India builds a 2,500-mile barrier to rival the Great Wall of China - Page 3




 
--
 
February 19th, 2006  
TBA_PAKI
 
Quote:
I am sorry partner but you have yet to get your facts correct on history.
The Independence act stipulated that the six hundred princely state within the Indian Sub-Continent had a choice to join either India or Pakistan after signing the instrument of accenssion.Yes the demography pattern and geographical contiguity decided the majority of the issues.However the Nizam of Hyderabad and the ruler of Kashmir chose to abstain.
OK Sir!


But still British suggested that muslim majority states go with Pakistan.


And population of Kashmir wanted to join Pakistan but the hindu leader wanted to join this region with India. This is a major fact that Indians don't want to recognize.


He was not making an early decision because he feared a revolt against him from Kashmiri locals. He was acting on the basis of self-interest and not for the interests of Kashmiri people.
Quote:
During October 1947 ,that is exactly after almost two months of creation of India and Pakistan the marauders from Pakistan,aided and abetted by the Pak Govt and its military arm were raiding the Kashmir valley in a surreptitious bid to wrench it for themselves.Its a matter of shame that the marauders themselves muslims did not spare the large muslim population of Kashmir from muder, mayhem and rape.Greed and avarice took priority over religious affinity and teachings.In a desperate bid the ruler of Kashmir acceded to the Indian Union and asked for its forces to come to the rescue of the local population.Paks oft repeated cliche on Islamic brother hood has often been proved otherwise on ground.
The muslim majority was putting pressure on hindu leader to accede to Pakistan but he was not making any move. Rumours of muslim revolt against him started spreading in the region and for this reason Pakistan sent tribal militias in to the region. On seeing these developments he acceded the region to India and then fled to Dehli. This was an act of stupidity beyond normal person's understanding. This gave birth to the conflict.


If he was so true then why did he fled to Dehli?


Kashmiri people would have fought by him and he could have waited for Indian response.


And your sources are dead wrong on our militias raping and pillaging any muslim in Kashmir. Most of the time they did not met any resistance from Kashmiri locals. It is a propaganda compaign of your media to defame our stand. Hindu property was indeed damaged by them!


Also I want to ask TWO questions?


1- Why their is no voilence in Azad Kashmir?


Those people are Kashmiri as well but they are very happy with us.

2- Why Kashmiri people in your side observe strikes and shut-down of businesses when your Military Day comes? Why they call it the Black Day?


Because they show the truth.


So get your facts straight as well!

Quote:
In 1972 the Bengali muslim population of erstwhile East Pakistan rose in revolt against the genocide and torture their fellow brethren muslims from West Pakistan had perpetrated on them and thus was Bangladesh born.
Sir! their was lot more then that going on in that region. It is a separate and huge debate. Mukti Bahni movement was installed by some elements in Bengladesh to start freedom movement and this sparked voilence in that region and army had to make their move.

But I agree that treatment of people by them was not good and we paid a price for that.
Quote:
The treatment meted out to expatriate muslims who had migrated to Pakistan from India and called Mujahirs is well known, they were treated as second class citizens, the Punjabis and Sindhis always did rule the roost in Pakistan.
The muslims that migrated to Pakistan during partition days were treated like brothers and sisters here.

Even my family migrated from Dehli to Pakistan and we are enjoying all benefits of life here.


What is your point?

Quote:
India by article 370 of the Indian constitution has granted special status to Kashmir and no outsiders even from India are permitted to settle in this verdant valley so as to preserve the ethnicity of the Kashmiris and their life style.Whereas in Azad Kashmir or Pak occupied Kashmir once again the Punjabis and Sindhis have slowly moved in to establish their summer homes and promote their business and the demography is under a gradual change.
Sir! your side of Kashmir is called occupied for a reason!


Our side of Kashmir is open for trade and businesses and development. Plus many people living their are ethnic Kashmiri. Punjabi prefer to live in Punjab and same is the case with Sindhi people. People live where their businesses are functioning and established.


You point here holds no ground as well.


Quote:
Finally the muslim population in India is by far larger than in Pakistan and the second largest in the world after
Indonesia.Our President is Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam who is a muslim and is one of the top scientist in the country.
Yes! you are absolutely true here!


Quote:
So my dear friend your so called logic of muslim dominated area etc falls on flat ground and the world better reconcile to it.

No it does not!
February 26th, 2006  
jackehammond
 
Dear Members,

India is probably building the fence because of the increase of power of Islamic radicals in Bengldesh. What they want is for a nonMoslem state to over react to provications and most likely they fear cross border raids against the Hindu villages which would then provoke India to take measures which is what they want. It is just a common sense precaution.

Jack E. Hammond

BTW> To the member about Kashmir. Considering that for all practical purposes Pakistan after 1947 drove out almost all of its nonMoslem population (ie India has a much larger Muslim population than Pakistan) I can see why India was concerned about Kashmir. Also Pakistani paid mercs were terrorizing any Moslem leaders who wanted to stay with India. Last, to Indias credit it did not drive out the Moslem population (ie like most Moslem nations do and are doing today) after 1947. Althought the Moslem terrorists in Kashmir have been successful in driving out the nonMoslem population to a good extent. Last, this debate reminds me a lot of Hitler Germany's demand in 1938 that the ethnic German part of Czechoslavkia be allowed to have 'self-determination' and succeed from Czechoslavakia. Winston Churchill gave the best reply: " ... self-determination. It is a fraud and a farce to invoke that name. We in this country, as in other liberal and democratic countries, have a perfect right to exalt the principle of self-determination, but it comes ill out of the mouths of those in totalitarian States who deny even the smallest element of toleration to every section and creed within their bounds."
March 2nd, 2006  
chinese-canadian
 
I think China and India will just be friends. Both of them just have too many similiarities. We both are the oldest civlizations on Earth, we both flourished in the past, we both became crappy in 19th century and we both are now rising gradually.
by the way, the HImalaya Mountain on Chinese-Indian border is good enough wall already...
--
March 3rd, 2006  
jackehammond
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinese-canadian
I think China and India will just be friends. Both of them just have too many similiarities. We both are the oldest civlizations on Earth, we both flourished in the past, we both became crappy in 19th century and we both are now rising gradually.
by the way, the HImalaya Mountain on Chinese-Indian border is good enough wall already...
Dear Member,

Have to disagree. India developed nuclear weapons and and ICBM force to deter China. Also if what you believe is true, why is China arming Pakistan to the hilt with modern weapons and trying to obtain naval basing rights in Burma?

Jack E. Hammond
March 3rd, 2006  
chinese-canadian
 
ha, even Canada and U.S have invasion plans for each other. Building a strong relationship does not mean that both sides won't deter or spy on each other with some cautious measures. I am just saying there is a great future ahead for both nations and cooperation between the two will benefit each other immensely.
March 9th, 2006  
jackehammond
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinese-canadian
ha, even Canada and U.S have invasion plans for each other. Building a strong relationship does not mean that both sides won't deter or spy on each other with some cautious measures. I am just saying there is a great future ahead for both nations and cooperation between the two will benefit each other immensely.
Dear Member,

Military History Quarterly had an article about five years ago on the subject of the US pre-1939 invasion plans for Canada. They were dusted off in 1940 after the Fall of France. But when Churchill made it clear that England would never surrender and that even if the islands were taken the RN would sail to Halifax and Bermuda with the Royal Family and the British government - ie sans Churchill who stated he would die fighting the Germans.

Finally, from my memory the plans involved gaining control of fast of Halifax and the trans-Canadian railroad. Halifax was considered to be a serious military nut to crack. The Great Lakes were no problems as by treaty after the War of 1812 it wad demilitarized.

Jack E. Hammond
March 10th, 2006  
Damien435
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinese-canadian
ha, even Canada and U.S have invasion plans for each other. Building a strong relationship does not mean that both sides won't deter or spy on each other with some cautious measures. I am just saying there is a great future ahead for both nations and cooperation between the two will benefit each other immensely.
For some reason I just really doubt that validity of this statement, if these plans do exist then it would only have been as tests for someone in strategy & tactics who had too much time on their hand. But let me tell you why they don't exist.

A.) It would be suicide for Canada to attack America.

B.) You can look at it as we already own Canada or our relationship is so close that our two nations are practically one, we do afterall share the world's longest, unguarded border.
March 10th, 2006  
chinese-canadian
 
Canadians did have a plan to go into U.S, but not full-scale invasion.. it was more like preemptive strike when U.S' invasion is imminent
March 10th, 2006  
Damien435
 
 
But like I said, busy work.
March 10th, 2006  
jackehammond
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien435
For some reason I just really doubt that validity of this statement, if these plans do exist then it would only have been as tests for someone in strategy & tactics who had too much time on their hand. But let me tell you why they don't exist.

A.) It would be suicide for Canada to attack America.

B.) You can look at it as we already own Canada or our relationship is so close that our two nations are practically one, we do afterall share the world's longest, unguarded border.
Dear Member,

All nations have such plans. Some for full scale invasion and some for defenses, etc. For example a Mexican Army officer at the US War College was once asked to leave a class, because the subject turned to possible military action against Mexico. And exchange USAF officer also reported he was barred from one paper war game for the same reason.

For Canada if for what ever reason relations soured between the US and Canada and the British Empire it would be defensive except for gaining control of the railroad line that ran from a US port in Maine to Montreal -- ie the St Lawerance River freezes up and you can not re-enforce Canada's eastern interior till Spring and that is why the rail line lead to an ice free port in Maine. During the American Civil War, President Lincoln even allowed British troops to trans through Maine on that rail line to re-enforce Canada to allay UK fears of Irish-Americans attempting an invasion, which did happen after the Civil War.

Jack E. Hammond