Cobra
India may not have many real options, but keeping quiet about jihadis should not be one of them. I mean official Pakistan never ceases to complain about anything and everything including Indian missile tests, Jinnah's property in Mumbai, Hindi movie plots.

People should read Jinnah sometime. Even when he was asking for something really outrageous(like equality in govt for Muslim League with Congress in provinces where Muslim percentage was less than 10% even), he would be complaining about not getting it

flag objectionable content

Pakistan does not want another war with India over Kashmir, Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar said while describing the current status of bilateral relations as the "best" the two countries ever had.


Let me translate for inbred retard pakis

Kashmir banega pakistan....NOT...

salim/selim..back to your stalking/paranoia...

flag objectionable content

{"Post by Cobra on May 9, 2008 11:17:48 am
Sadna, we can go mossad on them but that needs guts."}

Cobray,
Israel's hold on Palestinians is not any more effective than the Injun's hold on the Kashmiris. Eventually, both captive peoples will be free.

Nobody thought the Kosovars would ever be free of Serbia.

flag objectionable content

Sadna, we can go mossad on them but that needs guts.

flag objectionable content

My view has nothing to do with Pakistan. Kashmir is a Muslim majority state and as such does not want to associate itself with rest of India. No matter of pampering would deter them from dissuade them from that.

flag objectionable content

:But I believe that Indians should either put up or shut up. They can't depend upon outsiders, the US or anyone else to defend their interests."

Do you mean that India has only two alternatives
1. India should attack the jihadi camps or
2. India should mouth Paki propaganda about peace and pretend the jihadis don't exist.

Sorry I don't agree. I will complain about jihadis as much and as long as I want, and the Indian media and govt should too.

flag objectionable content

Mere words conciliatory or belligerent, can't solve the Kashmir Problem. Now it is not the right thing to say but Kashmiris ought to share some blame for their plight too.

In 1947 the Majority Party of Kashmir decided to go with India and Kashmiris changed minds way after that. Shaikh Abudullah was kept in jail but when he came out he still had strong support in Kashmir and became the PM.

Indians failed to capitalize on the favorable political conditions before the 70s. Now blaming Pakistan is just a way to cover up their own failure to keep the Kashmiris on their side.

Pakistan uses Kashmir for its internal consumption. Indians do exactly the same thing. Both deal with internal issues and blame each other for the Kashmir Problem.

Indians just take it out on Kashmiris...

flag objectionable content

{"It is stupid idea to keep holding a piece of land that draining country resources any way. Why not hold the plebiscite and decide the matter once and for all? Why should our soldiers have to die to defend someone who doesn't need defense from us? What kind of false pride is it?"}

Cobra,
You know, my friend, we have similar viewpoints. I agree that the eventual masters of any land are the local people who live there. I can harp all I want about FATA and Swat, but the bottom line is that those people decide their own fate, eventually. If they want to be a part of Pakistan, which they willingly did, it was fine. If Mushy starts bombing them and killing them and they decide to walk from Pakistan - that is their right. Similarly, why should Tamil and Bengali Indians keep dying to keep an occupied people in line? Ignoring our respective jingoistic emotions, when it comes down to brass tacks, we are saying the same things. I am not much of a super nationalist.

flag objectionable content

The only problem is we will set wrong precedent. Khalistanis, Assamis and other groups will get a wrong lessen from it. Plebiscite has people's mandate and hence has more legitimacy.

flag objectionable content

Well I see your point. Agreed.

flag objectionable content

cobra:

I would rather give Kashmir to Pakistan than have a referendum there; the risks of unpredictable consequences for Indian Muslims of losing the referendum in Kashmir are too high,in my opinion.

flag objectionable content

If not go all mossad on them if you have guts. Yaar, we couldn't tackle a handful terrorists in Kabul who kidnapped our plain right in front of our eyes. I would focus on such mishaps don't happen in future. Rather than maintaining status quo with Pakistan.

flag objectionable content

Salim:

My position on Kashmir is well known and quite different from the official Indian position. But I believe that Indians should either put up or shut up. They can't depend upon outsiders, the US or anyone else to defend their interests.
If they are so afraid of Pakistan's nukes, they might as well lift their dhotis and let Pakistanis do whatever they want.

In my opinion, Pakistan will use nukes only if its own integrity is threatened, not to protect terrorist training camps that it doesn't even admit to having.

flag objectionable content

It's much easier to give Kashmir valley to Muslims and seal the border.

flag objectionable content

It is stupid idea to keep holding a piece of land that draining country resources any way. Why not hold the plebiscite and decide the matter once and for all? Why should our soldiers have to die to defend someone who doesn't need defense from us? What kind of false pride is it?

flag objectionable content

{"I would support any Indian govt. which shows the balls to attack terrorist training camps in POK or elsewhere."}

DM Sahib,
Talk is cheap and unless you find another group of willing Mukti Bahini traitors, such actions will be doomed to failure. Considering the rapid development of nuclear weapons and credible delivery mechanisms, even a million Mukti Bahinis couldn't repeat the fiasco of '71.

The days of punishing Pakistan with violence have ended forever. A. Q. Khan Zindabad.

flag objectionable content