Why is Kashmir an Issue?
submitted 5 months 16 days 13 hours ago by: Iola : 96 commentsSince childhood, it has been drummed into the Pakistanis that Kashmir is ours and that we have to get it back. I have the following arguments to ask ppl to let go of it now and better fix their own house first. In fact I would like all the proTaliban agencies and hardliners to get together at buzzvines and without getting personal give me some logical reasons for why Pakistan should sustain their meaningless stance.
By getting Kashmir, which resources do we get our hands on? Maybe a boost to the tourism industry! I seriously have no idea and am willing to believe everything you tell me except for my right to question you. I would also like my questions to be answered!
Is this Kashmir issue just to make the world know that this is an unstable region and thus Pakistan should be considered a dangerous neighbour, requiring world support against the aggressive Indian intentions? Thus to justify to our public the defense spending and keep them emotionally abused by raising this slogan of 'Kashmir Hamara hai' and celebrating the 'Kashmir Day'- that again is a question!
Is the Pakistani governments as well as the former governments so very keen about the human rights violation and the issue of delf-determination that the Kashmiri leaders keep talking about? If yes, why is there not enough evidence of the same in its own country?
I seriously want to know why Kashmir is such an issue and on this post that I am putting up, which is going to be a learning and enlightening session for me, I don't want to be told that I am secular and less patriotic than the ppl who oppose me here. It should be totally a sans-emotion debate and based on arguments and evidences that I can check back on, whether it is books or any website or whateva. Nothing vague here please! Nothing nonsensical and nothing personal.
Stay away if you plan to be nonsensical or this time around I'll be flagging every stupid and personal comment that comes my way and prevents me from learning what I am so keen on understanding!
Thank you.
Comments
Because the rivers run through it. To hell with the people
Just got enlightened with some discussion elsewhere..thanks!
Who ever controls Kashmir controls Indus, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi and to some extent Sutlej. A very enviable position to be in, for sure
...but I mean to say we can't get it back, can we? So why the dispute then? Why can't things be normal between India and Pakistan - with more trade at least?
Who says we can't get it back? Amass enough nuclear weapons to annihilate India many times over and then tell them simply "Hand over Kashmir within 24 hours or Pakistan and India will cease to exist" Trust me, they'll comply, they know we are crazy people
Yes that is the only way but won't that be a mere threat that is actually neva going to materialize.. I find it inconceivable for any of the governments..so what do you say in the less utopian scenario? :)
On a more serious note, its imperative, for the continued existence and prosperity of Pakistan to wrest Kashmir from India's control. Already most of the rivers are dry 11 months out of the year.
How has been Pakistan pulling it along so far then? Not that I don't agree with its importance espcially after the recent water dispute with India! Still what has Pakistan been doing so far? This electricity problem - the roots lie there too or is it because of our failure to make more dams merely?
The God damn, dams should be Internationally outlawed; this is a very primitive way of generating electricity and ecologically untenable
Listen, ppl are not making damns in the world elsewhere now?
Yes, and to their own detriment
What is bad about damns?
Mainly the effects on the regions ecology, emission of green house gases from decomposition of organic life in the newly flooded areas, displacement of people, irrigation of one area at the expense of another (Pakistan, India), water wars between provinces as well as states.....
Let me discuss this with my ecology Maestro for a moment! Will get back with unanswered questions then! Hang on- don't go anywhere!
Are you two timing :)
Oh Lord! Lol.I'll kill you later. Not really..Meant that in a different sense altogether. :)
Just a sec- are dams really doing all this? Give me an example of this elsewhere!
Euphrates - Iraq and Syria may have no choice but to go to war with Turkey over its damming of the Euphrates
Egypt has already threatened to use force to thwart any attempts at damming the nile
Ok cool! :) Enlightened there! THanks
Well planned, well executed war on several fronts with the aim of either capturing Kashmir or enough of Indian terrritory to swap for Kashmir.
Currently this does not seem feasible and if we continue wasting money on obsolete F-16's we'll never get there. Military strength goes hand in hand with economic development so we must strengthen our economic foundations before embarking on any military adventures. For now, we would do good to preserve the union, forced or otherwise, that we have
Which union? IS there one?
At least the one pictured in the current issue of the world atlas; maybe next year 4 little babies will be born and the mother will die delivering them and hence only the babies will appear in the atlas
Lolz...
Now to simplify this whole thing for myself, am I to assume that since for water reasons, this stance of Pakistan is for its overall good but that it will merely stay as a stance for many years to come yet?
My next question is should or should we not let go of this thing for better trade relations with India?
As Khalifah mentioned its the issue of the control of the rivers, but another fact is that for so many years both the countries have come up to a peacefully solution to the issue and are equally sharing the water resources which is imp for both as both are agricultural states.
Secondly and most importantly the real reason for the Kashmir issue is the survival Armed forces & defense budget. For the Armies of both countries to survive they need a reason and that reason is the Issue of Kashmir and a threat to the national security. Imagine if there is no issue of Kashmir do we really need Armed forces & there defense budget. So we will never go on war for the issue and we will never want the issue to be resolved under any conditions. Many talks fail because the Armies of both countries donot want to resolve this issue.
Thirdly countries who spend trillions on research to build smart weapons of mass destruction need customers to sell the weapons. There is no other profitable business like the business of selling & buying weapons. And for this business to flourish there have to be conflict between nations it could be religious or on a piece of land but it has to exist between states who have resources to buy weapons and spend ridiculously amount of money on it. So these countries do take care that defense budgets do keep flourishing. Hey did you know Pakistan just spend billion of $ to buy a bunch of F16's while we are suffering from many other crises ...
Good! Another viewpoint! Ready for the questions now? :)
The sharing thing is often exploited by India so in that context it makes the control over water resources rather more important I feel!
The second argument though partially solid doesnt seem to be very relevant to me. Umm....are you talking about a Switzerland in this age?
With reference to the last para- the answer is yes, I know. :)
Don't let go; maintain status quo on this issue while pursuing normalization of relations. Who knows, we may even mutually agree to form a union in the future. Namely, the Democratic Republic of United India
Ok.. Now tell me how justified is the insurgence of those Islamist organizations in Kashmir? AND can we justify the wars ova this issue?
Jihad, if we go by the definition of the word, is NOT permissible in Kashmir
What is your definition of jihad which makes it nonpermissable in Kashmir?
Are you using this term as the one used by the Mullahs to nullify their slogan for the fools or in the real religious context with reference to some ahadith etc? A lil confusion on my end!
Essentially, Jihad is permissible if you are being driven out of your house or if you are being prevented from following your religion. Neither of these conditions existed when the Kashmiri struggle started, nor do they hold true today.
Of course people will be quick to point out that innocents are being murdered daily, but the fact remains that they are not being murdered because they are muslims but because they have taken up arms against the defacto government
Ok..what about the wars? Were they justified?
Which wars?
The first one. Oooops and Kargil too. :)
As Jihad, no. As beneficial to a newly established nation, yes
So how does it get justified on the international front?
The first one, as an excercise of sovereignty; the second one is not justifiable, in fact given the circumstances, unconscionable
Don't you think such unjustifiable acts give support to the hardliners and ProTaliban sympathizers and are quite a big governmental blunder against its own stability?
Yes, Kargil episode was a terrible lapse of judgment. It was poorly planned and even more poorly executed, what makes it worse is that it was literally carried out even as the country's PM was embracing his Indian counterpart
Why do you think ppl around us can't see all these things?
Illiteracy, it will literally kill you
THANK YOU KHALIFAH AND GOODNIGHT! :)
Ahhh....would surely have taken part, but its a long read :(
It is educational and enlightening so maybe you should read it anyways, seriously!
(1) india supports the TIBET seperatist cause. while at the same time it is doing the same thing in kashmir.... ie suppressing a seperatist movement and violating human rights. india is a hypocrite.
(2) when ther ewas a seperatist tendency in EAST PAKISTAN india exploited it to fullest (even though bangladesh had no future with us but it doesnt matter. india intervened and gelped them get freedom. pakistan will always feel justified doing the same thing in kashmir and rightly so.
(3) the rivers that START in kashmir actually run in pakistan. its sensible only that pakistan should have right to use them. unfirtunately bcos they start in kashmir and kashmir is controlled by enemy they can f*ck with the rivers. already they have the rights to use ravi and sutlej which logically and morally speaking should be pakistan right. and now they are gonna f*ck with jehlum and indus too. no doubt about that. remember that the future wars will be fought over water unless ofcourse they learn to use utilize ocean water economically.
(4) india is now f*cking with balochistan. its true that paksitani governemt has always treated baluch people like crap and they always got the shit end of the stick. but since the end of taliban rule and start of pro-india hamid asshole karzai rule india is quick to establish econmic and strategic ties with afghanistan and encourages anti pakistan propaganda. there is no doubt that india is financing and supplying the baloch insurgents with weapons from afghanistan. india will now give pakistan its own OCCUPIED KASHMIR !! as an equalizer. today indian media is portraying balochistan just like we portray occupied kashmir .
(5) india will never give up kashmir. its their last hope to improve their mostly low quality dravidian breed. yes belive it or not this is a hidden agenda. indian politicans have the racial insecurity always.
I am not really getting this.
Umm...are you saying that Pakistan should continue making an issue of it since India is supposedly doing all that and this would be the best way of getting back at them?
And in case, you are saying that, do you see Pakistan owning this piece of land one day? If yes, how do you foresee it happening?
Khalifah: Jihad is also compulsory when your fellow men are opressed...PBUH on anotehr place said" The best struggle is saying truth against a cruel ruler" so jihad is not limited to the above 2 conditions only.
IOLA:
Islamic insurgents are necessry as there is a considerable quantity difference between Armies. The Kashmir fighters are engaging 7 lac indian army(equal to our whole army) in kashmir.
"yesterday india has refused to consider design of Baglihar dam"
HOW ARE WE MANAGING THEN WITH SO SCARCE WATER RESOURCES?? it is being managed by shortening of water supllies to farmers. The permanent supllies are chanegd to non-permanent. it is the reason that farmers are using desil engines to water the fields..which is adding cost in vegetable prices and fruit items.
My questions follow:
If that is Jihad then don't you think it gives America quite the right to invade and depose off rulers? Why is it that only if we Muslims do it, it would be Jihad? Talking about the concept and not the term please!
Do these insurgents know what they are fighting for?
Kindly simplify the last paragraph further- am unable to understand it.
Its not a dispute concerning water or economy, it’s a matter of our RIGHT. You can sacrifice for solving a dispute by letting go of land and resources BUT when it comes to a nation it cannot surrenders its genuine right. What message would you leave in such a case for the coming generations? This, that whatever seems difficult should be ceded? No, We cannot afford losing a justified stance just because of the fact that it appears unable to materialize.
Why it hasn’t been solved over the years? Like the Palestine issue, where the world knows how justified Arabs are its the kind courtesy of the charters of new world order that never let it crystallize.
Why we can’t take it militarily and through use of force? Well who says, we can! Again, only if we are lucky enough to have a ruling cohesion that can ensure serious achievement of this goal through discrete economic beefing and careful future planning or the key players permit us for that or at least leave the two parties alone without any intervention.
One of the doctrines that these policy makers have always in mind is to discourage all muslim countries on their “use of force (military means)” in achieving their objectives. They simply don’t want to see a new example of muslim galore attained at the cost of their purposed agenda i.e. futile dialogue. This is what everyone knows has always happened for example, in 65, kargil and last arab war.(and before someone point out kargil, let it be a known fact that it was again uncle sam who provided Indians with the hi-res satellite photos of the correct location of our bunkers and army personnel, terrain reconnaissance etc)
Lastly, have you ever pondered on how peacefully matters of grave concern and issues of unbelievably colossal magnitude are amicably resolved but through peaceful dialogue when any western countries or a community other than the muslims are involved in it? Example range from Berlin wall, Serbian crises, Korean nuclear crises,Russian missle crises and the list goes on. The muslim community on the other hand is always made an example of chaotic distress unable to resolve even the minutest of an issue, whether its Kashmir, Palestine, Bosnia, etc why?
Try to read the message, its there written on the wall and you don’t have to read in between the lines anymore. What the brutal and unjustified invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan conveys to us? What the ever threatening diplomatic mix ‘carrot and stick’ is trying to achieve in Syria, Palestine, Pakistan and Iran?
“Muslims are feebleminded and down to look at people therefore military muscle they must not have”
Now Iola, talk secular and let us know that Kashmir problem is not all abt the religion part and has its roots in the land and not in the belief ? And before you start getting you the exercise think for a second, why India and the world turned their back on ‘plebiscite’? what did they fear? emotions of the kashmiris or their religious fraternity with Pakistan???
Gladly flag me, will you??