Afspa - J&k

[S1ngh]

..... An even worse instance is the Indian armys repeated veto against the home ministrys recent proposal, backed by the Abdullah government, to partially lift the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) from peaceful areas in J&K. AFSPA gives the army unrestrained powers. It allows an officer to shoot anyone suspected of the intent to commit a violent act, including a breach of prohibitory orders such as Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Worse, AFSPA gives impunity. The concerned officer can only be sued with the defence ministrys prior permission which is never given. Nothing can be a more brazen violation of natural justice. No wonder the law is extensively abused to kill innocent people in J&K and the northeast.

Yet, Northern Command army chief B S Jaswal in 2010 publicly pleaded that AFSPA be treated as a holy or religious book: Don't touch this pious document Recently, a general even threatened the army would stop counter-insurgency operations if AFSPA is lifted a case of blackmail.

[mrggg123]

this area belongs to india. The ruler was hair singh nalwa. There was a monarchy which has been wiped away. Hindus and Sikhs have been cleansed from this area, now muslims feel they deserve their own state. This will further cleansed minorities away like they've been doing for decades. Pakistan will eventually control this if Kashmiri people did get control.

[Jonny101]

this area belongs to india. The ruler was hair singh nalwa. There was a monarchy which has been wiped away. Hindus and Sikhs have been cleansed from this area, now muslims feel they deserve their own state. This will further cleansed minorities away like they've been doing for decades. Pakistan will eventually control this if Kashmiri people did get control.

Not Hari Singh Nalwa. This area was a part of the Sikh empire until the Dogras betrayed the Sikhs and got Kashmir as the reward for this betrayal. The Hindu(Dogra) ruler of this state wanted to be independent but Jinnah was too greedy to wait it out and sent tribal to take over. Today Kashmir is a Muslim majority area and don't want to be part of India. They want to be part of Pakistan. But one must also recognize the rights of the Hindus of the state.

J&K state is actually a combination of 3 distinct areas lumped together into one state. Kashmir Valley, Jammu and Ladakh. Kashmir is Muslim, Jammu is Hindu and Ladakh is Buddhist. The 3 distinct areas should be separated since they have neither religion nor language in common. Further more Kashmir Valley should be given to Pakistan. Kashmir is the biggest liability for India today. So much headache caused by such a small land mass which is not even equal to 1% of India's total land mass is not worth it, while India should keep the Hindu Jammu and Buddhist Ladakh areas. Also if India does not do the smart move right now and get rid of Kashmir then in future they risk losing all of J&K if Muslims ever get the upper hand over the Hindus. It's better to cut your losses right now and consolidate what you have instead of losing the whole thing in the coming future.

[Mehtab Singh]

I don't think Kashmiris want to be part of Pakistan either. They want to free from both. I have already posted about the horrific brutality suffered by Kashmiri Hindus for over 600 years: http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?/topic/72638-how-many-hindus-really-killed/?p=592334

You can see the full article at https://www.facebook.com/notes/satish-ganjoo/hindus-and-hinduism-in-kashmir-a-saga-of-conversion-death-and-exile-dr-satish-ga/447971572526

Giving away Kashmir to Muslims would be a repeat of what was done to Sikhs in 1947. The land our Guru Sahibaan's feet touched was given away to those who martyred Them. Similarly, giving away the land where the ancestors of these Kashmiri Pandits lived, thrived, suffered and died to those who were responsible for all that inhuman carnage for centuries would be painful as well.

[Jonny101]

I don't think Kashmiris want to be part of Pakistan either. They want to free from both. I have already posted about the horrific brutality suffered by Kashmiri Hindus for over 600 years: http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?/topic/72638-how-many-hindus-really-killed/?p=592334

You can see the full article at https://www.facebook.com/notes/satish-ganjoo/hindus-and-hinduism-in-kashmir-a-saga-of-conversion-death-and-exile-dr-satish-ga/447971572526

Giving away Kashmir to Muslims would be a repeat of what was done to Sikhs in 1947. The land our Guru Sahibaan's feet touched was given away to those who martyred Them. Similarly, giving away the land where the ancestors of these Kashmiri Pandits lived, thrived, suffered and died to those who were responsible for all that inhuman carnage for centuries would be painful as well.

Problem is that while all the Hindus and Sikhs were ethnically cleansed from Pakistani side of Kashmir, but the same was not done by the Hindus on the Indian side and the result a large Muslim population remained in Indian Kashmir and consequences are right before us. What happened in Punjab logically should have happened in J&K state in 1947. While Hindus and Sikhs were expelled(from PoK), so should have the Muslims in the Indian side and in their place the Hindus and Sikh refugees from Pakistan should have settled just as it was done in east Punjab. Now doing such a thing would be impossible.

The Kashmiri Pandits have been ethnically cleansed probably on Pakistan's orders and since then a large amount of Muslims have settled in Jammu changing the ethnic balance. The people of Jammu are Pahari, similar to the people of Himachal. Kashmiris today are demanding independence but in reality they will form a union with Pakistan. Saying they want to be independent from both India and Pakistan is just a ploy to make it more acceptable in the eyes of the Indians. Kashmir is like the part of the body which has cancer, it's better to cut it off before it consumes the entire body. Separating Kashmir Valley and giving it to Pakistan will have several hidden benefits for India too. The tiny Kashmir Valley land mass is a HUGE liability for the whole of India. In future militant activity there will just get worse and bloodier once America pull out of Afghanistan, that is for sure. Those militants from the NW will target the Hindus of Jammu and do there what they did in Kashmir to the Pandits.

One of the first rules of investment management is to cut your losses when you see things are going to go bad. It's better to lose a little than everything. Having a Muslim majority area sharing it's border with Pakistan is a recipe for disaster for India from the start. Anyhow since India did not do the right thing in 1947 it's better for them to atleast cut their losses now.

[Hindustani]

Not Hari Singh Nalwa. This area was a part of the Sikh empire until the Dogras betrayed the Sikhs and got Kashmir as the reward for this betrayal. The Hindu(Dogra) ruler of this state wanted to be independent but Jinnah was too greedy to wait it out and sent tribal to take over. Today Kashmir is a Muslim majority area and don't want to be part of India. They want to be part of Pakistan. But one must also recognize the rights of the Hindus of the state.

J&K state is actually a combination of 3 distinct areas lumped together into one state. Kashmir Valley, Jammu and Ladakh. Kashmir is Muslim, Jammu is Hindu and Ladakh is Buddhist. The 3 distinct areas should be separated since they have neither religion nor language in common. Further more Kashmir Valley should be given to Pakistan. Kashmir is the biggest liability for India today. So much headache caused by such a small land mass which is not even equal to 1% of India's total land mass is not worth it, while India should keep the Hindu Jammu and Buddhist Ladakh areas. Also if India does not do the smart move right now and get rid of Kashmir then in future they risk losing all of J&K if Muslims ever get the upper hand over the Hindus. It's better to cut your losses right now and consolidate what you have instead of losing the whole thing in the coming future.

Giving land for peace is never a good idea especially if the intention of the enemy is to islamize the entire region piece by piece. Do you really want to give islamists more operating room? How about strategically or militarily? Is it wise to have your enemy even closer to the hinterland and above you now? How about the water supply? How about the religious sites? Imagine giving somebody that wants to kill you a piece of land in your backyard. Not wise.

The same case can be made for the Siachen Glacier. Its not the glacier thats important but the presence of the IA prevents a chinese pakistani linkup in that region. In an event of a war the IA will have to fight uphill if that region is given up.

[Hindustani]

Problem is that while all the Hindus and Sikhs were ethnically cleansed from Pakistani side of Kashmir, but the same was not done by the Hindus on the Indian side and the result a large Muslim population remained in Indian Kashmir and consequences are right before us. What happened in Punjab logically should have happened in J&K state in 1947. While Hindus and Sikhs were expelled(from PoK), so should have the Muslims in the Indian side and in their place the Hindus and Sikh refugees from Pakistan should have settled just as it was done in east Punjab. Now doing such a thing would be impossible.

The Kashmiri Pandits have been ethnically cleansed probably on Pakistan's orders and since then a large amount of Muslims have settled in Jammu changing the ethnic balance. The people of Jammu are Pahari, similar to the people of Himachal. Kashmiris today are demanding independence but in reality they will form a union with Pakistan. Saying they want to be independent from both India and Pakistan is just a ploy to make it more acceptable in the eyes of the Indians. Kashmir is like the part of the body which has cancer, it's better to cut it off before it consumes the entire body. Separating Kashmir Valley and giving it to Pakistan will have several hidden benefits for India too. The tiny Kashmir Valley land mass is a HUGE liability for the whole of India. In future militant activity there will just get worse and bloodier once America pull out of Afghanistan, that is for sure. Those militants from the NW will target the Hindus of Jammu and do there what they did in Kashmir to the Pandits.

One of the first rules of investment management is to cut your losses when you see things are going to go bad. It's better to lose a little than everything. Having a Muslim majority area sharing it's border with Pakistan is a recipe for disaster for India from the start. Anyhow since India did not do the right thing in 1947 it's better for them to atleast cut their losses now.

Not entirely true. The Dogras apparantly killed 250,000 muslims in 47 and beyond. Ethnically cleansed the entire Jammu valley. The British paper The Spectator reported this in 47. You can google the Jammu Massacre. The Sikh troopers of the Patiala Regiment aided along with the RSS. Here is a link.

http://bloodiedrivers.blogspot.ca/2010/09/jammu-massacre-1947.html

In 1947, Muslims were in a 61 per cent majority in the Jammu province. Horace Alexander wrote in the Spectator (January 16, 1948) that the killings had “the tacit consent of State authority” and put the figure at 200,000. On August 10, 1948, The Times (London) published a report by “A Special Correspondent”, an Indian Civil Service official who had served in the State. He wrote: “2,37,000 Muslims were systematically exterminated – unless they escaped to Pakistan along the border – by all the forces of the Dogra State, headed by the Maharaja in person and aided by Hindus and Sikhs. This happened in October 1947, five days before the first Pathan invasion and nine days before the Maharaja’s accession to India.” India was, therefore, not responsible one bit. Hari Singh was, personally. Between 1941 and 1961, the Muslim population of Jammu fell from 61 per cent to 38 per cent. Sheikh Abdullah wrote: “There was enacted in every village and town through which he [Hari Singh] passed an orgy of arson and loot and murder of Muslims. In Jammu the killing of Muslims all over the province continued unabated for weeks under his very nose. In an article entitled “Being Muslim in Jammu”, Zafar Chaudhary writes: “There was hardly any family in the region which escaped” it. Those “events permanently changed the way the Muslims of Jammu would live or think” (Economic & Political Weekly; August 23, 2008). Some decided to make peace with the BJP agitators. The BJP’s State president, Ashok Khajuria, said at a press conference on July 26: “Muslims vacate your houses... I am warning you… else, Jammu people are ready to throw you out.” On November 5 and 6, 1947, more than 100 lories, loaded with women, children and old men were taken into the wilderness of Kuthua forests. Hindu extremists and armed gangs were let loose on these innocent people and an unparallel butchery was perpetrated, killing thousands of them. Women were raped, molested and their valuables looted. All these bloodsheds were taking place in full view of the Indian army, which had by that time occupied a major part of the state. In another act of butchery, a large gathering of 25000 Muslims, in Miran Sahib and Ranbir Singhpora, were machine-gunned. During migration to Pakistan in 1947, nearly 300,000 people were massacred in cold British daily "the London Times" wrote on October 10, 1947 in a report from its special correspondent in India that the Maharaja, under his own supervision, got assassinated 237,000 Muslims, using military forces in Jammu area. The editor of "Statesman" Ian Stephen, in his book "Horned Moon" wrote that till the end of autumn 1947, more than 200,000 Muslims were assassinated.

The 1947 carnage left several Muslim majority populated villages in Jammu district alone totally Hindu or Sikh populated. In Jammu district alone, which is a part of the larger Jammu province, Muslims numbered 158,630 and comprised 37 per cent of the total population of 428,719 in the year 1941. In the year 1961, Muslims numbered only 51,693 and comprised only 10 per cent of the total population of 516,932. The decrease in the number of Muslims in Jammu district alone was over 100,000. That there was a design to change the demographics is demonstrated by another incident. Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Mehr Chand Mahajan told a delegation of Hindus who met him in the palace when he arrived in Jammu that now when the power was being transferred to the people they should better demand parity. When one of them associated with the National Conference asked how they could demand parity when there was so much difference in population ratio. Pointing to the Ramnagar natural reserve below, where some bodies of Muslims were still lying, he said, "the population ratio too can change."

According to official records of the United Nations Security Council, Meeting No. 534, March 6, 1951: "Shortly after the terrible slaughters in India, which accompanied Partition, the Maharaja set upon a course of action whereby, in the words of the special correspondent of The Times of London published in its issue of 10 October 1948, "in the remaining Dogra area, 237,000 Muslims were systematically exterminated, unless they escaped to Pakistan along the border, by all the forces of the Dogra State headed by the Maharaja in person and aided by Hindus and Sikhs"."

[S1ngh]

Dogra raja of Kashmir wanted to stay independent; neither with kashmir nor with Pakistan. However, prime minister of his state desperately wanted to be with India because of his link with nehru clan. Pakistan made mistake on declaring war in that time and that forced dogras to sign/surrender to be with India despite public opposition.

DOn't remember that PM's name but he is the grandfather of the current chief minister omar abdullah.

[Mehtab Singh]

• in their place the Hindus and Sikh refugees from Pakistan should have settled just as it was done in east Punjab.
• Saying they want to be independent from both India and Pakistan is just a ploy to make it more acceptable in the eyes of the Indians.
• The tiny Kashmir Valley land mass is a HUGE liability for the whole of India. In future militant activity there will just get worse and bloodier once America pull out of Afghanistan, that is for sure. Those militants from the NW will target the Hindus of Jammu and do there what they did in Kashmir to the Pandits.
• It's better to lose a little than everything. Having a Muslim majority area sharing it's border with Pakistan is a recipe for disaster for India from the start.

Very good points veeray.

Imagine giving somebody that wants to kill you a piece of land in your backyard. Not wise.

Exactly!

[Jonny101]

Not entirely true. The Dogras apparantly killed 250,000 muslims in 47 and beyond. Ethnically cleansed the entire Jammu valley. The British paper The Spectator reported this in 47. You can google the Jammu Massacre. The Sikh troopers of the Patiala Regiment aided along with the RSS. Here is a link.

http://bloodiedrivers.blogspot.ca/2010/09/jammu-massacre-1947.html

In 1947, Muslims were in a 61 per cent majority in the Jammu province. Horace Alexander wrote in the Spectator (January 16, 1948) that the killings had “the tacit consent of State authority” and put the figure at 200,000. On August 10, 1948, The Times (London) published a report by “A Special Correspondent”, an Indian Civil Service official who had served in the State. He wrote: “2,37,000 Muslims were systematically exterminated – unless they escaped to Pakistan along the border – by all the forces of the Dogra State, headed by the Maharaja in person and aided by Hindus and Sikhs. This happened in October 1947, five days before the first Pathan invasion and nine days before the Maharaja’s accession to India.” India was, therefore, not responsible one bit. Hari Singh was, personally. Between 1941 and 1961, the Muslim population of Jammu fell from 61 per cent to 38 per cent. Sheikh Abdullah wrote: “There was enacted in every village and town through which he [Hari Singh] passed an orgy of arson and loot and murder of Muslims. In Jammu the killing of Muslims all over the province continued unabated for weeks under his very nose. In an article entitled “Being Muslim in Jammu”, Zafar Chaudhary writes: “There was hardly any family in the region which escaped” it. Those “events permanently changed the way the Muslims of Jammu would live or think” (Economic & Political Weekly; August 23, 2008). Some decided to make peace with the BJP agitators. The BJP’s State president, Ashok Khajuria, said at a press conference on July 26: “Muslims vacate your houses... I am warning you… else, Jammu people are ready to throw you out.” On November 5 and 6, 1947, more than 100 lories, loaded with women, children and old men were taken into the wilderness of Kuthua forests. Hindu extremists and armed gangs were let loose on these innocent people and an unparallel butchery was perpetrated, killing thousands of them. Women were raped, molested and their valuables looted. All these bloodsheds were taking place in full view of the Indian army, which had by that time occupied a major part of the state. In another act of butchery, a large gathering of 25000 Muslims, in Miran Sahib and Ranbir Singhpora, were machine-gunned. During migration to Pakistan in 1947, nearly 300,000 people were massacred in cold British daily "the London Times" wrote on October 10, 1947 in a report from its special correspondent in India that the Maharaja, under his own supervision, got assassinated 237,000 Muslims, using military forces in Jammu area. The editor of "Statesman" Ian Stephen, in his book "Horned Moon" wrote that till the end of autumn 1947, more than 200,000 Muslims were assassinated.

The 1947 carnage left several Muslim majority populated villages in Jammu district alone totally Hindu or Sikh populated. In Jammu district alone, which is a part of the larger Jammu province, Muslims numbered 158,630 and comprised 37 per cent of the total population of 428,719 in the year 1941. In the year 1961, Muslims numbered only 51,693 and comprised only 10 per cent of the total population of 516,932. The decrease in the number of Muslims in Jammu district alone was over 100,000. That there was a design to change the demographics is demonstrated by another incident. Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Mehr Chand Mahajan told a delegation of Hindus who met him in the palace when he arrived in Jammu that now when the power was being transferred to the people they should better demand parity. When one of them associated with the National Conference asked how they could demand parity when there was so much difference in population ratio. Pointing to the Ramnagar natural reserve below, where some bodies of Muslims were still lying, he said, "the population ratio too can change."

According to official records of the United Nations Security Council, Meeting No. 534, March 6, 1951: "Shortly after the terrible slaughters in India, which accompanied Partition, the Maharaja set upon a course of action whereby, in the words of the special correspondent of The Times of London published in its issue of 10 October 1948, "in the remaining Dogra area, 237,000 Muslims were systematically exterminated, unless they escaped to Pakistan along the border, by all the forces of the Dogra State headed by the Maharaja in person and aided by Hindus and Sikhs"."

It's all Islamic propaganda that Muslims were massacred in J&K during 1947. If such a large number of Muslims were being killed by the Dogras and Sikhs, you think the popular Muslim PM and his followers would have pressured the Raja to join J&K state with Hindu-India instead of Muslim-Pakistan? And Patiala's army did not participate in any massacre of Muslims in Kashmir or Jammu. Their function there was to stop the tribals from overrunning Kashmir which they did.

My own late uncle was a young soldier in the Patiala army that faced the Pathan tribals and stopped them. He used to tell us about his experiences in the war. He told us how the general Hindu population was extremely fearful of the Muslim Pathans, and that the Dogra soldiers would run away at the first sight of a Pathan instead of fighting them. It is only when the Sikh soldiers of the Patiala state and Indian army came that they gave a powerful blow to the ambitions of the tribals/Pak army. After beating the tribals, the Sikhs in the army wanted to also retake parts of Pakistan because they were still very angry of the Sikh slaughter that just happened in west Punjab but Nehru thought his so called "diplomatic skills" can find a solution to the Kashmir problem.

Here is a picture of those Tyar Bar Tyar Sikh soldiers being air lifted to J&K