Kashmir : An Illusive Solution

[vstol Jockey]

Dear Sir.

I hope you realize that had that been the case of 1948, I would have agreed with you. I suggest we leave it at that.

The situation has completely changed due to CPEC and Pak brutalities on Original POK residents. Pakistan of today is completely different from Pakistan of 80s which was a vibrant society, very open in its views and life style. Do you know Karachi had more bars and discs in 1970s than Mumbai?
The laws against Ahmadis and discrimination of Shias, has created a new situation in POK and Gilgit-Baltistan. It is this which will ensure what I wrote about.

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

My Dear Member.

I suggest leave the almighty to peace and with his/her wisdom in managing shenanigans of us mere mortals.

I sincerely hope you realise some of us may be atheist and some downright fringe enough to be strung out at the nearest lamp post for blasphemy or heretic values.

Your point is something I am scratching my head to understand and am agitated over the fact that age and vagarancies of weather have taken their toll on the good ol' scalp and a fine example of female pattern baldness is taking firmer root day by day, and am scratching my head trying to find a point.

I was not making a point but replying to someone. Read the entire conversation to understand the context.

Being an atheist is also same as being Muslim/Christian etc. Decent people say 'i don't know', not make random opinions. Also I don't understand who is 'we' as in you mentioned. Also, can you tell me what was the point that you were making by replying like this?

 

[Himanshu Pandey]

I was not making a point but replying to someone. Read the entire conversation to understand the context.

Being an atheist is also same as being Muslim/Christian etc. Decent people say 'i don't know', not make random opinions. Also I don't understand who is 'we' as in you mentioned. Also, can you tell me what was the point that you were making by replying like this?

he is trying to find out the point as he said...

now may you please explain how being atheist is same as being a follower of Semitic religions?

As far as I know atheism is all that is against them.

 

[smestarz]

In this solution is the now famous guy who rode on Bumper of Indian army jeep be included?

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

My Dear Member, your attempt to introduce God into a discourse by presuming to know more, a distorted view on religion and a general trend of derailing and trolling on this thread is indicative of your potentially short life span here on this line.

My sincere request is to make your point so that we can stop speculating as to your intent - the we being the Hindu, the Muslim, the Sikh, the Christian and the Atheist sides to me. Unfortunately a professional hazard of services.

Suggest get on with your point please.

I never claimed to know more about god. I was just saying that throwing out man made laws, restrictions etc which are not in line with natural laws is the only way to solve any problem.

Appropriate reaction to the accumulated actions of history and present actions is the only right thing to do. Muslims are here because of genocide, not because of natural creation. The way to eliminate muslim given the availabile choice is also genocide. If muslims don't exist, there won't be these problems. If none of the abrahamic cults exist and instead world is pagan then most of the extremely dangerous threats will end. Period

 

[nair]

Keep Religion Away from Discussions.......

 

[VCheng]

Unfortunately my engagements at present preclude an active involvement.
I hope you have an ample opportunity to share your views in the interim.

More intense an indepth work awaits us further ahead, much to tickle your sublime intellect. I suspect you will enjoy witj @Himanshu Pandey joining in with his at times variable thought processes to provide a veritable experience of diversity and contrarian outlook in certain aspects.

Of course @VCheng needs to be unbridled at an opportune time. Am still unable to provide him an enticing piece though.

All in good time, Sir, all in good time.

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

@Hellfire how can you be muslim, Christian, hindu at the same time? Do you have split personality? These are not mere names. These are design of living. You can't live in different ways being a same person. So, don't utter such words with me

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

Keep Religion Away from Discussions.......

Unfortunately, the problem with Kashmir is religion. So, it is paradoxical that one has to speak on kashmir but keep religion away.

Religion is a group of people who follow a common design of living and have common faith in supernatural creation. In other words, religion is faith+civilization. Politics is also about managing a group of people. Since both involves group of people, both become tied to each other. It is not possible to separate civilization from politics, in this case, kashmir. It is as good as saying don't discuss about kashmir

 

[nair]

Unfortunately, the problem with Kashmir is religion. So, it is paradoxical that one has to speak on kashmir but keep religion away.

I understand this point, But religious discussion will not get us anywhere, But it can be used to make a point, without being abusive -

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

I understand this point, But religious discussion will not get us anywhere, But it can be used to make a point, without being abusive -

See, now you understood why I was writing indirectly.

There are things which must not be told in public directly and hence I am using indirect ways.

 

[Himanshu Pandey]

I never claimed to know more about god. I was just saying that throwing out man made laws, restrictions etc which are not in line with natural laws is the only way to solve any problem.

Appropriate reaction to the accumulated actions of history and present actions is the only right thing to do. Muslims are here because of genocide, not because of natural creation. The way to eliminate muslim given the availabile choice is also genocide. If muslims don't exist, there won't be these problems. If none of the abrahamic cults exist and instead world is pagan then most of the extremely dangerous threats will end. Period

just for reference... gaius marius, a pagon worshiper has killed and sold into slavery around 750000 germans because they were wondering and looking for permission from some king to settle on his empty lands.

 

[bonobashi]

Then one must beg the question that did the corresponding enabling act in the Indian Parliament ratifying the Instrument of Accession go by the de jure or the de facto position, given that it is this determination that would guide the government's policies henceforth? Was there such a distinction made, ever?

Sir,

I don't know the answer, but shall try to find out. Meanwhile, please consider these:
The initial acceptance was administrative, by the Governor General, Louis Lord Mountbatten, and not legislative; it is necessary to find out the date on which the legislative acceptance was made. However, at a bald level, it may be said that GoI had thought that it would almost as a matter of course gain back its lost territory of J&K as soon as Pakistan realised the errors of her ways and withdrew troops and volunteers. At all times, GoI took the entity to be the de jure entity; a mistake that legislators of a choleric disposition commit even today. Or perhaps their commitment leads to the choler; it is a fine point.
The root is that there is no provision in the Constitution for the cession of a territory. There is enough evidence to show that J&K's ownership of Aksai Chin was in grave doubt, but lack of the provision above led to, and still ensures an inextricably jammed situation.

 

[Kshithij Sharma]

just for reference... gaius marius, a pagon worshiper has killed and sold into slavery around 750000 germans because they were wondering and looking for permission from some king to settle on his empty lands.

The way I see - the person who behaves unreasonably and those who support him blindly are all guilty.

In the case of Gaius Maro or Romans, the condition of war was clear - settle via negotiations. If there is no negotiation but violence, then the war will be to wipe out every enemy immaterial of his occupation - soldier or civilian by either killing or enslavement. The German tribe invaded Roman ally who asked for Roman help. War was fought for 10 years and several Roman camps and settlement were sacked by German tribes. So, the Romans settled it once and for all by wiping entire tribes. Romans didn't kill them because they were germans but because they were invaders.

This is what I also say. Wipe out anything that is hostile and unreasonable.

This is the only solution which is meaningful anywhere

 

[VCheng]

Sir,

I don't know the answer, but shall try to find out. Meanwhile, please consider these:
The initial acceptance was administrative, by the Governor General, Louis Lord Mountbatten, and not legislative; it is necessary to find out the date on which the legislative acceptance was made. However, at a bald level, it may be said that GoI had thought that it would almost as a matter of course gain back its lost territory of J&K as soon as Pakistan realised the errors of her ways and withdrew troops and volunteers. At all times, GoI took the entity to be the de jure entity; a mistake that legislators of a choleric disposition commit even today. Or perhaps their commitment leads to the choler; it is a fine point.
The root is that there is no provision in the Constitution for the cession of a territory. There is enough evidence to show that J&K's ownership of Aksai Chin was in grave doubt, but lack of the provision above led to, and still ensures an inextricably jammed situation.

I look forward to what you may be able to find out. Your point about there being no provision to secede territory is duly noted, but that is precisely why determining the the boundaries to which the IoA can be applied to remains important, if it can be shown that the de jure claims are more aligned with the de facto positions that exist today. A very big, and tenuous IF, I might add.

 

[Himanshu Pandey]

The way I see - the person who behaves unreasonably and those who support him blindly are all guilty.

In the case of Gaius Maro or Romans, the condition of war was clear - settle via negotiations. If there is no negotiation but violence, then the war will be to wipe out every enemy immaterial of his occupation - soldier or civilian by either killing or enslavement. The German tribe invaded Roman ally who asked for Roman help. War was fought for 10 years and several Roman camps and settlement were sacked by German tribes. So, the Romans settled it once and for all by wiping entire tribes. Romans didn't kill them because they were germans but because they were invaders.

This is what I also say. Wipe out anything that is hostile and unreasonable.

This is the only solution which is meaningful anywhere

concluded and defended very heroicly but my dear there is few problems which arose with it.

the war was in Italian goul and gaul across alps which was not direct roman territory.. the so called allies were gauls who were waging wars with rome a few year ago.

you are preaching about natural laws over man made laws... and here you are denying so many people a right to wonder and settle on earth made by god because there were man made boundaries which were going to be protected by greedy man.

and even if by some natural law logic I accept it... how you defend the sell in slavery of hundred thousands of children, women and old?

is slavery a natural law or killing people looking for home is natural law?

and the biggest problem is thou use of words "the way I see"... isn't you were preaching about natural laws and right and wrongs rather then assumption and opinions?

my dear it is good to have an opinion but that opinion is good is not a necessity.. please offer a solution for kashmir and other Indian problems without genocide, slavery, rape and torture... because if you allow the rules of jungle in society.. there are loins lurking in your courtyard too.

 

[Himanshu Pandey]

Don't speak arbitrarily. The union of India itself is a deceit. There is no reason for India to host Muslims when muslims are invaders and not indigenous civilization. Even during partition, 90% muslims voted to leave. By what rights are these Muslims even allowed to live in this part of India? This itself is illogical. If constitution is illogical and arbitrary, it only means constitution must be destroyed.

Why should I be bothered with what useless or pretentious rules of armed forces? The way I see it - my life is threatened by jihad. I want it to end. I don't give a damn what constitution says or not. If constitution doesn't give assurance to me, I don't need it. If armed forces doesn't protect me by providing a final solution instead of dragging the problem, I don't need the armed forces.

Majority or minority simply doesn't matter here. Islam is unnatural and insane concept. It is a matter of right and wrong.

Indira Gandhi also let Hindus get wiped in Bangladesh and intervened only after Pakistan attacked INDIA directly. Her husband was Feroze Khan who changed his name to Gandhi to not ruin political career of Nehru. She was also the one who made India a secular state as a retaliation to RSS protest in 1975. If Nehru and Indira were thrown out and along with them all muslims were expelled, I would be feeling much safer now.

BJP alliance with Geelani? Let us hear of that, please. It is perfectly in the right topic and thread

I do allow rantings and quick wits in the course of discussion...

but if you a 2 bit key board warrior who never ever touched a gun or had beaten anyone thinks he can abuse the republic of India and it's constitution... I am telling you politely this is not a place for you to be.


either become a patriot or g back to the hole you came out.

@nair @Ashwin @Aashish may you please take proper action here.

 

[Manmohan_MMY]

I have been thinking about one thing for a while
ever since the CPEC project started the unrest has started in full swing,
most certainly the loan money from the Chinese is being used for fuelling the Kashmirs unrest

 

[Manmohan_MMY]

Why is Kashmir a vexing problem?

1. The state has 3 sub-regions - Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. In Kashmir valley muslims are predominant. However, both in Jammu and Ladakh, non-muslims such as Hindus and Buddhists are dominant. Many Muslims would like to join Pakistan, but all non-Muslims want to be with India [EDIT: there is a controversy here on how many Muslims actually want to be a part of Pakistan. See the comment thread]. The Muslim part sits in between the Hindu part and Buddhist part. This means cutting away the Muslim part and merging with Pakistan is not easy.
2. The region is extremely cold (with some of the coldest temperatures in the inhabited world), snow bound, land locked and hilly (having some of the tallest mountains in the world). Given the geography and the terrain, cutting it up is not as easy as it looks on the map.
3. The hills are considered strategically important to both India and Pakistan. The hills of Kashmir slope into the crucial region of Punjab on both sides of the border. Controlling the hills are important for both the armies.
4. The region carries the Indus water that is extremely crucial for both Pakistan and northern India. Water is the most precious resource in the dry subcontinent and you have to be extremely careful in how you carve the resources.
5. The status of Hindus in Pakistan is infinitely worse than that of the Muslims in India. Although its minority record is not spotless, India has had a couple of Muslim presidents and there are muslim leaders in every spectrum - business, sports, entertainment, arts and sciences. That means any solution that involves Hindus ending up in Pakistan is far worse than a solution involving Muslims ending up in India.
6. Terrorism. The region adjoins extremely troubled regions such as northern Pakistan, Afghanistan, Xinjiang of China and central Asia. This means an independent Kashmir can become a breeding ground of terrorists as a weak Kashmiri government can't prevail over lethal terrorists. It could become a sort of Somalia and become a bigger headache for the whole region.
7. Pandora's box. India is a highly heterogeneous country and removing Kashmir could embolden other separatist groups all over the nation. This is why India has to be inflexible at times dealing with the problem.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-b...ependence-Is-the-status-quo-the-best-solution

 

[Manmohan_MMY]

Kashmir issue can be solved: Ex-RAW chief

Solution to the festering Kashmir issue is very much “doable” and is not an “impossible” thing since we have come a long way from 1947 but Prime Minister Modi has “wasted the first 18 months in changing the status quo,” observed former RAW chief A.S. Dulat here on Tuesday.

“Great leaders world over try to bring major changes in the first few years after that it does not matter whether it is a five year or a six year term,” exclaimed the author of the best selling book ‘Kashmir – The Vajpayee Years’ during a conversation with author Karri Sriram organised by the ‘Hyd Park’ at Taj Krishna.

Calling Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee as one of the “greatest Prime Ministers”, Mr. Dulat said the former could have got elected “unopposed if he had contested from Srinagar in 2003” and he continues to be popular there. Hence, “Kashmiris were excited when Modiji got elected” and had a “huge opportunity but it got wasted as he has all the qualities that Vajpayee had”.

Workable solution

“Pakistan’s arrogance has helped us” and even Kashmiris knew India will not let go and that the gun had brought only “death and destruction”. Only workable solution for now will be to recognise the present “Line of Control”. Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh too wanted to do a deal “but did not know how to go about it”, he explained, during the course of his conversation and later taking questions from the gathering.

“We have to show empathy, find a way out of the status quo. Talks are a tedious process…we have to carry it forward” he said.

Although some feel India should be more macho about tackling terrorism, “we have dealt with it exceptionally well”.

“20 secret meetings”

About failure of the Agra summit between the then Pakistan President Gen. Musharaf and Prime Minister Vajpayee, Mr. Dulat, also a former special director in the Intelligence Bureau, felt that it was more because the Pakistanis “put all eggs in Vajpayee basket”.

He also revealed that the then Pakistan Ambassador Jehangir Qazi had held “20 secret meetings” with Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani before the Agra summit was announced by the latter.

But, Gen. Musharaff and Mr. Advani began on a sour note when the latter sought handing over of Mumbai blasts accused and underworld don Dawood Ibrahim during a meeting at the Rashtrapati Bhavan.

He has no doubt that Dawood is a “state guest” of the Pakistan Government living in Karachi and moving around. Bin Laden too was a guest of Pakistan and he was quite sure the CIA had informed the Pakistan Government before the Abottabad raid.

The former RAW chief noted Kashmiris followed a liberal Sufi Islam and Muslims were descendents of Saraswat Brahmins. Therefore, it was all the more “unfortunate” that the majority of Pandits had to leave Kashmir because the threat was real.

Mr. Dulat said the Rubaiyya Sayeed kidnapping was “clumsily handled” whereas “indecision” by the powers that be allowed the Kandahar hijacked plane IC 814 to leave the Amritsar airport to Lahore.

Kashmir issue can be solved: Ex-RAW chief