The Kashmir Problem

[payeng]

Do you agree Pak own the whole Kashmir without a war？ As long as the majority of people agreed to join Pakistan in Kashmir，I think Pak take a wise action。At first make Kashmir become a new nation，then unite it peacefully。I think it's easier than have a war with India。And even if the unite is fail，I think still it's more favorable to Pakistan。

no I would not agree, Kashmir people are not against the administration, but they are fed up of war, they demand a change in situation, not necessarily in Pakistan's favour, few problems exist because war is fought in this side of the border and causalities are inevitable, they don't support Pakistan.

Regarding Pakistan owning Kashmir, I feel like they don't even own Pakistan itself.

Still that question：why you become enemy？

That's a question for which we would need to see history.

I don't think Pak will feel a strong India is a threat if you become friends。So maybe it's Pak‘s idea now，but The idea is not can not be changed。

when ideologies changes ideas change.

The muslim nation who have stronger enemy。Even in Saudi also have persons do those things。

Saudi Arabia is not in a political crisis like Pakistan, please keep in notice that we are not discussing about any fourth nation, with no Kashmir relation.

I don't think it just exist in Pak。

I need a clarification, do you mean that it exist elsewhere also, or you mean religious leaders have no influence in Pakistan's political affairs.

Can you tell me what India can do will be Beneficial to India In addition to peace talks？

If you mean in addition to peace process, their are a lots of opportunities for both the nations.

But current stand by India is justified, you cannot believe a friend if his intentions are doubtful.

[Luke Gu]

Regarding Pakistan owning Kashmir, I feel like they don't even own Pakistan itself.

Then who do you think own Pak？I hate a Confusion election，but at least they own the right to choose the person who they think is right。

That's a question for which we would need to see history.

I have no interest in researching the Hatred
between Muslim and Hindu in history。I just know you become enemy because of Kashmir in your short nation histories。I wonder what will happen if England make clear that who should own Kashmr。Maybe you‘re good friends now。

Saudi Arabia is not in a political crisis like Pakistan, please keep in notice that we are not discussing about any fourth nation, with no Kashmir relation.

I know Saudi Arabia is not in a political crisis，but she offer financing to Terrorist，so I don't know why you’re so surprise for Pakistan do such a thing 。I talk about the weird phenomenon in many Muslim countries。

I need a clarification, do you mean that it exist elsewhere also, or you mean religious leaders have no influence in Pakistan's political affairs.

I mean that it exist elsewhere also。

But current stand by India is justified, you cannot believe a friend if his intentions are doubtful.

I don't think I have the right to wonder if it's right。It depends on your judgments。I think you should do someting rather than just wait for a good enough Pak goverment for India。To his intentions are doubtful ，I think you know why some nations take actions to Enhance mutual trust。Maybe you should build enough mutual trusts before peace talks。I know you‘re doing these things now。

[n21]

Hey ，Do not be too exaggerated！Are you talking about Islamic Jihad or Pak goverment？

Interesting you ask that. Do you feel there is a difference? If yes please do mention.

By the way Pakistan believes it is the leader of Islamic Ummah, specially after having nuke.

Add to that,all these Taliban,LET etc would not have survived without the help of Pakistani government.

Would you be surprised to know that the "Light of Pakistani Democrary.. etc" Benazir Bhutto is referred to as the "Mother of Taliban".

Also if you ever get time do find out the motto of Pakistani Army. It is within youtube.

[n21]

I know that - their naming of missiles and all. The concept of pak doing a "mughal" over India is completely ludicrous because it is not possible unless martians come over to help them. They can't wrest any piece of land from India. I believe what you are really trying to say is pak will always be antagonistic to India untill they conquer it. That would put their mindset on par with al-qaeda type jihadists/radicalism. The nation still has a middle class and it seems they intended to use violence only to gain leverage in kashmir but enduring rivaly has morphed that to a "destroy em" posture.

This is where is making the mistake. I know they cant conquer,but the problem is the mindset to be one up and at any cost.

You also need to remember that it is not the middle class who have most number of guns. It is PA and it is PA who will always run the show.

The current state of Pakistan is the result of that obsession.

The jihadists (taliban) were not disarmed becoz they gave pak influence in afghanistan (strategic depth thing). I agree that if we come to a solution purely out of "safety" or "cost" PA would tempted to escalate to drive India out. How this resolution is framed is also very important. One that takes into account changes in pak society, accepting mfn status & economic integration. For that the "moderates" should call the shots in pak. Lots of problems there.

I say again. Moderates don't have the most number of guns. It is PA first and then Taliban LET kinds.

Why should PA not try down in India what it did in Afghanistan?

This is where we differ. You believe that PA uses jihadists to achieve their goals - true but more than that its the jihadists who use PA/pak for their own motives. The PA/ISI did more harm to pak than India could ever hope to - what does that statement tell u & who wins - jihadists. The fight is definitely about more than just kashmir but only for the jihadists not for pak.

I have one answer for you. After 26/11 the Taliban leadership publicly declared that they will side with PA if India attacks.
This despite the fact that PA is "suppose" to have killed hundreds of their comrades.

India has been trying to resolve issues through talks for decades now.The biggest problem it faces it who should it talk to,so that Pakistani keeps it's end of bargain?

[Luke Gu]

Add to that,all these Taliban,LET etc would not have survived without the help of Pakistani government.
Would you be surprised to know that the "Light of Pakistani Democrary.. etc" Benazir Bhutto is referred to as the "Mother of Taliban".

I think the goverment just want to use Jihad to get nation interests。When the goverment and Jihad have interests conflict，you will see the difference between them。BTW，the Pak goverment is fighting Taliban now。

By the way Pakistan believes it is the leader of Islamic Ummah, specially after having nuke.

Become a leader of Islamic Ummah doesn't mean let Jihad govern the nation。

Do you feel there is a difference?

Yes，slamic Jihad just is a chessman of the goverment。

[n21]

Some more news of PA's friends.

Al-Qaeda allies build huge Pakistan base - Telegraph

[Luke Gu]

Jaish members were behind a spectacular attempt to assassinate then-president Pervez Musharraf in 2004. They were also involved in training and commanding the Taliban guerrillas who overran Pakistan's Swat valley.

n21，I‘m confused about that ：whose friends are these terrorists？PA，Pak goverment，or Pak Jihad？

[ghatotkacha]

Some more news of PA's friends.

Al-Qaeda allies build huge Pakistan base - Telegraph

From the article ...

Pakistani authorities have turned a blind eye to the new base, in the far south of Punjab province, even though it is believed to have been built to serve as a radical madrassah - Islamic school - or some kind of training camp

On the inside walls, there are painted jihadist inscriptions, including a warning to "Hindus and Jews", with a picture of Delhi's historic Red Fort, suggesting they will conquer the city.

... so much for our peacenik's assertions that Pakistan will be chummy and friendly with India once the Kashmir issue is resolved ...

[pChan]

From the article ...
... so much for our peacenik's assertions that Pakistan will be chummy and friendly with India once the Kashmir issue is resolved ...

Pak supporting terrorist proxies is well known. I don't need to read any new articles about it. The fact is even when given the option of total peace/economic integration in exchange for a shared influence in kashmir most of you simply won't support it. Admit it. This intransigence comes with a cost & a more pragmatic policy is in Indian interest.

India can prosper in-spite of kashmir problem. Though she may have to take more outrages like mumbai. That cost is nowhere near to what pak is paying now. Hope they come around to accepting status-quo & begin economic integration with India. But I won't hold my breath.

[ghatotkacha]

Pak supporting terrorist proxies is well known. I don't need to read any new articles about it. The fact is even when given the option of total peace/economic integration in exchange for a shared influence in kashmir most of you simply won't support it. Admit it. This intransigence comes with a cost & a more pragmatic policy is in Indian interest.

India can prosper in-spite of kashmir problem. Though she may have to take more outrages like mumbai. That cost is nowhere near to what pak is paying now. Hope they come around to accepting status-quo & begin economic integration with India. But I won't hold my breath.

What I was pointing out in my post was the fact that the proxies of Pakistan army do not think of stopping at Kashmir (see the comment on Red Fort). They are looking at establishing an Islamic rule on the whole of India.

Have you heard of "Ghazwa-e-Hind"? Please do some research on that on the internet and it might open your eyes to what it really is that the Pakistan army wants (but I won't hold my breath on it) ...

Tell me .. what does Kerala have to do with Kashmir? If the Pakistanis are only looking for a settlement on the Kashmir issue then why are jihadis from Kerala being trained and recruited by LeT and other offsprings of the ISI?

Let me put a counter proposal to what you are proposing here... why shouldn't we tell the Pakistanis that you stop creating problem in Kashmir and we will not interfere in Balochistan ... otherwise all bets are off ... wouldn't that bring peace and everybody can live happily ever after?

[ghatotkacha]

I guess these guys will be OK once we have a joint admin with Pakistan in Kashmir ...

Fearing Taliban, Pak Hindus take Thar Express to India

[YoungIndia]

Ultimately the purpose of nation states is to "serve" its people - any "geo-strategic" or "national" interests should be defined accordingly. The Indian govt is not “serving” the people right by expending so much energy in keeping Kashmir. .

1. first you are being unpragmatic. there is no use talking about things that are not going to happen.

2. you just don't understand the conflict at the level of vision and ideology.

do you understand how islamic politcal traditions are? they are incompatible with democracy in many ways.

I can write an essay on it.let me put it this way.Poltical interests is seen in terms of muslims only.the state is supposed to "serve islam".many term it as "political islam"

as you can see, it is a narrow minded view and its not in the interests of society as a whole.

you see the hate between west and the islamic world today? that was played out long ago in India when the muslim league demanded partition.

we have already agreed to grant pakistan in 1947 respecting "people's will" and out of fear for a civil war. that has only opened a new can of worms
and still no peace.

your suggestions are as deluded.and its also an injustice to all people who had to lose their homes,jobs and family so that pakistan came into existence.

so you want kashmiri non muslims and loyal kashmiri muslims to go through the same?


Sometimes, when you can't agree,you will have to impose your ideology on the wrong side.Lincoln imposed it on the confederates and built america to what it is today(though change was gradual.). the west believed that communism was a wrong ideology and was consistently hostile to it.

Unfortunately the world today is such that India and the west will have to impose their ideology of multiculturalism on ideologically hostile muslims.It has to be mentioned here indian muslim intellectuals are loyal to india's national ideology. there is nothing unfair about it.

The indian state is well justified in imposing ideology inthis instance.

"people's will" only applies to true democracy. those who dream of an islamic state have nothing to do with democracy or any decent values.

they don't care about their neighbours. nobody has to care about them either.

[YoungIndia]

The rewards of giving up "total control" seem to far outweigh the costs of keeping it.

the problem is you are so highly divorced from reality that its not funny.

there is a word "pragmatism". look it up.

the real world works way differently.try to come to the real world.

[pChan]

the problem is you are so highly divorced from reality that its not funny.

there is a word "pragmatism". look it up.

the real world works way differently.try to come to the real world.

Tall words, you are not the first one here to accuse me of being in la-la land. Reality as of now is just conflict. Ultimately when dialogue resumes between India & Pak & concessions are expected from both sides I hope India does not waste that opportunity.

[diplomaticview]

Orange is so conservative

Worst thing is when people lost their human feelings,

Neutral analysis

Nobody can change the mentality of People of Pakistan as still Indian mentality is not changeable, but only way to best is to solve common problems by principles and world agreements which is not present in Indian mentality. China’s presence or strategically location is necessary to stabilize sub continent. India fears from China on empty reasons. China is a power of region and friendship with Pakistan is could be more effective to normalise situation in region and India have to accept this truth as possible. But world must give chance Pakistan to control situation in Afghanistan because except Pakistan & Iran nobody can control Afghanistan,
where the matter about collapse of Pakistan than i want to mention this fact that at this time 180 separatists organizations are activated and seeking for freedom in India, so first advise for India is to look for its own country stability than Pakistan.

Where is the matter of Kashmir than it also knowned that according to the agreement of 1947 Kashmir is the part of Pakistan not India. So India has not strong reason to occupy Kashmir rather than a week & diametrical word "ATTOT ANG" which has no literal meanings but a sign of conservatism. Logically not supported by any world dictionary or language. Meanwhile Juna garh and the area of Gujrat is also by fact is part of Pakistan. So in my point of view only solution for Kashmir is to evacuate Indian army and hand over to Pakistan than I think all problems will be solved.

Humanity is dead:.... because in UNO security council take side of India because of the death of 200 peoples in India last year
but no common resolution or nobody take interest in the murder of 99000 people massively killed by Indian army in Kashmir from the 1948.

Is this bloodshed is according to the UNO OR SECURITY COUNCIL MENDATES??
And still going on!

India is disturbing Pakistan by constructing dames on major rivers of Pakistan and further more India seeking good relations & loving letters from Pakistan?????? is it possible? Problems which are faced by India, are self made. I am not saying that Pakistan is clear country and so many problems are existed from the side of Pakistan but who is the initiator.

Pakistan is an independent country like India and has totally rights to get progress and make itself strong by defence, economy etc as India.

If one person want to live with peace then it only could be possible not to disturb others.