J&K News and Discussion - 2016

[rsangram]

X-Post....

I expounded on this with another member yesterday.

It's a long war and each: 1947, 1965, 1971, 1989 to 2003 and present are battles in this war.

First was Battle of Kashmir. It settled accession and that Pakistan occupied Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan.
1965 was Battle Of Punjab. It showed India will cross International Borders in self defence of Kashmir.
1971 was Battle of East Pakistan. It led to creation of Bangladesh and 93000 POWs. Same number at Battle of Stalingrad in WWII.
1989 to 2003 is Second Battle of Kashmir. It established India will finish off Pakistan.
Now we are in Third and hopefully last Battle of Kashmir. If NaMo wins this it ends Pakistan. So we need to understand and support him.

The last two are mistaken assertions. In fact, from 1989 it has been quiet the opposite of what it says above.

[ramana]

So when did Kashmir terrorists action start?

And what was wrong with last statement?

[rsangram]

No, the second battle of Kashmir started alright, but it did NOT establish that India will finish off Pakistan. In fact, if anything, it established that Pakistan would finish off India. Kashmiri Pandit exodus was the crowning achievement of Pakistan during this period, but there were other major achievements, beyond even the Pakistanis' own wildest dreams.

The third battle is also heading the other way. Pakistan is using what it established from 1989 to 2003, ie., a perfected and proven asymetrical warfare strategy against India, to now cause the "end of India" as we know it.....by separating Kashmir from us.

If we cannot even resettle our own Kashmir Pandits, whose population is rather small in the whole scheme to things, securely in the valley, how can we even think of "the end of Pakistan". It is all imagination. And if we just have to indulge in fantasy, why the fantasy of "end of pakistan", why not conjure up something truly grand......such as "beginning of complete and utter world domination by India before Modi leaves office".

[rsangram]

American civil war happened because there was no agreed protocol to democratic independence.
As far as i know, human rights charter plus democracy implies, if there is political will for independence, democracies accommodate atleast the legal scenario via its constitutional courts.

...

This is utter and complete nonsense you are peddling here. No democracy will allow a fascist or a theocratic secession. All that these theories have created is an ever increasing spiral of violence and misery on the subcontinent. One million dead in 1947, three million in 1971, and a hundred thousand since then. How many more will the likes of you kill before you give up this 'human rights' and 'right to self determination' nonsense?

The only entity that establishes a peace and a modus-vivendi on the subcontinent is the Union of India and the Union (not a federation) is indissoluble.

Sudeep,

I have moved the discussion of the meaning and merits or lack thereof of Indian Democracy to the thread entitiled, "Directions of Indian Democracy", in the General Discussion Forum, in deference to Ramana's wishes to keep this thread focused on J&K, which really, is where it should be focused. You may, join us and post on that thread, if you wish to contribute and discuss the direction of Indian democracy.

[Rudradev]

I expounded on this with another member yesterday.

It's a long war and each: 1947, 1965, 1971, 1989 to 2003 and present are battles in this war.

First was Battle of Kashmir. It settled accession and that Pakistan occupied Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan.
1965 was Battle Of Punjab. It showed India will cross International Borders in self defence of Kashmir.
1971 was Battle of East Pakistan. It led to creation of Bangladesh and 93000 POWs. Same number at Battle of Stalingrad in WWII.
1989 to 2003 is Second Battle of Kashmir. It established India will finish off Pakistan.
Now we are in Third and hopefully last Battle of Kashmir. If NaMo wins this it ends Pakistan. So we need to understand and support him.

I seriously doubt it.

I believe NaMo does not want to end Pakistan at this time. If he ends Pakistan then he has to clean up the splattered remains of Pakistan. He has enough work on his plate stewarding Bharat's realization of her own potential. In fact, if NaMo was even given an option today to solve J&K and end Pakistan in one sure shot, I believe he would forego that option, and let J&K continue in its present state of managed instability for the foreseeable future. His primary interest in J&K is to ensure that no third party, such as the US or PRC (via CPEC) is able to leverage the situation and make permanent gains on the ground. Otherwise, he will prefer the status quo.

We have to see this in the light of the CPEC drama, and especially the types of articles that are coming out in the Paki media, brimming with the realization that their country is about to be irretrievably mortgaged in an East-India-Company type situation for perpetual colonial exploitation by China.

This is the Paki "gun to my own head" way of dealing with India. In the "second battle of Kashmir" you describe above, the period began with the unveiling of Photochor Khan's n-weapons in 1987. There began a renewed period of Paki proxy war via terrorist tanzeems under the umbrella of nuclear blackmail. This went on through Pokhran and Chagai into Kargil, when the Paki nuclear bluff was finally and resoundingly called by India. After that, Musharraf just kept repeating himself hoarse that Kashmir is a nuclear flashpoint, world must solve it, India must make concessions to avoid a nuclear holocaust in which India suffers immeasurably (but Pakistan is totally destroyed) etc. He kept repeating the threats of the nuclear suicide bomber, and was completely ignored as we went ahead with LoC fencing, rooting out terrorist cells, and finally sealed the deal with Parakram. After Parakram the US told Musharraf to shut up and stop sending terrorists into India. The nuclear bluff had fizzled out. That's how the "second battle of Kashmir" ended.

Now we see the Pakis again pointing a NEW gun to their own head... CPEC! They are threatening India that we will soon find ourselves with China as both a northern and a Western neighbour... even though the effect of Chinese colonization will be to end the state of Pakistan as we know it. It is not so different from threatening self-destruction by turning their entire nation into a nuclear suicide bomber.

The unspoken deal being offered by Pakistan is : give us Kashmir, then we will normalize relations with you (India) and allow our economy to grow via trade with India etc. In effect, we will become a diligent partner in SAARC and collaborate with you for our mutual prosperity (it is BS of course, but it is what they are peddling). On the other hand, if we don't give Kashmir to Pakistan, they will sell themselves to the Chinese as a colony because "it is the only route to prosperity we have left open to them", and then we will be sorry

Of course, like the previous nuclear gun, the CPEC gun which the Pakis are now pointing at their heads isn't only meant for an Indian audience. It is for the West, especially the US as well. If things had gone according to plan for the Pakis, Clinton/Abedin would have won the US presidency... and the Americans would have come swooping in to intervene in SoothAsia to prevent Pakis from selling themselves to the Chinese (ooo, the poow widdle Pakis). POTUS Clinton would have pressured evil Yindoo Modi to give up Kashmir so that Pakistan did not mortgage itself to CPEC. Unfortunately for the Pakis, Clinton lost, and Trump became POTUS instead. Now they are half mortgaged to the Chingadyas and they have no idea what to do next

[ramana]

Thanks for the comments. So second battle hypothesis is right.

I am trying to recast the narrative into a long war with different battles which allows to see big picture.
If we cast each of them as separate wars we lose the thread of what was achieved and where it leads.

NaMo is dead serious about ending J&K terrorism from inside.
And the internal security and Army are aligned on this.
Political parties need to be drawn to this.
Once alignment of security goals is seen they will scramble to get the rewards.

Once this happens if TSP pulls its trigger go ahead.

They are dust anyway.

[ramana]

No, the second battle of Kashmir started alright, but it did NOT establish that India will finish off Pakistan. In fact, if anything, it established that Pakistan would finish off India. Kashmiri Pandit exodus was the crowning achievement of Pakistan during this period, but there were other major achievements, beyond even the Pakistanis' own wildest dreams.

The third battle is also heading the other way. Pakistan is using what it established from 1989 to 2003, ie., a perfected and proven asymetrical warfare strategy against India, to now cause the "end of India" as we know it.....by separating Kashmir from us.

If we cannot even resettle our own Kashmir Pandits, whose population is rather small in the whole scheme to things, securely in the valley, how can we even think of "the end of Pakistan". It is all imagination. And if we just have to indulge in fantasy, why the fantasy of "end of pakistan", why not conjure up something truly grand......such as "beginning of complete and utter world domination by India before Modi leaves office".

Thanks for the feedback. So we disagree on the details and RD has provided some of them.
Sometimes battles are not decisive and have collateral damage which has to be fixed once the war is won.

Its too early to resettle the Kashmir Pandits as the ground situation is still not conducive to that. We don't want Israeli settlements type kibbutz's for our own people in our own land.



I can assure you once the third battle is won all this will go away.

[SBajwa]

No, the second battle of Kashmir started alright, but it did NOT establish that India will finish off Pakistan. In fact, if anything, it established that Pakistan would finish off India. Kashmiri Pandit exodus was the crowning achievement of Pakistan during this period, but there were other major achievements, beyond even the Pakistanis' own wildest dreams.

And this is the same modus operandi everywhere else in India., Kairana in UP or West Bengal or Kerala. Get the non-muslims out and physically take over their lands/businesses/women/etc.

[SwamyG]

No, the second battle of Kashmir started alright, but it did NOT establish that India will finish off Pakistan. In fact, if anything, it established that Pakistan would finish off India. Kashmiri Pandit exodus was the crowning achievement of Pakistan during this period, but there were other major achievements, beyond even the Pakistanis' own wildest dreams.

It was not an achievement of Pakistan; but an outcome of the nexus between Congress, Communists and BIF forces. Pakistan just fished in troubled waters.

[Yagnasri]

The J&K battle is not about J&K. It is only a part of larger Jihad. The idea of Ghazwa e Hind is not some myth as we presume, but a command which the Paki jihadis are implementing in J&K. If anyone thinks that handing over J&K to Pakis on a silver plate will make them our friends, they are very wrong. In the 1950s etc it was the water sharing of Sindhu river. Long after that, the J&K started as a part of greater Islamisation of Pakis. We are not fighting a nation called Pakistan, we are fighting Jihadis who have Pakistan in their control.


If the J&K fight is a Jihad and about Islam, the Indian Muslim leadership in other places who conversantly keep quite on J&K will be made to take a stand which they do not want to take at any point of time. If we read that IA and CRPF losing men day after day to Indian Muslims and not to some political terrorists in J&K then the entire secular discussion will change. It is also for the same reason the Hindu genocide in the Vally is not being discussed in the open in MSM. They simply do not want the world to realise that this is done as a part of the larger war on unbelievers by the followers of Islam.

The radicalisation of Indian Muslims was going on for decades and no one care to see who it will affect our national security. A significant sector Indian Muslims brainwashed to have is as much hatred of Isreal as other in the Arab world on daily basis by Saudi-funded Mullas. We may think that what this hatred of Jews has to do with Hindus. But it is this hatred of Jews comes from on part of the teachings of their book and the same book teaches a lot of things about Ideal worshipers like Hindus. How can we be sure that this hate only gets or getting limited to Jews now and there is no hate being drilled int their brains on Hindus directly or indirectly by the religious leaders of Muslims in India?

It is in this contest we have to see how the statement of that Hizbul commander's (or whatever) statement on Hurriyat needed to be looked. He was made to change the statement as he spoke the true nation of the fight in j&K and no one from Muslims side want general public in India to hear.

[rsangram]

The J&K battle is not about J&K. It is only a part of larger Jihad. The idea of Ghazwa e Hind is not some myth as we presume, but a command which the Paki jihadis are implementing in J&K. If anyone thinks that handing over J&K to Pakis on a silver plate will make them our friends, they are very wrong. In the 1950s etc it was the water sharing of Sindhu river. Long after that, the J&K started as a part of greater Islamisation of Pakis. We are not fighting a nation called Pakistan, we are fighting Jihadis who have Pakistan in their control.


If the J&K fight is a Jihad and about Islam, the Indian Muslim leadership in other places who conversantly keep quite on J&K will be made to take a stand which they do not want to take at any point of time. If we read that IA and CRPF losing men day after day to Indian Muslims and not to some political terrorists in J&K then the entire secular discussion will change. It is also for the same reason the Hindu genocide in the Vally is not being discussed in the open in MSM. They simply do not want the world to realise that this is done as a part of the larger war on unbelievers by the followers of Islam.

The radicalisation of Indian Muslims was going on for decades and no one care to see who it will affect our national security. A significant sector Indian Muslims brainwashed to have is as much hatred of Isreal as other in the Arab world on daily basis by Saudi-funded Mullas. We may think that what this hatred of Jews has to do with Hindus. But it is this hatred of Jews comes from on part of the teachings of their book and the same book teaches a lot of things about Ideal worshipers like Hindus. How can we be sure that this hate only gets or getting limited to Jews now and there is no hate being drilled int their brains on Hindus directly or indirectly by the religious leaders of Muslims in India?

It is in this contest we have to see how the statement of that Hizbul commander's (or whatever) statement on Hurriyat needed to be looked. He was made to change the statement as he spoke the true nation of the fight in j&K and no one from Muslims side want general public in India to hear.

I agree with your diagnosis. J&K is not an isolated problem, but a continuation of Jihad against Hindus of which Ghaswa-e-Hind is the main rallying cry. Muslims will not let up on their war against Hindus until they have completed their unfinished business of Ghazwa-e-Hind, meaning Fateh over Hind, meaning conversion of all Hindus. And that is the reason, Hindus are fighting a losing battle. Kashmir is merely a small battle for the Muslims, after having won it, they can move forward to the rest of India. It is not Kashmir, which is the unfinished business of Partition, it is Partition, which was part of the unfinished business of Ghazwa-e-Hind. Pakistan is nothing but a forward post battalion of the larger Islamic Jihadi army whose immediate purpose is Ghazwa-e-Hind, but long term purpose is to convert the whole world into the most fundamentalist, regressive form of Islam.

The result of a one thousand year old continuous Ghazwa-e-Hind is this, and this is by no means an exclusive list.

1. About 43 of the population of the subcontinent(if you include Afghanistan) today, in 2017 is Muslim, with the percentage increasing every day. This was ZERO, before Ghazwa-e-Hind began. Hindu population of the subcontinent is roughly 800 million, Muslim population is roughly 600 million (India, pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan).

2. Physical separation of territories from India (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangla Desh), and practically emptying out of the Hindus from those territories.

3. Emptying out of Hindus from large sections of territories within present day India, such as Kashmir, and as Bajwa says, large enclaves within West Bengal, UP, Kerala, Andhra, Tamil, etc.

4. Massive trauma induced psychosis among the general Hindu population, which manifests itself in the form of various deformities and suicidal self wounding, such as blind belief in democracy, kleptocracy, corruption, Stockholm Syndrome vis-a-vis the Muslim, and all forms of self destructive behavior, including delusion and fantasy, not to mention jingoism (THIS IS MY BOOK IS THE WORST EFFECT OF GHAZWA-E-HIND SO FAR, EVEN WORST THEN GENOCIDE OF HINDUS AND SEPARATION OF TERRITORIES)

5. A complete acceptance of a Muslim's place in the subcontinent and complete recognition of Hindu free subcontinental countries, and a mental regularization of the Hindu free status of erstwhile Hindu territories, not only in the mind of the rest of the world, but in the mind of an overwhelming number of Hindus as well. Even pointing this fact out, is enough to brand a Hindu as a Hindu terrorist, a Hindu fundamentalist, a Hindu fanatic, a Hindu Nationlist.

6. Development of nuclear and the transportation of nuclear weapons capability on the subcontinent by the Muslims

7. Continuous pattern since 1000 years, which continues to this day, of daily, senseless killings of Hindus by Muslims, just because the victims are Hindus and the Hindus because of trauma induced mental disabilities and shock, are unable to organize a defense, preferring instead to live in a delusion that they are winning

I predict that in 100 years, if there is no change in trajectory, which to me does not seem to be in the cards, India will be Islamic, along the same lines of Indonesia and Malaysia. Because the Muslims are already 43% of the population of the subcontinent. Once they hit 51%, as we all know, the Muslims have no concept of co-existence, once they hit 51% they will very quickly use the sword to convert the rest or exile the few who will resist, or kill the other very few who will resist to the very end. This is particularly true, now, with them having nuclear weapons.

[rsangram]

My above post will beg the question as to if there is a solution and if so, what ? First let us define what we mean by a solution. In my view, a solution how we take a chance of preserving the Hindu culture in any significant way beyond the next 100 years, and secondly, starting now, become more secure from Ghazwa-e-Hind, which will continue no matter what, until there is Islam.

So, what in my view is the solution ? I think desperate times call for desperate solutions. In my view, we are in desperate times, with 43% Islamic population of the subcontinent (Which is as per census in all subcontinental countries and therefore, in my view drastically under report the muslims, so in actuality it is more like 45 or 46%), and Hindus under massive ongoing attack and Hindus too mentally disabled right now to mount any kind of defense, leave aside an effective defense.

We could try other solutions, but in pretty short order if nothing else works, I think we may have to start thinking about settling for one more partition, but with strict population transfer, and then creating a highly fortified, armed to the teeth with eat grass mentality, Hindu Nation, with strict discipline on the inside and strict, even draconian punishment for any self destructive behavior like corruption. We can find examples of these highly militarized, highly disciplined internally and highly regimented societies in our Indian history. Please refer to Chanakya created and even pre-Chanakya created order in Magadha, as just one example. It was precisely this "Order" of Magadha that created terror and ultimately scared away Alexander and his troops from India.

And please, dont shoot the messenger. I did not create conditions which have led to our desperate times. I am merely recognizing our desperation well in time to be able to do something about it and proposing a solution to our pathetic situation. Clearly, if I were God, I would not want another partition, I would even annul the one that happened, and wave my magic wand, and have all the muslims nicely accommodated in the 60 odd other Islamic nations. It is quite possible, that had our "illustrious" leaders such as Jawaharlal and Mohandas, agreed with Jinnah and brought about a population transfer in 1947, we would not be in such desperate state right now and another partition could well have been avoided.

[Supratik]

There are many other threads where you can scare people off their pants. This thread is for discussing the security, political, economic, etc situation of J&K.


IMO, the tide and ebb of violence in J&K are like turbulence in a flight. This is a battle of attrition where the Kashmiri Islamists are being weared out. Already 2% of the male population is dead. So eventually fatigue is going to set in. You have to just keep killing the jihadis as fast as they are produced. That is for the Kashmiris only. The ultimate solution is to neuter Pakistan. Even if and when Pakistan is neutered jihad is going to continue. So we have to be prepared just like we have been fighting jihad for the last 1400 years. This is not a war for those who start shaking violently in their pants after every incident. Fortunately our army and security forces are not one of them.

[rsangram]

There are many other threads where you can scare people off their pants. This thread is for discussing the security, political, economic, etc situation of J&K.


IMO, the tide and ebb of violence in J&K are like turbulence in a flight. This is a battle of attrition where the Kashmiri Islamists are being weared out. Already 2% of the male population is dead. So eventually fatigue is going to set in. You have to just keep killing the jihadis as fast as they are produced. That is for the Kashmiris only. The ultimate solution is to neuter Pakistan. Even if and when Pakistan is neutered jihad is going to continue. So we have to be prepared just like we have been fighting jihad for the last 1400 years. This is not a war for those who start shaking violently in their pants after every incident. Fortunately our army and security forces are not one of them.

45% Islamic population so far on the subcontinent and counting. And Supratik Bahubali is standing tall, unshaken in his pants ! What a sight to behold !

[Rudradev]

I have a problem with rats in my house.

Therefore I request the City's Department of Property Records to partition my house and remove the basement, guest bedroom, two bathrooms, and one verandah from my title deed. Then I will no longer have to live with rats in my house.

This, of course, is a solution that serves my best interests while taking care of the problem for good. What a brilliant idea!

I am also preparing for the future by stockpiling petrol and matches. After the partition, if I still see or hear any more rats in the part of the house that remains my own, I will just burn the whole building down. Then let us see what the rats do.

[Supratik]

rsangram,

You are either young and immature or unable to think through. When there is a problem you find ways to deal with it. Not run away from it. This thread is not about Muslim population but about J&K. Rudradev, already answered you.

[ramana]

Lest stick to J&K in this thread please.

[rsangram]

I have a problem with rats in my house.

Therefore I request the City's Department of Property Records to partition my house and remove the basement, guest bedroom, two bathrooms, and one verandah from my title deed. Then I will no longer have to live with rats in my house.

This, of course, is a solution that serves my best interests while taking care of the problem for good. What a brilliant idea!

I am also preparing for the future by stockpiling petrol and matches. After the partition, if I still see or hear any more rats in the part of the house that remains my own, I will just burn the whole building down. Then let us see what the rats do.

Muslims are not rats. And as hard as the rats are to get rid of, Muslims are in a different league. They are more like roaches with a sting of a cobra. The only way to get ride of them is, yes, partition the house.

If you think for a moment, rather than professing the same old worn out, lazy arguments, you may arrive at a conclusion which maybe different than mine, but you will certainly arrive at the conclusion that status quo and the current trajectory is not going to work. AND THOSE DIFFERENT IDEAS ARE WHAT WE SHOULD BE DEBATING, NOT BULLYING PEOPLE INTO ACCEPTING THE COMPLETELY USELESS STATUS QUO.

All of your laughing your ass off etc, would be funny, if it were not for our young kids dying on the border everyday. Send those "laughing my ass off" to those soldiers families.

[rsangram]

Lest stick to J&K in this thread please.

We are discussing J&K. You cant solve J&K without fortifying yourself against Gazwa-e-Hind.

I suggested one way, to try and deal with Gazwa-e-Hind. If someone does not like it, they can argue against, but there is no need for Supratik to make personal attacks.

At least Rudradev tried to make an argument against me, which is perfectly fine, by the way - not his argument, but his approach to opposing me.

In my view, you cannot solve J&K without completely not having the muslims live with us, anywhere in our country. Would I prefer to keep all the territories and expel the muslims ? Yes. but it is not within our capabilities to do that. The best we can hope for is, to strike a grand bargain, where we expel the people and settle it by giving them some more territory. Even that will be resisted by the Islamics, as they know that is a losing proposition for them - since they want all of Indian territory, which they are well on the trajectory to do, as is clear from their current population percentage (45% in the subcontinent) and relative birth rates, compared to Hindus. They are under no pressure. We Hindus should feel the pressure and urgency.

I have no problems whatsoever with counter arguments, without personal attacks. But I guess personal attacks normally come into play, when the opposition does not have an argument.

One last partition with complete population transfer, ensures NO MORE partitions, ever in the future and no Islam whatsoever in the remainder of our territory.

[Gagan]

Rsangram
Careful man. Many breapers around

[Rudradev]

All of your laughing your ass off etc, would be funny, if it were not for our young kids dying on the border everyday. Send those "laughing my ass off" to those soldiers families.

Sure.

As soon as you send, to the martyred soldiers' families, a map of this "re-partitioned" India-minus which is your panacea to solve the problem.

Please show the bereaved parents, brothers, sisters, wives, children of those soldiers how little regard you have for the national borders which their loved ones died to defend.

[rsangram]

All of your laughing your ass off etc, would be funny, if it were not for our young kids dying on the border everyday. Send those "laughing my ass off" to those soldiers families.

Sure.

As soon as you send, to the martyred soldiers' families, a map of this "re-partitioned" India-minus which is your panacea to solve the problem.

Please show the bereaved parents, brothers, sisters, wives, children of those soldiers how little regard you have for the national borders which their loved ones died to defend.

I will send the map of re-partitioned India, with regret and a great deal of sadness and apologies. But I will send it with an iron clad condition of a 100% population transfer. In fact, there will be a population transfer first to the proposed areas, and then a formal severance.

I think we will be better off with this arrangement.

If you disagree with me, then you think that having all of India under the present system of governance and with 150 million muslims as part of India is a better deal. What will be the endgame there ? How do you forsee it working out well for us in the future. Can you play out the scenario for what will happen between now and let us say 2042 and where exactly will we stand in 2042 ? With particular emphasis on a) J&K and b) how exactly will we manage 200 million muslims at that point in time, how will we prevent them from vacating more Indian land of Hindus and create multitudes of mini Pakistans All across our country and how will we prevent demands for many partitions, given that we will still be as corruption ridden as we are today and therefore, as weak as we are today ? I know, you think, that we will somehow become stronger, but please lay out how we will become stronger. Please dont say, 10% growth, year after year, will automatically take us there.

[Rudradev]

Not a "better deal", it is the ONLY deal. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by giving the enemy a free bonus headstart on Ghazwa-e-Hind. That is exactly what is achieved by parting with territory that belongs to India.

If it comes to that, a place to receive transferred populations already exists, and was created in 1947 for precisely that purpose. But whether or not there is any transfer, not one square inch of present-day Indian territory can cease to be Indian territory. That is completely unacceptable.

If giving away our own territory is the path one embarks on, then the endgame is that one square inch gone inevitably becomes 33 lakh sq.km. gone. If you understand the first thing about Ghazwa-e-Hind and its history on the subcontinent, it should be that giving an inch only guarantees they will demand a mile. Then you find yourself fighting all over again, but with the disadvantage of having one less inch in your possession. It is no solution at all.

As the Israelis say: if you give up your land in the hope of peace, then you end up with no land and no peace.

[BharataTalwar]

rsangram, I understand where you are coming from but I feel that you are not considering all options. Its a major regret that we didn't accept the two nation theory. By accepting a major Muslim population, aswell as Christian I might add, our nation became the jack of all identities and master of none.

We live in an age where Russians are reinventing themselves as the bastion of ethnic Russian Orthodox identity following their failed communism experiment, the Chinese with Han Buddhism, Jinnah designed Pakistan as the Mughal continuation with an Islamic identity, all the while the west is crumbling before our very eyes obsessed with their secular melting pot ad nauseam.

India needs to abandon this failed western experiment and reinvent ourselves as a no-nonsense Hindu nation only. Abrahamic religions have no business in India, HOWEVER, who said anything about giving up land? Did Pakistanis even for a second think about giving up Lahore, the God Damned CAPITAL of Sikhism???

The solution is the exact opposite to what you are proposing. We need to reclaim the Indus Valley in FULL. All Muslims from the Indus valley have to be relocated elsewhere. If Hindus had the same mindset as Muslims, this wouldn't even be questioned. This is the only way to stop Pakistan and their Ghazva wetdream permanently and take back our ancient lands. Yes, there will be casualties, but compare our situation to early 20th century Europe who endured two "world" wars over pettier territorial disputes. With our current liberal mindset, we cannot even seem to handle teenage stone throwers. TSP must be laughing themselves to sleep. Your outlook on the future is far too pretty. Its a lot gloomier in my opinion when you consider that your defeatist mentality is widespread among Indians.

We are among the most powerful countries on the planet. Explain to me why we shouldn't reclaim the Indus Valley from Islam?

[SwamyG]

Gen. V.K.Singh wants the Hurriyat to be declared a terrorist org and be banned.

http://m.indiatoday.in/programme/hurriy ... 56682.html

[JE Menon]

What exactly are you suggesting rsangram? I don't see much clarity. Are you suggesting

1. A partition (ceding) of the existing territory of India (i.e. the territory that we currently control without Aksai Chin and Pak-Occupied Kashmir) as a solution to the Ghazwa-e-Hind problem?

2. That all the Muslims living in this area must "somehow" be motivated to move to the territory to be given away?

3. This approach will solve the Ghazwa-e-Hind problem?

Kindly clarify.

[Dipanker]

1. About 43 of the population of the subcontinent(if you include Afghanistan) today, in 2017 is Muslim, with the percentage increasing every day. This was ZERO, before Ghazwa-e-Hind began. Hindu population of the subcontinent is roughly 800 million, Muslim population is roughly 600 million (India, pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan).

You are off by ~200 millions in estimating hindu's population of the subcontinent. India's current population is 1.25 billion and ~80% are hindus, that mean in India alone there are 1000 million hindus. Bangladesh has 12% Hindus and Pakistan ~2%, thus total population of Hindus on the subcontinent will be around 1025 million. If you include the Sikhs+Jains+Buddhists+Animist, another 40-50 millions can be added to 1025 million. Muslims are around 560 million or about 35% population of the subcontinent.

[Karthik S]

NIA begins probe against Hurriyat leaders for receiving money from Pak, LeT

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... E0PaL.html


Hopefully this will be taken to its logical conclusion.

[chetak]

Lest stick to J&K in this thread please.

We are discussing J&K. You cant solve J&K without fortifying yourself against Gazwa-e-Hind.

I suggested one way, to try and deal with Gazwa-e-Hind. If someone does not like it, they can argue against, but there is no need for Supratik to make personal attacks.

At least Rudradev tried to make an argument against me, which is perfectly fine, by the way - not his argument, but his approach to opposing me.

In my view, you cannot solve J&K without completely not having the muslims live with us, anywhere in our country. Would I prefer to keep all the territories and expel the muslims ? Yes. but it is not within our capabilities to do that. The best we can hope for is, to strike a grand bargain, where we expel the people and settle it by giving them some more territory. Even that will be resisted by the Islamics, as they know that is a losing proposition for them - since they want all of Indian territory, which they are well on the trajectory to do, as is clear from their current population percentage (45% in the subcontinent) and relative birth rates, compared to Hindus. They are under no pressure. We Hindus should feel the pressure and urgency.

I have no problems whatsoever with counter arguments, without personal attacks. But I guess personal attacks normally come into play, when the opposition does not have an argument.

One last partition with complete population transfer, ensures NO MORE partitions, ever in the future and no Islam whatsoever in the remainder of our territory.

what if the refuse to move?? like they did in 1947??

[bharotshontan]

There isn't any "refuse" to move. Folks only move in demographic changing terms when fear of life is there. Hindus were unable or unwilling to reproduce that climate in Hindu majority erstwhile India while Muslims were successful in creating such in erstwhile Pakistan. Sikhs extracted their pound of flesh in tit for tat manner in Punjab, but Hindus basically took it laying down and turned the other cheek.

I think there is virtue in starting a movement for a second partition of India but this time initiated by the Dharmics seeking a 0% Islamic population. The cult will be explicitly banned. It isn't about burning down the basement because of rat infestation. The metaphor that is more applicable is a body having malignant tumors all over and needing to fight that cancer requires first cutting out and isolating the tumor and consolidating that which has not been affected yet.

Speaking of going to martyr families with xyz maps, look, nobody is fighting for what a map looks like. Bharat is an idea, a common core runs through us but is getting undone by Abrahamic cancer. It is scary enough that Muslims in India are feeling dominant enough to be bombing each other Pak/Syria style like how those caught in UP the other day were IS folks planning on blasting Sufi sites. More than any map, I'd rather go for truncated 0% cancer India (India is currently truncated anyway btw) than have the current holy map and militias of Owaisis and Ansaris blasting each other while enjoying Hindu right hand possessions.

[chetak]

a really torturous posting on cashmere

twitter

The Pancake of Peace Painted on the Visage of Viciousness Melts To Reveal the Underlying Unsightly Scowl of Separatism - 27 Years later

[Rudradev]

.

I think there is virtue in starting a movement for a second partition of India but this time initiated by the Dharmics seeking a 0% Islamic population
...

The metaphor that is more applicable is a body having malignant tumors all over and needing to fight that cancer requires first cutting out and isolating the tumor and consolidating that which has not been affected yet.

Have you ever heard the term "non-resectable" cancer?

It means a situation where the tumor or tumors cannot be surgically removed without doing worse harm to the body than the cancer itself is causing. Quite common actually, for cancers presenting at Stage 2+.

IOW, surgery in that situation is EXACTLY the option analogous to burning down one's house because there are rats in it.

Speaking of going to martyr families with xyz maps, look, nobody is fighting for what a map looks like. .

No, they fight for the full territorial extent of sovereignty that the map represents. When jawans of 18 Grenadiers charged up near-vertical rockfaces in the teeth of HMG fire during Kargil, they were obviously not fighting for the physical appearance of what the map "looked like", but for every inch of land the map encapsulated within its boundaries.

If you don't grasp this, you're either being deliberately obtuse, or have no concept of what a political map represents.
.

[rsangram]

We are discussing J&K. You cant solve J&K without fortifying yourself against Gazwa-e-Hind.

I suggested one way, to try and deal with Gazwa-e-Hind. If someone does not like it, they can argue against, but there is no need for Supratik to make personal attacks.

At least Rudradev tried to make an argument against me, which is perfectly fine, by the way - not his argument, but his approach to opposing me.

In my view, you cannot solve J&K without completely not having the muslims live with us, anywhere in our country. Would I prefer to keep all the territories and expel the muslims ? Yes. but it is not within our capabilities to do that. The best we can hope for is, to strike a grand bargain, where we expel the people and settle it by giving them some more territory. Even that will be resisted by the Islamics, as they know that is a losing proposition for them - since they want all of Indian territory, which they are well on the trajectory to do, as is clear from their current population percentage (45% in the subcontinent) and relative birth rates, compared to Hindus. They are under no pressure. We Hindus should feel the pressure and urgency.

I have no problems whatsoever with counter arguments, without personal attacks. But I guess personal attacks normally come into play, when the opposition does not have an argument.

One last partition with complete population transfer, ensures NO MORE partitions, ever in the future and no Islam whatsoever in the remainder of our territory.

what if the refuse to move?? like they did in 1947??

They probably will refuse to move. Because the Islamists want all of India. They cannot tolerate Hindus having even the proverbial "five villages"". They will very easily see that what I am proposing is a bad deal for the muslims, just like Duryodhana saw that giving away even five villages was a bad deal for his scheme of things which was total and complete domination. Lord Krishna was not stupid in proposing the five village deal. Only us Hindus will not realize that it is a bad deal for the muslims and a good one for Hindus(in view of the fact that we did not effect a population transfer in 1947, and trust me, I wasnt even born then, so I had nothing to do with it, I am only trying to deal with its after effects and trying to fix that folly somehow), and if somehow we can bring it about, we should.

But if they refuse to move, there will be no partition and parting of territories and territorial status quo will continue, as long as India can maintain the territorial status quo. I dont see India changing the territorial status quo by even going after POK. We dont even talk about it. So we and our future generations will be doomed to trying and defend a status quo, until India turns totally Islamic, which can happen in 80 years, 100 years, 150 year, max. Think about it, 100 years is not even a blip in history, particularly in case of Indian civilization which may be 10,000 years old. Being just 100 years away from extinction, we are right on the precipice. We can choose not to notice it, and bury our heads in the sand. After all, we always had "Dilli abhi door hai" mentality, and throughout our history we Hindus have been blind sided by events, particularly events of the Islamic variety. Muhammed Shah Rangila learnt "Dilli Abhi Door Hai" mentality from us Hindus. He got "Hinduized", in that respect.

Look, I think there is a misconception, deliberate or otherwise, here on the forum. People are getting incensed about my talking about reluctantly and sadly settling for parting with some territory, by only focusing on that. They are not focusing on what I am proposing we want in return, without which there WIL BE NO PARTING of territory - namely, full, 100% population transfer - voluntary or negotiated population transfer.

NO 100% POPULATION TRANSFER FIRST - NO PARTITION OF TERRITORY.

[chetak]

^^^^^^^

We are a democracy, saar.

Going forward, they can easily fu(k their way to control of India in some decades, as they probably will, anyway.

four wives and no 3T will ensure that, no??

[Rudradev]

Look, I think there is a misconception, deliberate or otherwise, here on the forum. People are getting incensed about my talking about reluctantly and sadly settling for parting with some territory, by only focusing on that. They are not focusing on what I am proposing we want in return, without which there WIL BE NO PARTING of territory - namely, full, 100% population transfer - voluntary or negotiated population transfer.

NO 100% POPULATION TRANSFER FIRST - NO PARTITION OF TERRITORY.

Why be coy about it then, Rsangram?

If (as you now claim) your plan involves no parting with territory and 100% population transfer... you are saying, round up every last Muslim in the current borders of India and send them to present day Pakistan or Bangladesh.

Yes or no?

Anything else , DOES involve giving up Indian territory. And Indian territory is not your grandfather's territory, for you to propose "reluctantly and sadly" parting with. Not one inch of it.

[rsangram]

1. About 43 of the population of the subcontinent(if you include Afghanistan) today, in 2017 is Muslim, with the percentage increasing every day. This was ZERO, before Ghazwa-e-Hind began. Hindu population of the subcontinent is roughly 800 million, Muslim population is roughly 600 million (India, pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan).

You are off by ~200 millions in estimating hindu's population of the subcontinent. India's current population is 1.25 billion and ~80% are hindus, that mean in India alone there are 1000 million hindus. Bangladesh has 12% Hindus and Pakistan ~2%, thus total population of Hindus on the subcontinent will be around 1025 million. If you include the Sikhs+Jains+Buddhists+Animist, another 40-50 millions can be added to 1025 million. Muslims are around 560 million or about 35% population of the subcontinent.

You are missing the larger point and trying to split hair, diverting attention from the main issue.

Anyway, here is a link to official Indian Census Data by religion

http://censusindia.gov.in/Census_And_You/religion.aspx

[rsangram]

What exactly are you suggesting rsangram? I don't see much clarity. Are you suggesting

1. A partition (ceding) of the existing territory of India (i.e. the territory that we currently control without Aksai Chin and Pak-Occupied Kashmir) as a solution to the Ghazwa-e-Hind problem?

2. That all the Muslims living in this area must "somehow" be motivated to move to the territory to be given away?

3. This approach will solve the Ghazwa-e-Hind problem?

Kindly clarify.

Will be happy to. Now, you got to realize this is out of the box thinking and has to be looked at objectively, using logic, rather than from prism of existing orthodoxies and status quo. Try to look at it somewhat dispassionately when you consider this, although I must admit, that this whole proposition arises from abundance of passion on my part.

Premise 1. Hindus cannot defend themselves, their territory, particularly J&K, their culture and their civilization adequately without a political entity all their own, like Israel or any number of Islamic countries do. I admit that it is true that this is not a sufficient condition, but certainly a necessary condition and a first necessary condition.

Premise 2. As long as there are any substantial number of muslims living in any territory where Hindus live, they backed by their 1.5 billion brethren around the world along with the stupid Western countries, not to mention China and even Russia, will never allow Hindus to have a political entity, all their own. Look what they did to Nepal, which was relatively benign and largely a symbolic Hindu entity. By the way, an interesting tit bit. Nepal is the only country after World War 2, which went from having a state religion in its constitution to so called, "secular".

Premise 3. Hindus cannot push Muslims out of India, by creating an atmosphere where they will "self deport". Hindus just dont have it in them to create such an atmosphere.

Premise 4- Muslim population of the subcontinent is already 40%, and rising everyday in relation to the Hindus. Not merely rising, rising massively, in relation to the Hindus.

Premise 5 - Once Muslims become a majority or even come close to it, majority meaning 51%, but even if they come close to it, they will start a traditional Islamic genocide, which they have been doing since the inception of Islam in all their conquered territories. They have perfected the art of genocide and are the most genocidal power in the history of mankind. They are pastmasters at it, and once they come close to becoming a majority, they will very quickly convert the rest of us, or force the rest of us to leave as refugees, like they did to Paki Hindus and what even the "friendly" Bangladesh is doing to Bengali Hindus. OR, what the Islamic Kashmiris in India did to Kashmiri Pandits.

Premise 6 - the way it has developed since 1947, India of today has, in fact, in practice, become an anti-Hindu entity, where the Hindus have become suicidal due to suffering mass trauma for 1000 years, and anti-India forces although in minority, collude with foreigners to destroy the Hindus. The Hindus because of their suicidal tendencies and ill health, help these anti-Hindu forces to expedite the destruction of Hindus. To emerge out of our mass trauma which will restore Hindu survival instincts back requires time and space of our own, where Hindus are protected and nurtured back to health, which is only possible in a Hindu state

Conclusion 1 - Given the above premises, a) India as it stands today, cannot be a political entity for Hindus alone, constitutionally, b) In practice, it is even less Hindu, in fact, it is more anti-Hindu, c) India cannot change its demographics by force, d) IT WILL BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT EVEN TO DO THIS, BUT THE ONLY CHANCE iNDIA HAS TO BE MUSLIM FREE, IS THROUGH A NEGOTIATED PARTITION WITH POPULATION TRANSFER. Am I happy to come to this conclusion.....NO.

Which territory will we give away, depends on what comes out of negotiations.

Our starting position should be population transfer without any parting of territory, as we can go back to 1947 partition and say that this is the unfinished business of that partition. After all, in 1947, we created on country for subcontinental Muslims and one for Hindus, as per the two nation theory, which said that Hindus and Muslims cannot live together. Hindus, unanimously rejected the two nation theory, asserting that Hindus and Muslims can live together. The Muslims won the argument because the rest of the world, led by England bought into that theory. Hindus made a mistake in 1947 by not forcing a population transfer from our territory, while the Muslims enforced a population transfer from their territory. We made a mistake, to take a chance to creating a unique example in the history of mankind of brotherhood and secularism. We took that chance and failed to create such a panacea. 60 years is a short time in history and since our good faith attempt failed, we would like to invoke and agree with the two nation theory now and bring about an orderly and humane population transfer, Hindu style, with tears and all, to Pakistan, without any further territorial partition.

But we can in the end settle for some 5 to 10% of our territory to be parted, in exchange for total population transfer, once and for all. Which 10%, will have to be negotiated. It cannot be non-contiguous to Pakistan, it will have to be bordering Pakistan, I would think, but I am open.

Once we have a Hindu nation, then we can try to make it highly regimented, highly militarized, very orderly, nuclear protected HARD STATE and we can go to ancient Magadha, pre and post Chanakya to look for models of such a society.

[Rudradev]

Premise 3. Rudradev is correct in saying that Hindus cannot push Muslims out of India, by creating an atmosphere where they will "self deport". So let us go with Rudradev's premise as true here. Hindus just dont have it in them to create such an atmosphere

Would you like to quote the exact words I posted, which you have paraphrased to mean the above?

Because I do not recall ever articulating any such premise.

For the record I have not once, ever, been disposed to make claims about what Hindus "just do not have in them" (whatever this is supposed to mean... does it purport to be a "scientific" argument in some way?)

[rsangram]

Look, I think there is a misconception, deliberate or otherwise, here on the forum. People are getting incensed about my talking about reluctantly and sadly settling for parting with some territory, by only focusing on that. They are not focusing on what I am proposing we want in return, without which there WIL BE NO PARTING of territory - namely, full, 100% population transfer - voluntary or negotiated population transfer.

NO 100% POPULATION TRANSFER FIRST - NO PARTITION OF TERRITORY.

Why be coy about it then, Rsangram?

If (as you now claim) your plan involves no parting with territory and 100% population transfer... you are saying, round up every last Muslim in the current borders of India and send them to present day Pakistan or Bangladesh.

Yes or no?

Anything else , DOES involve giving up Indian territory. And Indian territory is not your grandfather's territory, for you to propose "reluctantly and sadly" parting with. Not one inch of it.

You are splitting hair.

Excuse my English.

I was responding to someone who said, what will happen if they refuse to move. I said, (IF) there is not population transfer first, then there is no partition. I had not changed my position and said that there will be only population transfer without partition. I would like for it to be so, and it can be our opening position, but in the end, I would settle for some parting of territory in exchange for total population transfer.

I hope that clarifies.

[rsangram]

Premise 3. Rudradev is correct in saying that Hindus cannot push Muslims out of India, by creating an atmosphere where they will "self deport". So let us go with Rudradev's premise as true here. Hindus just dont have it in them to create such an atmosphere

Would you like to quote the exact words I posted, which you have paraphrased to mean the above?

Because I do not recall ever articulating any such premise.

For the record I have not once, ever, been disposed to make claims about what Hindus "just do not have in them" (whatever this is supposed to mean... does it purport to be a "scientific" argument in some way?)

I apologize. I read it in one of the posts and thought you said it. I will gladly edit my post to reflect it.

By the way, when I said, " Hindus do not have it in them, to create conditions where people would self deport", I meant it as a compliment to Hindus, which I think you know. But you are in a confrontational mood and will pick any thing and twist it around.

Look, the idea of parting with territories is as traumatic for me as it is for you. I just think, it is our last chance to survive, cutting away our second foot too. Like the last ditch decisions made to stop cancer from spreading.