in the UNSC does it give a time frame? Secondly in which of the UNSC resolutions does it say that Pakistan has to withdraw first?
Your opinion on the change is irrelevant. The UNSC resolutions stand until the UNSC decides otherwise. You aren't a special snowflake, your opinion does not matter. Stick to the facts.
Read it and you will realize that to create conditions for a free & impartial plebiscite, Pakistan govt was to withdraw all tribesmen who had entered for the purpose of fighting and prevent any intrusion into the state of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the state.
Obviously, Pakistan did not do it and infact is still supporting intrusion into J&K and also furnishing material aid to the terrorists fighting in J&K.
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
I repeat for clarity:
You state "in time". Where in the UNSC does it give a time frame? Secondly in which of the UNSC resolutions does it say that Pakistan has to withdraw first?
Re: Kashmir - a new, interesting, and dangerous viewpoint
^ Pakistan did not withdraw its infiltrators prior to the signing of the Simla agreement in 1972. Infact infiltration is going on even today.
Simla Agreement which was signed after the UNSC resolution of 1948 had excluded the mediation of the UN in the Kashmir dispute and as such that UNSC resolution is irrelevant and cannot not provide a framework for settlement of this dispute.