Black day in Kashmir: Protesters urged to breach LoC

[twoplustwoisfour]

No i dont think so......The UN wants a vote in the whole of kashmir and not unilateral action from one state.
Why dont you move your troops out first?.......well thats the same reason why pakistan wont.

Elections in a huge territory like United J&K would have to take place in phases. We have to ensure that there is no interference by both Indians and Pakistanis in the election process. There is no way we can have the referendum in the entire territory at the same time.

I repeat, it is Pakistan which is so adamant for holding a referendum. Why don't they do that in their territory first? Put pressure on India to hold elections in their territory.

 

[LaBong]

No i dont think so......The UN wants a vote in the whole of kashmir and not unilateral action from one state.
Why dont you move your troops out first?.......well thats the same reason why pakistan wont.
We can either follow the UN or you indians can keep demanding silly things.

But it's Pakistan who gets all itchy about Kashmiris struggle and pain. India is happy with the status-quo. So I guess Pakistan have to walk the extra mile. Either withdraw all forces, give proper independence to Pakistani Kashmir; thus enjoy a moral high ground to rest of the world, or go down the same fruitless way it's been trotting for last few decades.

 

[Pagla Dashu]

‘India’s claims of Pakistan ceding territory in 1963 are false’
NEW DELHI: Prominent lawyer AG Noorani has rebuffed the impression created by the Indian government, and widely accepted by Kashmiri leaders, that Pakistan ceded some Kashmiri territory to China in 1963.

At an Indo-Pak peace conference on Monday, People’s Conference Chairman Sajjad Ghani Lone had accused Pakistan of “gifting” Kashmiri territory to China. A few years ago, Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front chief Amanullah Khan had levelled similar allegations. Separatists have recently picked up the issue and demanded Beijing’s involvement in the Kashmir dispute. “Based on documentary and archival evidence, Pakistan did not cede any land. On the contrary, it was China which ceded 750 square miles of administered territory to Pakistan under the Pakistan-China boundary agreement of March 3, 1963,” Noorani told Daily Times.

He said according to Article 2 of the agreement, after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations about the boundary with the Chinese government of the People’s Republic of China.

I seriously doubt if Mr Noorani had indeed said anything like that. Even if we assume he had indeed said this, it is strange that he had access to both Chinese and Pakistani archives. To the best of my knowledge, he can't speak, read or write Chinese. In any case, he got the Article number wrong. It is actually Article 6 that requires renegotiation once Kashmir is solved.

One more reason why I find it hard to believe that Noorani would make such a comment, is that Noorani is an excellent constitutional lawyer. He would have been the first one to note that since the agreement between Pakistan and China is ex parte it is void ab initio.

 

[srsrsr]

‘India’s claims of Pakistan ceding territory in 1963 are false’
NEW DELHI: Prominent lawyer AG Noorani has rebuffed the impression created by the Indian government, and widely accepted by Kashmiri leaders, that Pakistan ceded some Kashmiri territory to China in 1963.

At an Indo-Pak peace conference on Monday, People’s Conference Chairman Sajjad Ghani Lone had accused Pakistan of “gifting” Kashmiri territory to China. A few years ago, Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front chief Amanullah Khan had levelled similar allegations. Separatists have recently picked up the issue and demanded Beijing’s involvement in the Kashmir dispute. “Based on documentary and archival evidence, Pakistan did not cede any land. On the contrary, it was China which ceded 750 square miles of administered territory to Pakistan under the Pakistan-China boundary agreement of March 3, 1963,” Noorani told Daily Times.

He said according to Article 2 of the agreement, after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations about the boundary with the Chinese government of the People’s Republic of China.




Yes.......only kashmriris allowed to vote or buy land ect in AJK.
You indians did try and are still trying to settle non kashmirirs into IOK,i know of one guy whos family was from indian punjab and he was given incentives and other freebies to move to IOK.




What about the 1.5 million refugees in AJK that where "driven out"?

Article is misleading. The boundary was disputed with China, even before 1947. Read 'Disputed'. Dispute between China and the area of J&K. 2 things could've logically happened.
(a) Maintain "Status Quo", until a solution for J&k comes in (b) Involve all parties involved in the dispute - namely J&K, India, Pak and China and then it could've been settled. I'm not going to comment on the time required for either of the above.

However what Pak did was absolute stupidity to give away the area to China, just for the sake of improving relations with China. Clearly shows how much it values Kashmir.

"...........He said according to Article 2 of the agreement, after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations about the boundary with the Chinese government of the People’s Republic of China. ........."

Seriously do you beleive once J&K issues is settled, China is going to reopen this case?

 

[twoplustwoisfour]

Its the people that wil breach the LOC and not the miltary.......so it does not go against any UN agreement.......its kashmiris from one side crossing over to the other other side just like the million odd refugees that already crossed over from IOK......you didnt seem to have a problem then of letting people cross the LOC.

The military has to ensure that people do not breach the LOC. This is as per the UN resolutions that you are touting. It's the responsibility of Indian military to ensure no pakistani / oppressed kashmiri from pakistan comes into the territory under their control and vice versa, Pakistani military has to ensure no Indian comes into their territory.

The only time i would back the people breaching the LOC is if kashmiris merged from both sides in there millions under the glare the world press and made the LOC a bit of history like the berlin wall.
If theres not large numbers then the people crossing over will be shot by the indians......i have seen this before with my own eyes.

So you admit that people from P O K are crossing over to Indian territory? Wonder who they are running away from. Lol

 

[Prometheus]

There are only two ways to give independence to Kashmir. Either Pakistan and India both jointly agree to a UN administered plebiscite or we fight each other.

It is India that does not agree to the plebiscite and hence we have to fight.

hail Pakistan for 1972 simla agreement............which clearly says that.......plebiscite can rot in the bin.......

 

[srsrsr]

‘Salahuddin go ahead! We are with you,’ the crowd responded in unison.

Folks are becoming smart now. The terrorists have realised that all leaders sit in a couch aaraam se and give statements, while the innocents get carried away and get killed. So this time they want leaders to go forward and they'll follow. Now we all now how these clowns oops leaders do

 

[dabong1]

Elections in a huge territory like United J&K would have to take place in phases.

There is no way we can have the referendum in the entire territory at the same time.

There is about 10-12 million people in the whole of kashmir with probably 5-7 million voters.
A lot of the land is mountains and empty spaces so taking all that onboard it would not take that long to hold a vote.
Countries with a bigger population then kashmir can hold a vote nationwide in one day so am pretty sure the same can be done in kashmir over a couple of days.
Why dont we have election in a couple of district of kashmir on both sides......the districts that run parallel on the LOC can have elections the same day.

We have to ensure that there is no interference by both Indians and Pakistanis in the election process.

Thats where you have to accept UN-international monitors.

I repeat, it is Pakistan which is so adamant for holding a referendum. Why don't they do that in their territory first? Put pressure on India to hold elections in their territory.

What happens if AJK vote to become a part of pakistan......will you still be holding elections or coming out with the excuses.
And also the onus is not on pakistan to hold any election or is there any demand in the AJK for a unilateral move on the issue.
The killings and protest are taking place in IOK and not AJK,so its more on you to hold elctions then it is on us.We have said from the start that we are willing to hold elctions as long as you come out and do the same and say it in public.
It really simple follow the UN.

 

[dabong1]

hail Pakistan for 1972 simla agreement............which clearly says that.......plebiscite can rot in the bin.......

Simla Agreement

"In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations."

Well the Simla Agreement is void since you invaded sachin!

How did you say it.?......oh yeah....Simla Agreement can rot in the bin!!!!

 

[The HBS Guy]

There is about 10-12 million people in the whole of kashmir with probably 5-7 million voters.
A lot of the land is mountains and empty spaces so taking all that onboard it would not take that long to hold a vote.
Countries with a bigger population then kashmir can hold a vote nationwide in one day so am pretty sure the same can be done in kashmir over a couple of days.
Why dont we have election in a couple of district of kashmir on both sides......the districts that run parallel on the LOC can have elections the same day.



Thats where you have to accept UN-international monitors.




What happens if AJK vote to become a part of pakistan......will you still be holding elections or coming out with the excuses.
And also the onus is not on pakistan to hold any election or is there any demand in the AJK for a unilateral move on the issue.
The killings and protest are taking place in IOK and not AJK,so its more on you to hold elctions then it is on us.We have said from the start that we are willing to hold elctions as long as you come out and do the same and say it in public.
It really simple follow the UN.

You would not have wasted your time to type so much had you read this post of mine:

We know we will lose the referendum and that is precisely why we will never conduct a referendum.

You are free to do whatever you want to but we are not letting an inch of J&K leave our control.

You have two options:

1. Fight a nuclear war with us, prevail over us and then take Kashmir.

2. Accept LoC as International Border.

Choice is yours. I cannot be more honest than this. Bye.

 

[dabong1]

But it's Pakistan who gets all itchy about Kashmiris struggle and pain. India is happy with the status-quo. So I guess Pakistan have to walk the extra mile.

Naaaa dont think so.

Either withdraw all forces, give proper independence to Pakistani Kashmir; thus enjoy a moral high ground to rest of the world, or go down the same fruitless way it's been trotting for last few decades.

The UN only has to choices when it comes to kashmir....its either india or pakistan.
Its you that need the "moral highground" after all the kashmiris killed by the indian army where killed by you and not us.
You indians have been going down the "same fruitless way" for decades and it has got you nothing.
From no freedom movement in kashmir a few decades ago you have had a full blown freedom fight on your hands in the last so many decades.Its only getting worse for you guys not better.

 

[Pagla Dashu]

Simla Agreement

"In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations."

Well the Simla Agreement is void since you invaded sachin!

How did you say it.?......oh yeah....Simla Agreement can rot in the bin!!!!

That requires a priori assumption that Siachen was part of Pakistan, i.e. fell on Pakistani side of LoC. There is nothing in Karachi Agreement 1949 that conclusively proves that assumption.

That aside, India's take over of Siachen was in response to Pakistan's preparation to do the same. Musharraf's book makes it pretty much clear, how Pakistan was preparing to take over Siachen. It, therefore was not 'unilateral' but merely a defensive response to an impeding threat.

Now, try again.

 

[dabong1]

I seriously doubt if Mr Noorani had indeed said anything like that. Even if we assume he had indeed said this, it is strange that he had access to both Chinese and Pakistani archives. To the best of my knowledge, he can't speak, read or write Chinese. In any case, he got the Article number wrong. It is actually Article 6 that requires renegotiation once Kashmir is solved.

One more reason why I find it hard to believe that Noorani would make such a comment, is that Noorani is an excellent constitutional lawyer. He would have been the first one to note that since the agreement between Pakistan and China is ex parte it is void ab initio.

Just what i expected.......denial mode.

 

[dabong1]

That requires a priori assumption that Siachen was part of Pakistan, i.e. fell on Pakistani side of LoC. There is nothing in Karachi Agreement 1949 that conclusively proves that assumption.

That aside, India's take over of Siachen was in response to Pakistan's preparation to do the same. Musharraf's book makes it pretty much clear, how Pakistan was preparing to take over Siachen. It, therefore was not 'unilateral' but merely a defensive response to an impeding threat.

Now, try again.

I think you need to try again..........proved totally wrong and now take it like a man.

 

[dabong1]

You would not have wasted your time to type so much had you read this post of mine:

Its always "wasting time" when your arguments are blown apart!!!!