Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    is that not an inferance, if you wanted an "independent kashmir' the same would have applied for pakistan, would it not?
    Partition of India and Pakistan happened over 50 years ago, that cannot be changed now. However, the Kashmir issue can still be decided that is why I believe in an independent Kashmir, because the Kashmiris are getting the raw deal and getting screwed over by India and Pakistan.


    Thought this is a nice ideal it is certainly not implementable. Any deterioration in the Indo-Pakistani relations would result in a mass build up of troops around Kashmir as a threat to one another. You say give them an army to defend themeselves...what against two nuclear powers and one of the worlds largest standing armies. Im sure the US has no intention of allowing that to ever happen. As i said its an ideal which will never work.
    I think I already said it won't happen - but that is what should happen.

    Is it realistic to claim territories in the middle of India - a logistical nightmare just call it the "Hyderbad air lift" a similar thing will happen as to soviet East Germany and West Germany. As history has dictated again with Bangladesh each country has to be a sold connected land mass in order to work.
    Whether or not it is realistic is another issue. You said India claims Kashmir because the Maharaja signed with India, hence Pakistan will claim Hyderabad and Junagar because the Nawabs signed with Pakistan. Now what I advocated was India getting out of Kashmir if it wants to keep Junagar and Hyderabad. That is a practical compromise.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Now what I advocated was India getting out of Kashmir if it wants to keep Junagar and Hyderabad. That is a practical compromise.
    - Was "East Pakistan" a practical comprimise - no, its essentially the same thing - Bangaladesh resented governance from West Pakistan so fought a war of independence. Hyderbad and Junagar are not connected to the main body of provinces which decided to join Pakistan, similar to Bangaladesh, whats to say it wouldnt have been the same in Hyderbad - there resentment at being governed from Islamabad. Whereas Kashmir is diffrent because it is a geographiacally part of India - you can compare the two situation, Kashmir has to be treated as its own entity.
    - Looking at the geography of the two nations its thourougly inpractical to expect that.
    - I think keeping Kashmir, Hyderbad and Junagar are a fair comprimise for allowing the millions upon millions of muslim indians who did not flee india unlike the millions of Hindus who did flee Pakistan through fear of being ethnic cleansed. Maybe if every unpatriotic muslim in india decided to move to either Hyderbad, Junagar and Kashmir, in my opinion Pakistan is welcome to those area - Pakistan has been a break of Indian progression for 50 years, the sooner India is rid of this problem the faster it can progress and allow Pakistan to spiral into the chaos its created for itself through military coups and extremist religion politics.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zaf1986)
    Partition of India and Pakistan happened over 50 years ago, that cannot be changed now. However, the Kashmir issue can still be decided that is why I believe in an independent Kashmir, because the Kashmiris are getting the raw deal and getting screwed over by India and Pakistan.
    the hindu pandits are already bein killed everyday in kashmir, and that is with indian troops deployed there. if kashmir was to become independent the situation would become much worse for them.

    and anyway.....even if it kashmir was to become independent, we (indians) cant exactly trust pakistan to leave it like that can we!?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    just a thought as to one of the major barriers of the issue - One of the major trionity in vedic mythology, Shiva, is supposed to reside in Mt. Kailas. This makes prehaps indias holiest site in kashmir - the amarnath cave.

    Asking india to give up Kashmir is like asking a muslim to give up Mecca, Medina or Jerusalem - it simply wont happen, and i assure you that if it does India will see ethnic clensing on an unprecidented scale.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Whereas Kashmir is diffrent because it is a geographiacally part of India -
    You can support India on the issue, but don't lie. If Kashmir was geographically part of India there would be no dispute. It isn't.

    the hindu pandits are already bein killed everyday in kashmir, and that is with indian troops deployed there. if kashmir was to become independent the situation would become much worse for them.

    and anyway.....even if it kashmir was to become independent, we (indians) cant exactly trust pakistan to leave it like that can we!?
    And Pakistan will say the same thing, Muslims are being killed in Kashmir by hindu extremists and if Pakistan were to let go of their side, India would just come over, like it did in 1965. As I said earlier, its never going to happen because both sides have no trust in each other, and for good reason.

    just a thought as to one of the major barriers of the issue - One of the major trionity in vedic mythology, Shiva, is supposed to reside in Mt. Kailas. This makes prehaps indias holiest site in kashmir - the amarnath cave.

    Asking india to give up Kashmir is like asking a muslim to give up Mecca, Medina or Jerusalem - it simply wont happen, and i assure you that if it does India will see ethnic clensing on an unprecidented scale.
    The sikhs most holy shrine is in Pakistan, I don't see them complaining and saying theyre gonna kill all the Muslims because sikhism's holiest place is in Pakistan - if you bring religion into this there will be problems. For all practical purposes, both Pakistan and India are secular, non-religious states. Musharraf is allied with America which a fundementalist government would never do, and Manmohan is committed to the gas pipeline from Iran, which a fundementalist government would never do either. So leave religion out of it, otherwise the topic gets messy.

    - I think keeping Kashmir, Hyderbad and Junagar are a fair comprimise for allowing the millions upon millions of muslim indians who did not flee india unlike the millions of Hindus who did flee Pakistan through fear of being ethnic cleansed. Maybe if every unpatriotic muslim in india decided to move to either Hyderbad, Junagar and Kashmir, in my opinion Pakistan is welcome to those area - Pakistan has been a break of Indian progression for 50 years, the sooner India is rid of this problem the faster it can progress and allow Pakistan to spiral into the chaos its created for itself through military coups and extremist religion politics.
    Who decided what defines an "unpatriotic Indian Muslim"? Most of the Indian Muslims I know are hugely patroitic.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    You can support India on the issue, but don't lie. If Kashmir was geographically part of India there would be no dispute. It isn't.
    That argument could go around in circles so i'll stop it here, its rather tenuious anyway as an argument for both India and Pakistan claimancy to Kashmir.

    Muslims are being killed in Kashmir by hindu extremists
    Sorry....can i have some proof, i dont believe ive ever been read of Hindu terrorists ever killing the family of Pakistani soldiers families. In fact i think its widely regarded that Hindus dont generally indulge in terrorism. As i said proof please - not an isolated incident either a continuing trend of Hindu extremist murder in Kashmir against Muslims.

    sikhs most holy shrine is in Pakistan
    When did Pakistan invade India to take all of Punjab and the Golden temple of Amritsar in some invasion of India i missed?

    Pakistan and India are secular
    India is secular - as it should be. Pakistan is an Islamic country according to the CIA world fact book. Pakistan was founded on the principal of a land for muslims the KIS in Pakistan stands for Kashmir - religion as a factor must be brought into the equation whether you like it or not.

    leave religion out of it, otherwise the topic gets messy.
    Do you honestly believe that religion has nothing to do with it. Of course it does this is Pakistans Claim to Kashmir, given it is predominantly Muslim. Whilst you say form an independent kashmir, whilst this is an ideal solution its completely unworkable, hence religion as a factor must come into the debate somewhere, im not here to debate the virtues of Islam and Hinduism or the cons, so theres no reason for the thread to get messy, after all Hindusim teaches tolerance to all faith and at the end of the day we believe in one universal god. I only introduced religion as a factor which needs to be addressed.

    I only used religion to point out the limitation of your idea of an independent Kashmir.

    [/QUOTE]Who decided what defines an "unpatriotic Indian Muslim"? [QUOTE]

    Those who advocate an unconditional return of Kashmir to Pakistan, those who kill worshippers in temples in gujurat, burn train loads of pilgrims, practice forced conversion of 'lower caste' Hindus and erode Indian culture in any way also those who are members of any right wing Islamic movement in India. They are unpatriotic indian muslims. Let me just clarify that i dont have a problem with Islam but i do have a problem with other people forcing religion on impoverished people - this extends not just to Islam but the mass conversions of Catholics in S. India.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry....can i have some proof, i dont believe ive ever been read of Hindu terrorists ever killing the family of Pakistani soldiers families. In fact i think its widely regarded that Hindus dont generally indulge in terrorism. As i said proof please - not an isolated incident either a continuing trend of Hindu extremist murder in Kashmir against Muslims.
    Proof that the Pakistan state sponsors terrorism in Kashmir?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Proof that the Pakistan state sponsors terrorism in Kashmir?
    Ive already provided a US article (apparantely big mates with Pakistan) stating that there was beyond a doubt evidence to suggest terrorist groups were backed by Pakistan.

    Your turn....

    also the fact that a Pakistani Minister was accused by a Pakistani general of operating a training camp in Kashmir would suggest its true - ill find the relevant article in a bit.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4092072.stm

    -if Pakistan were committed to a peace process would they not have turned these B****rd terrorists into Indian custody. There were loads of articles providing snippets of evidence this is just one to many many indicators of what India and Pakistan both know to be true.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I asked for proof that the Pakistani state sponsors terrorism. A minister giving housing to a so called terrorist in the 1980s does not equate to state support. I'm sure you are intelligent enough to know the difference.

    I will be back to continue the debate, once the darn exams are over. Just a few days to go now...
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    lol pakistan doesnt sponsor terrorism - they r helping the US get rid of terrorism - they're alrite the Pakistanis - i believe everyone shud get rid of terrorism - being muslim myself i dont need to kill innocent people to preech my points
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

3,053

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Do you want your parents to be with you when you collect your A-level results?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.