Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sameer
1. "This process may not require the participation of Pakistan but if you are planning to send seperatist Sunnis across the border then it does concearn Pakistan as well."
2." ... , (assume for one sec that this plan works), if Pakistan does not stop the insurgency sponsorship, training camps etc then Jehadis will always cross over ..."
3. " ... Also any plan that deals with religion ie Sunnis who decide to leave can get money and leave will never work in India as the supreme court will deeem it unconstitutional. ... "
4. " ... Any partition along religious lines will never work ... "
5. " ... and I for one cannot see the morality ... "
6. " ... sure you may have a seperatist in Kashmir but that does not mean that he should have to leave because Kashmir and his village is his as well ... "
7. " ... Partition was wrong in 47 and in 2004 is does not become any more right... "
8. " ... A plan will only work if both parties accept it. ... "
|
1. The author is not counting on sending them to Pakistan. There are 3 pages in the thread that I gave as a link ( in case, you may have not noticed his statement to this effect on a latter page).
2. This can occur irrespective of whether there is a Kashmir problem or not. This has to do with, what the author calls, "Sunnification". For proof, see Assam & West Bengal. Only the players are different. In a 100+ years, we'll have 50.1 % Sunnis there, followed by a demand for plebiscite.
The solution to this problem is a
Secure border which has nothing to do with Kashmir only or Pakistan.
In Kosovo, the process of Sunnification took 600+ years till Sunnis drove the Serbs out of their land with the Serbian holy places left behind.
3. Can you cite the part of the Indian Constitution which forbids it?
Here is the link:
http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/welcome.html
The Khalistanis went to Canada, UK & USA in thousands. They are running Gurdwaras & Sikh Madrassas in Canada & are very chummy with the local politicians, to my personal knowledge. The Supreme Court of India did not say that their leaving India was against the Indian Constitution. If it did, Khalistanis would be the first to try to blow it up.
4. We are not talking about partition of land but swapping of population. The author has nearly ruled out Pakistan in the scheme for this purpose.
5. Similarly, I cannot see the morality of cutting out the cancer tumour from my body because it is a part of my body. Even if it kills me.
I should not let Dawood Ibrahim leave Bombay in 1990 before he causes untold damage because he is a part of me & it'll be immoral.
Please don't misunderstand me. I am not being sarcastic but merely satirical to quickly illustrate my point on a messageboard, hopefully to make you ponder the implications of the "morality".
6. That is right. And we should have stopped the Khalistanis too. And built some refugee camps in Haryana for Punjabi Hindus whom they were shooting in buses & shops.
We have done that for Kashmiri Pundits already.
( Again, it is satire & not sarcasm.)
Please see the last few posts in ths link (including Sep5, 2005) :
http://pub16.bravenet.com/forum/1349860828/show/453413
7. Again, as stated above, we are not talking about parttion of land.
8. Both? Who is both? The author's plan does not envisage Pakistan as a party.
Maybe you did not get a chance to look at the original Link in its entirety. The Link has 3 pages. At the bottom of page 1 & 2, there is 'Next |>' button on the Toobar to go to the next page.