India’s Potential Lose-Lose-Lose Scenario

shankar,

i re-read your post are you serious ????? use gandhian tactics ??????????? and i though i was a wooly-eyed idealist .......i mean where`s rsaxena doesnt he have something sarcastic comment? i mean this is 2002 the gandhi of india is dead.........i dont think that indian pride in their freedom struggle outweighs the national penchant for as you aptly put it their ``homeland`` .........i mean protest and the like wont work .....the only thing that will work is if either the kashmiri muslims themselves fight you guys violently like the Palestinians when the Jordanians cut them off .......or you indians win........personally id like you indians to win...........the kashmiri muslims and this ``movement`` have backstabbed pakistan for too long .................

shankar

i disagree with you totally........gandhi MLK have their place and violence has its .......gandhi`s tactics used violence! how? it was the threat of violence and civil unrest on a large scale that made the british go home?????? i think you are living in fantasy land if you think MLK got the black man his civil rights only it was also Malcolm X and the so called radicals........its ultimately the threat of violence and civil unrest that forces an opressor

stop opressing.........i mean seriously the opression of the palestinians and kashmiris cant be marginalized no matter how much you say they use violence...........fine i agree you the use violence forces one to accept the priniciple that might becomes right ........in that sense suicide -terrorism is also warfare for them........if india doesnt stop its opression in kashmir i think the situation will escalate and you might have a palestine scenario.......you know i think india should take kashmir but this in no way makes me believe india`s stance on kashmir is moral ..............

dost-mittar

i do not think that the kashmiri independance movement is simply an islamist movement.....it is islamist under TNT you are 100 per cent right there but then again kashmir should have been part of pakistan by any standard of common sense it goes back to partition is pakistan an islamist movement? Indian position on kashmir is not moral or based on int`l law its like the israeli position :we stole it fair and square , might makes right ---thats the indian position. India to me doesnt have an ounce of credibility in kashmir .......but then again i like most other pakistanis want to give you kashmir just so u guys can stop trying beat pakistan with it .........keep kashmir by all means .......good riddance to violence , terrorism , and hatred if u guys want it keep it but we keep azad kashmir ............

dost mittar

do u really believe its a muslim separatist movement .........i sort of agree but then again you must admit india is doing something wrong that is alienating the kashmiri muslims??????????

dost-mittar,

{{Give Pakistani people an independent voice. They are a good people, a nationalist, reasonable people. All problems between India and Pakistan will become easier to solve.}}

If that happens, Pakistan`s world famous military will become increasingly redundant. There is NO way they are going to let themselves self-destruct. Their military thinks they are the only patriotic Pakistanis left in that country. The only way their military will get the biggest slice of the pie is if they continue hostility towards India.

Out of all the leaders Pakistan has produced, I dont think there has been any leader more hawkish than Mushy. If he wants to screw the people of Pakistan, India would have left him alone (like they did Zia)...its their internal matter & its their perogative to do what they want. But the problem is that he constantly rattles his sabres at India.

After his independance day speech, I am convinced that there can be no hope for peace between India & Pakistan. The man who has made a mockery out of Pakistani rights has the BALLS to lecture India about the rights of Kashmiri muslims.

Romair reflects the mentality of the of their military. They are so steeped in their self importance that they dont see the forest from the trees. The BIGGEST delusion is they feel that it was their tactics in Soviet occupied Afghanistan made the Soviet Union crumble. What they conveniently forget is that Ronald Reagen gave them a blank check to fund that war, not to mention their best equipment.

Is it just a coincidince that the Kashmir problem started in 89, when the Soviet`s were giving up on Afghanistan? Field Marshall believes that the actual Soviet prize was not Afghanistan, but Pakistan!...& the brave Pakistani military scared them off!

If you look at the comments of several Pakistani posters, both on Chowk & in their press...many Pakistanis are sick & tired of their govt`s obsession with Kashmir. Eventhough they may support the principle of kashmiri freedom, many are disgusted that its coming at the price of their own well being.

Pakistan has had to pay an enormous price for it...to the detriment of the people in the entire subcontinent; ESP the citizens of Pakistan. But who has ever given a s-it about what an ordinary Pakistani citizen wants?! The needs of the ``captive`` Kashmiri muslims outweigh the needs of their own citizens.

The sad part is that Mushy has now made sure that there is military ``approval`` in every domestic & foreign policy from a rubber stamp Parliament & a puppet Pakistani PM, from now on. No Pakistani PM will DARE make peace with India, from now on. Thats REAL democracy, for you!

Guys like Romair will go to their graves quoting Ghalib & Faiz. Unless & until Allah Himself intervenes, there will be a stalemate. Because, in a stalemate...MIGHT BECOMES RIGHT! Ofcourse, these guys believe Allah is on their side. When people use Allah`s name to comit violence, they go down to the same gutter as their oppressors. But what do Hindians know about Allah?...they dont pray to Him 5 times a day...they worship stones, foGod`ssake!

Dost Mittar#

In response to Umair you are saying, If Pakistan had rejected acceding by Nawab of Junagadh, Pakistan would be justified in Kashmir demand.

But will you agree that India attacked Junagadh.

So Pakistan is at least at par with India on moral ground in attacking Kashmir.

Fuzair: Any comments on reply #222.

Romair,

There isn`t any chance that India is going to let Kashmir or any other of its parts go away. You may think that is unfair. The only thing unfair, it seems to us Indians, is totally unjustifed Pakistani interference in Kashmir.

So, what are we going to do? Are you, as Pakistan`s well-fed military rulers, going to keep Pakistani people in a position of perpetual war with its neighbor? That doesn`t seem very wise, despite the penchant some idiots have for thousand year wars. For the most part, unending enmity with India doesn`t seem to be the goal that Pakistani people have in mind, even if they disagree with India`s stance on Kashmir.

Before making a racket over Kashmiri rights, shouldn`t you give Pakistani PEOPLE the right to make their own decisions?

Matters may not be as complicated as you make them out to be. Everytime there is even a nominally democratic set up in Pakistan, India and Pakistan inch closer to some agreement. Everytime there is any such movement, you military bosses suffer from indigestion, arrest your Prime Ministers and put them behind bars. Then we are treated to the macabre sight of silly generals holding dogs, proclaiming their love for real democracy and defending the democratic rights of Kashmiris.

I hope you see why we Indians have learnt to treat such generals and their defenders with what can only be called, in politest of terms, utter and complete contempt.

Give Pakistani people an independent voice. They are a good people, a nationalist, reasonable people. All problems between India and Pakistan will become easier to solve.

Shankar #239

I think position of both parties is rigid and so there is no way out. Until some change in power balance occurs. It is a stalemate (if you play chess).

India would have gotten home rule, but bot independence. You can pray for Hitler who destroyed the whole Europe, so none of them was able to retain their colonies.

There is no such thing as non violent independence movement. The reason is JKLF which tried to gain independence through political means was ruthlessly crushed.

Moreover you will agree that India is no Gandhi style non violent country. It has so far killed 60,000 Kashmiris.

Why do you not tell your Indian colleagues about non violence of Gandhi. Instead of telling it to Kashmiris.

If non violenece is so good, why India does not believe in it. And see how Kashmiris abandon their independence movement due to Gandhian non violence of India.

Ref Field Marshal turned Political Analyst #: 242

]At the time of partition, there were around 500 princely states, with a population of around 100 million. Out of these, three could have survived independently, if they wanted. These were Kashmir, Junagarh and Hyderabad. (Schofield, Kashmir in Conflict).]

It is pathetic to see the argument that Junagadh, Kashmir and Hyderabad were the only princely states that could have remained independent. If landlocked Hyderabad could have been independent, then so could Cooch-Behar. If Kashmir could have been independent, so could Swat. Junagadh was surrounded on all sides by the Kathiawar states and had one port, Velavel I believe, that was usable a few months in a year. If any state could have remained independent, it would have been Travancore-Cochin with its access to sea, sizeable lands and an educated populace led by a reasonably progressive maharajah and dewan. The next might have been Mysore but Mysore was landlocked.

Kashmir tried independence and it lasted till Oct 1947... exactly two months from Aug 1957.

[The general law was that the ruler of the princely state decides where he wants to go. This is outright slavery. But lets leave human rights out of it for a while. Since human rights is a concept unknown to many of our Indian arguments.]

So, when are you guys going to take a poll in Sindhu Desh?

[If the identical law (even an unjust law) was applied equally on all states, then mathematically it was impossible for either Pakistan or India to get all three states. They could have at most gotten two. Yet, all three ended up with India. How was India able to pull off this mathematical impossibility? And how in the world can Indians defend something as legal and just, when it is a logical and mathemetical impossibility (even if we don`t count human rights)?

Junagarh had a Muslim ruler with a majority Indian population. Kashmir had a Hindu ruler with a majority Muslim population. And Hyderabad had a Muslim ruler, with a large Muslim population, but majority Hindu population. The ruler of Kashmir, initially wanted indepdence, but later decided to join India. However, the people of Kashmir wanted to join Pakistan (they still do). The ruler of Junagarh wanted to join Pakistan, but the people wanted to join India.]

Jinnah and Co saw Junagadh as a perfect way to grab either one of the two big prizes: Hyderabad or Kashmir. So they installed Shah Nawaz Bhutto as Dewan in Junagadh when the Nawab was vacationing in Europe and the Nawab, who was willing to go along with the rest of the Kathiawar states about joining India, was persuaded to change his mind. If in fact India had given in on Junagadh, you would have no arguments about Kashmir and Junagadh would have done a Bangladesh much earlier setting all sorts of precedents for others who wanted out of Pakistan. God, what missed opportunities!

[And the ruler of Hyderabad wanted to be independent. Its hard to tell whether the people wanted independence or to join India, since they were invaded before they could decide.]

Let us get one thing clear about Hyderabad. India was not about to tolerate a Mughal-appointed governor claiming independence when there was no longer a Mughal empire. So stop talking about how the rights of the ruler were violated. As to the people there, they have been voting regularly every 5 years since 1950, something that Pakistanis haven`t still gotten the right to do.

[Junagarh should have gone to India, Kashmir should have gone to Pakistan, and Hyderabad should have either been independent or gone to India (depending on what its citizens wanted).]

Just cut out your crocodile tears for Hyderabadis and Junagadhis. Just say you want Kashmir.

No, you ain`t getting it.

Romair

``And it will not do so, until it is forced to do so. And it is about time, India is forced to do so.

``

And who will force India to do that. Dum ho to yeh bhee kar ke dekh lo miaN

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Romair #241

Al Margolis has certified that indians are human rights abusers !! OH MY GOD !

Now I am really convinced. These indians are really bad people. A great intellectual like Al Margolis, renowned throughout the world for his hysterical anti-indian ranting and the vapidity of his output, has made this judgement. Now I am truly enlightened.

I am deeply ashamed that my silly relatives who are cowering today in fear in Kud, Batot, Jammu and who were ``cleansed`` out of their homes in Srinagar are unable to understand this situation. I will call them tonight and explain at length.

BTW, How is your friend the Nazi Baker doing? I recall he was the last ``impartial observer`` you cited explaining how bad the indians were. Been to any KKK marches with him lately?

Kashmir a secular and independent country! get outta here! a piece of land 100 x 150 miles - a valley - wants to be an independent country? these jackasses live off Indian tax-payers` money and Indian tourists` money and want an independent country? get lost! every part of India belongs to every one of its citizens - Art.370 be damned! secular no problem. let`s get back all the pandits who have been driven out of Kasmir Valley since 1946 and also let people from all over India come to settle down in the Valley. Let`s give these scum a taste of their own medicine.