Pakistan, Kashmir, etc...

[jayakris]

To add to what I just posted.... So, the Kashmiris have no historical or other right, to ask for a separate country. No more right than has a Malayali or a Bengali. And I do not believe that the concept of a separate country of Kashmir even existed before 1947 and the partition mess. If you asked, say from the 1970s onwards, the people in the small Kashmir valley area (not all of J&K), they probably has had a majority wish for being a separate country. But that was all because of the 1947 mess, when they preferred to be in Pakistan instead of what the king Hari Singh did. Not because they wanted to be an independent country from even before 1947. So the options are/were always India or Pakistan. But the rules were rules, and they were set by the British who were the ones who instigated the partition idea when it should've all been one country. The king's accession papers were all that was required, and that was to join India.

To ask 60 years later "where do you want to be" to Kashmiris is unjustified, prasen. So, your liberal thinking that a country should exist because the people in that country wants it to be a separate country, is in error. That is justified if at least a long-enough period of such a wish existed. Not true about Kashmiris. They deserve no such rights to be asked "do you want independence from India or Pakistan". So, again, it is India or Pakistan for them. By British rules, they had to be in India. So they are in India, which is where they always were. Just because they are muslims, they don't get to join the artificial country Pakistan that the Brits created. Nehru was nice to you, and entertained your complaint even after Pakistan ran over your friends/families' area. And you try to take advantage of it? Sorry people, Nehru is not the PM now. Shut the hell up, and live in India like all of us, Kashmiris!

But I agree with prasen on say Catalonia, Crimea, etc etc. The land boundaries were all pretty undefined when things happened inn the past and the people have a right to want historical errors corrected. No such historical errors need to be corrected in Kashmir. It is just a group of people being coddled by stupid Indian government (because of their religion, while that was not even the 1947 criterion) into thinking that they are something special and deserved a country, or a change of country to Pakistan. A mistake by Indian governments and nothing else. That mistake by Indian governments is what was corrected by the abrogation of article 370.

[prasen9]

To add to what I just posted.... So, the Kashmiris have no historical or other right, to ask for a separate country. No more right than has a Malayali or a Bengali.

I agree with this fully. It is just that I do not believe that there has to be a historical right. If more Malayalis than not want a free country, I will advocate for a free Kerala. It is about freedom to me. Let people decide what they want to do. If they want to cut the branch they are sitting on, let them be Kalidasa.

I think the difference is that I believe whenever a group of people want a country they should have it. You believe in some historical precedent, legal documents, movements over some period of time, etc.

Nobody is arguing the legality of it being part of India. At least I am not. I am arguing that it is pointless to occupy a territory whose people may want to be free. In my case it is a matter of principle. You may say I am a dreamer . Or an anti-national.

But I am also practical. Instead of paying the army, I would pay teachers and doctors and nurses and improve the condition of those who want to be in India.

Like I said, I do not mind abrogating Article 360. I want people to move in there and buy land. I believe in free movement of people. Instead of taking away their autonomy, I would want Kashmir-style autonomy given to all states in India. That would be a master-stroke. Then they would not even be able to complain that we are taking away something from them. It is mighty stupid that some idiots at the centre are holding up the change of even the name of my state and helping preserve the British legacy name I guess they only care about Hindi and not the whole of India. The federal government should be as small as is possible. That said, I do not begrudge it enforcing human rights or charging a national VAT because of the efficiencies that creates.

[usaindia]

A video from YouTube usually appears here. Please contact an administrator.

A video from YouTube usually appears here. Please contact an administrator.

[srini]

Like I said, I do not mind abrogating Article 360. I want people to move in there and buy land. I believe in free movement of people. Instead of taking away their autonomy, I would want Kashmir-style autonomy given to all states in India.

If i take your statement out of context from Kashmir and apply to Manipur, would you give same opinion? Because in Manipur all this conflict originated from the court ruling granting Meiteis scheduled tribes status, which lets them buy land and reside in hill areas of Manipur the right they were banned earlier due to Kukis being the only people having the special status to reside in Hill areas while not being banned to buy land and reside in valley region.

[prasen9]

Yes. In general, I am for the freedom of any citizen to move anywhere and buy anything in an ethical way. No special status.