J&K News and Discussion - 2016

[Bart S]

is it being done now because of the recent expose on TV or is it being done helplessly after the expose because politicians are/were complicit in this funding??

either way, it's a shame how these agencies are playing and toying with India's security concerns, NIA most of all.

are we to foolishly believe that the "intelligence" agencies were all blissfully unaware of such funding earlier??

NIA probes Hurriyat ‘funding from Pak’

News articles say that Jet Li is in Srinagar, and has 'taken serious note' of the India Today expose. Looks like they have to read it in the MSM to believe what is bloody obvious to everyone and his dog since the whole Hurriyat fiasco started.

[chetak]

is it being done now because of the recent expose on TV or is it being done helplessly after the expose because politicians are/were complicit in this funding??

either way, it's a shame how these agencies are playing and toying with India's security concerns, NIA most of all.

are we to foolishly believe that the "intelligence" agencies were all blissfully unaware of such funding earlier??

NIA probes Hurriyat ‘funding from Pak’

News articles say that Jet Li is in Srinagar, and has 'taken serious note' of the India Today expose. Looks like they have to read it in the MSM to believe what is bloody obvious to everyone and his dog since the whole Hurriyat fiasco started.

this is another version of "kadi ninda".

It is malicious mehbooba and her gang who have precipitated this crisis and advanced the case of the pakis along expected lines as she was eagerly waiting to do all these years.

[Karthik S]

I'd like to ask Rsangram a simple question. Does he think every single Indian Muslim or to make it simpler every single Indian of the Muslim faith who are residents of the state of J&K would happily agree to this "population transfer for peace" scenario?

Rsangram I hope you understand that behind the feel-good "dharmic" sophistry that you are sprouting lies a deep racial bias. In short you are saying the loyalty of every single Indian Muslim is suspect and given a chance and a new "homeland" they would happily abandon India and settle there.

You are essentially pi**ing on the great contributions of Indians who are Muslims by faith like Kalam Sir, AR Rahman, Mohamad Kaif (you should follow his Twitter handle), Zaheer Khan and others. You are doing the same with the Muslim soldiers who laid down their lives for the country like the young officer brutally murdered in Kashmir recently.

In short I know it's easy to get a high by sprouting sophistry on an Internet forum using an anonymous handle. But it only shows that the person who is doing that hasn't thought things through. And you are not the first one to go down this path on this forum. Neither will you be the last. But be prepared to be called out for it.

Your answers are in these 2 videos, the second video is by our own PM, in 2001.

[rsangram]

Let us keep treating our kids at the border, defending us, as fodder.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-new ... 2P6OI.html

[Marten]

How else are borders protected from scum?

Specifically mention what actions will work. No BS or rhetoric. Specifics please.

[JE Menon]

Thread moved fast so I missed this post by rsangram in reply to my questions. It is in fact a very long answer just to say give away 5-10% of the territory of India, but since the trouble was taken I think a detailed reply is deserved. Here goes:

>>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.

Surrender is out of the box thinking too I suppose, or lateral thinking even if you wish. But I see no reason why we should even consider ceding territory when there is so much territory to be had across our borders with two countries. But as you said, I’ll attribute it to abundance of passion (and panic too, perhaps). Let me propose this out-of-the-box idea: take it easy. The equation was much worse a decade ago, and worse than that two decades ago. This is the recovery we are in. Keep steady, don’t be in a rush, patient, consolidated, cautious, incremental change where applicable, radical change where possible.

>>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.

One might consider this proposition if either of Israel or any number of Islamic countries have made a success of it. Israel, in its current shape, has been a modern day Sparta. While I have a great deal of admiration and even affection for Israel, given its particularities of location, numbers and other aggregates of power, it is not an example we want to emulate. We must be true to our civilizational heritage. Otherwise, what is it for? The Islamic countries? Seriously? If anything they are an example of what not to be.

>>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".

There are no unadulterated civilisations on the planet. That is what makes civilisations truly durable and lasting, ability to absorb, adapt, assimilate, and aggress. I’m not sure what you mean even with the above. Hindus have India. The followers of the Sanathana Dharma have India and are virtually on every other country on earth.

>>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.

Wholesale violence on behalf of a faith system, justified by that system and excused by that system is not part of our civilizational tradition – I mean of the tradition of the land, prior to the arrival of Islam. When we fight, we fight for territory and wealth, and/or for dharmic reasons, and then we fight to the end until there is no further place to go – whether it is an inner war or an outer one. Therefore no, we won’t create an atmosphere where Muslims will “self-deport”. There is a much more important territory to conquer, the territory of the Muslim mind. It will be slow, one by one even, but victory is inevitable. Science is also our friend. This conquest will not be for Hinduism. It will be for the Sanathana Dharma, but they will not recognize it, nor will we proclaim it. It will just be. But it will be slow.

>>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.

I think someone (A_Gupta?) has already pointed out that the statistic is incorrect.

>>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.

Times, circumstances, technologies and information velocity have changed and are changing at high-tempo. The above scenario is not going to materialize in India first. Much more likely, there will be wholesale but slow-moving genocide of Muslims in the arc from North-Western Europe to Pakistan by other more absolutist powers capable of high volumes of violence.

>>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

This is a scenario of weakness and fear, attractive to the helpless victim-complexed, possibly induced by a constantly negativizing flow of information through multiple devices. We are not in the position described above as a civilization. On the contrary, we are possibly the only people who have withstood a massive assault across the entire last millennium by two absolutist faith systems, and not just refused to die, but is now standing hesitantly but not uncertainly on the threshold of a major flowering. It will be unlike what what we had before the arrival of Islam, and it will not only be in India. This, too, will be slow. It is as inevitable as change.

>>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.

Here is where you start proposing the ceding of territory. Unwise. Even if we assume that we do, who is going to guarantee that another invasion like in the 7th century is not going to recur and we won’t be back to status quo. Remember India was “Muslim free” before Islam. No, the solution has to be a comprehensive one, and for that you have to capture the territory of the mind. Then only will it be over. And virtually the entire non-Islamic world is working organically towards that end, not with any real co-ordination or any real planning. And what is in the arsenal? Simple things. Consistent victory on the battlefield, where engagements occur. Consistent performance in all fields that advance mankind. A reliance on things that deliver replicable results. A demonstration of satisfying life, and a more fulfilling one for all members of society, without following the god of Arabia. And never never allowing any of its adherents to become victors through the application of violence. That was the mistake of all civilisations that came into contact with this faith system. But then it was new, unrecognized and unrecognizable. Now, non-Muslims understand Islam better than Muslims do. Times have changed.

>>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.

I’m curious to know how you intend to apply the “once and for all” demand.

>>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.

You can find any example of any type of society if you dig around enough in our ancient history. But that is only a small part of the whole. We should be seeking to protect the whole, not the part.

[rsangram]

>>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.

Here is where you start proposing the ceding of territory. Unwise. Even if we assume that we do, who is going to guarantee that another invasion like in the 7th century is not going to recur and we won’t be back to status quo. Remember India was “Muslim free” before Islam. No, the solution has to be a comprehensive one, and for that you have to capture the territory of the mind. Then only will it be over. And virtually the entire non-Islamic world is working organically towards that end, not with any real co-ordination or any real planning. And what is in the arsenal? Simple things. Consistent victory on the battlefield, where engagements occur. Consistent performance in all fields that advance mankind. A reliance on things that deliver replicable results. A demonstration of satisfying life, and a more fulfilling one for all members of society, without following the god of Arabia. And never never allowing any of its adherents to become victors through the application of violence. That was the mistake of all civilisations that came into contact with this faith system. But then it was new, unrecognized and unrecognizable. Now, non-Muslims understand Islam better than Muslims do. Times have changed.

>>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.

I’m curious to know how you intend to apply the “once and for all” demand.

>>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.

You can find any example of any type of society if you dig around enough in our ancient history. But that is only a small part of the whole. We should be seeking to protect the whole, not the part.

JE,

Thanks for the detailed response. Appreciate the totally civil nature of response even more.

Fair enough. You disagree with each of my premise, so obviously you will also disagree with my conclusion. I think we both have laid out our arguments and we will leave it for others to read and decide on their own. From the looks of it, a lot of people on this thread would tend to agree with your conclusion, which is that we should continue with status quo, but for reasons far less thoughtful than your own, and some even out of pure emotion.

I obviously do not want, neither would anyone on this thread want me to continue a further discussion, arguments and counter arguments on this issue anywhere on this forum, but certainly on this thread. So, I will leave it at that.

I do want to make one observation though. If you re-read your arguments, and sit back and think about it a little, you will find that for better for for worse, these are very close to the arguments that Jawaharlal Nehru would make. His entire ideology can be derived from the points that you make. A lot of what you say stems from optimistic thinking and assumption of "better case scenario, if not the best case scenario" playing out(tactical best case, not moral best case). For example, and I can point to more examples in your hypothesis above, when you say that it is more likely that the West will perpetuate genocide against muslims, rather than Muslims perpetuating genocide against Hindus when their population in the subcontinent hits a critical mass, I think it is a case of very "optimistic" thinking or best case scenario (optimistic may not be the right work, but I dont want to characterize your thoughtful assertion as "wishful thinking"...but a more positive version of "wishful thinking" would be a more apt phrase).

One thing, I do want to clarify, where you imply something which is totally not true. You, in your response to my assertion about Hindus not having it in them to create a genocidal atmosphere, stated something to the effect that creating such an atmosphere was anti-Hindu in ethos. I do not know if you misunderstood what I was saying, but I was saying the same thing in my original assertion there as you, that because it is against our ethos, we dont have it in us to create a genocidal environment. I hope you did not take my assertion to mean that I was advocating abandoning our ethos to create such an environment.

I am by no means running away from further argument. I leave it up to you that if you find it worth your while and time and If you would like to continue this discussion further, please suggest one of the other existing threads, and we can continue there, so that we can leave this thread to a more restricted focus of JK alone in a much narrower context . But if we do continue this discussion, I would like to separately and one by one, discuss each premise and continue to discuss that premise, until both of us have exhausted our arguments relating to that, and then move on to the next premise. This way we can have a very in depth and detailed thrashing out of the issues. One of the reasons I am open to continuing a discussion with you is that you are a rare Indian, with whom I can have a totally civil discussion without personal attacks, despite the fact that we disagree vehemently. This can only be a good thing, no matter how abhorrent we may or may not find each other's thinking.

[rsangram]

How else are borders protected from scum?

Specifically mention what actions will work. No BS or rhetoric. Specifics please.

I already did. Go up and read my series of posts from about 10 days , starting with the first one. What I proposed was not short term tactical solutions, but strategic solutions, long term.

[Marten]

How else are borders protected from scum?

Specifically mention what actions will work. No BS or rhetoric. Specifics please.

I already did. Go up and read my series of posts from about 10 days , starting with the first one. What I proposed was not short term tactical solutions, but strategic solutions, long term.

Ceding territory and talking about protecting territory do not go hand in hand. Why would attacks stop? How are your actions changing the behaviors of your attackers?

For as long as there are enemies at the borders, we shall shed blood protecting these very borders.

None of what you said in the previous pages addressed the core issue.

[disha]

The last cessation of land was done in 1947 and it did not buy us any peace and neither it protected us from brutal attacks.

Hence the talk of ceding territory is neither 'out of the box' idea nor a viable option. This kind of talk is lunacy at needs a quick and spectacular burial.

The core issue is islamic jihadism., the exceptionalism that "islam is the only true religion and allah is the only true god" and non-believers must be put to death. This islamofascism has crept into Cashmere valley by successive short sightedness and soft approach by various pussy footing Indian governments and their court jesters who we call lootyens delhi or lootyens #mediapimps ably supported by Kissinger wannabes throughout various US governments.

Solution of Cashmere is simple:

1. Abrogate article 370
2. Partition J&K into Ladakh, Jammu and Cashmere
3. Let the valley cashmeres work their way up just like any bihari or a rajasthani or a haryanvi or bengali or a gujju or a tamizhian or a malyalee.

Kashmiriyat is dead., but again it was never there.

[wig]

http://tribuneindia.com/news/nation/art ... 10458.html
The BJP having claimed in the past that Art 370 has no place now wants Art 370 to continue. I imagine the demand for abrogation of Art 370 raised in the past to be some kind of jumla

Article 370 gets a firm approval from BJP now. Clear signal from Centre of no objection to special status of J&K

excerpts

BJP national president Amit Shah declared in no uncertain terms that “the abrogation of Article 370 is not necessary for a solution to the Kashmir crisis”, a reverse gear to the core issue of the BJP since its Jan Sangh days when it fought for “one flag, one head of the state and one Constitution” for all the states in the union.

[Supratik]

Tribuneindia is a Congress newspaper. Understand the source before you get worked up. That is what BRF is for. He said "Just removing Art 370........".

It is correct as in fact if and when you remove Art 370 violence is going to only increase as KMs and their backers would know what it means.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-ju ... ah-2439490

[ramana]

I would worry when Amit Shah says no need to remove Art 370. It means they have something else in works.

[JE Menon]

rsangram,

>>I do want to make one observation though. If you re-read your arguments, and sit back and think about it a little, you will find that for better for for worse, these are very close to the arguments that Jawaharlal Nehru would make. His entire ideology can be derived from the points that you make.

These are arguments I’ve made so no need for me to re-read. I generally don’t post without consideration of what I’ve written. Further associating points in a discussion with people (like in this case JLN) does not add to the discourse, only takes it on a political tangent – because today Nehru’s name has been deservedly taken down several notches from the artificial divinity concocted by the acolytes of his child, grand-children and great-grand children. That said, I am not dissociating from some of the things which he said that I agree with. I don’t anywhere recall Nehru advocating a robust and dynamic strengthening of our pre-Islamic heritage, nor do I see him anywhere suggesting a form of “Ghar wapsi”, which is what capturing the territory of the mind amounts to. And that is what I'm advocating.

>>A lot of what you say stems from optimistic thinking and assumption of "better case scenario, if not the best case scenario" playing out(tactical best case, not moral best case). For example, and I can point to more examples in your hypothesis above, when you say that it is more likely that the West will perpetuate genocide against muslims, rather than Muslims perpetuating genocide against Hindus when their population in the subcontinent hits a critical mass,

While I plead guilty as far as optimistic thinking is concerned, I don’t think anyone will accuse me of being unrealistic. The “West” is already perpetuating a genocide against Muslims. Does anyone know the actual number of Muslims killed in just aerial bombing by the US and its Western allies in the last 26 years, since the Gulf war of 1991? Remember the bombing and droning has been going on virtually uninterrupted since then. You are talking about a scenario when Muslims reach 51% of the population of the Indian sub-continent, which is yet to be upon us. Meanwhile, I can only see an intensification of Western and Eastern application of violence directly, and through their proxies, in the area I have described. Unless these countries in the area change dramatically. I don’t see that happening.

>>I think it is a case of very "optimistic" thinking or best case scenario (optimistic may not be the right work, but I dont want to characterize your thoughtful assertion as "wishful thinking"...but a more positive version of "wishful thinking" would be a more apt phrase).

It would be wishful thinking, the original version, if facts don’t belie your case that a genocide will be upon us in short order. Since independence, gradually the pre-Islamic civilization has been finding ground in India – definitely could have been much faster but we were (and still are, make no mistake) burdened with the dynastic reality. Still it was and is an improvement over the previous centuries, although it felt like a false spring. Only now, with the election of Modi is the situation looking like spring might properly be upon us.

It is an improvement and the trend is for further improvement. Central issues that are at the core of absolutist systems are being taken to the centre of public discourse. But none of this is going to be resolved in a 24/7 news cycle or a week, month or even couple of years. At the very least a decade, though I must say that in 3 years we are already seeing substantial signs of change – for me, the first was the aarti at Varanasi after the election victory, attended by the senior party and government officials, publicized real time.

I’ll probably have to write an article about this somewhere… it’s churning inside with no sense of proper coalescence into a form, but it will come…

>>One thing, I do want to clarify, where you imply something which is totally not true. You, in your response to my assertion about Hindus not having it in them to create a genocidal atmosphere, stated something to the effect that creating such an atmosphere was anti-Hindu in ethos. I do not know if you misunderstood what I was saying, but I was saying the same thing in my original assertion there as you, that because it is against our ethos, we dont have it in us to create a genocidal environment. I hope you did not take my assertion to mean that I was advocating abandoning our ethos to create such an environment.

That was exactly what I took it as, because it seemed to me that was what you were advocating. It is good you clarified, because it may have seemed that way to others as well.

>>I am by no means running away from further argument. I leave it up to you that if you find it worth your while and time..

It is likely worth our while, but unfortunately I simply do not have the time for a sustained engagement – I do moderate the forum, and this takes up time as I read virtually every thread which shows movement; as well as write for other sites, and of course try to maintain a day job … But I will ping in now and then as I did in this instance. Thank you.

[Yagnasri]

With due respect to various gurus here that this Jihad will end if Kashmir or some part of India is given to Muslims all will be well. It will not be. The religious war as I posted before will continue and will not stop. No Muslim can stop it as it was commanded by Allah. Further, there is no obligation on Muslims to abide by any treaty made with Kafirs like Hindus. With the time suitable to them they can always nullify the same and start the Jihad once again.

In respect of Genocides and capacity to have them, Pakis said to have killed some 20 lakh people in B'desh. Kashmir valley population is some 30 Lakhs and not all of them are anti-India. We are just giving too much weight to Sunnis there and forgetting other communities live there who may not be anti-Indian.

UCC if the first step. Stopping Salafi education is another one. GoI need to continuously engage in weakening this Salafi link to Indian Muslims and make them something like Indonesian Muslims. It can be done if there is strong will. UCC is the first steps. Of course for J&K Art 370 needed to be removed or UCC can be notified to J&K wherein such notification of jurisdiction does not require Assembly approval. ( ( may be wrong here on this)

[Yagnasri]

Tomorrow there is a Con Mafia, its political chela parties, NGOs and aman ki asha gang will be holding a conclave.

[JE Menon]

>>With due respect to various gurus here that this Jihad will end if Kashmir or some part of India is given to Muslims all will be well.

NOTHING should be given to any ideology as trivial as to say there is only one way and you are to be subjects and/or slaves. There is a perfect analogy in our pancatantras I think. For heaven's sake I've completely forgotten about it. It is about this cannibalistic asura who sits outside the village and eats one of its inhabitants every day, the person being voluntarily given by the villagers. His appetite does not cease, rather increases, until he is killed. For sure someone here knows the exact story and the names of the characters. I've forgotten everything else except the storyline completely.

[rsangram]

rsangram,

--------


>>I am by no means running away from further argument. I leave it up to you that if you find it worth your while and time..

It is likely worth our while, but unfortunately I simply do not have the time for a sustained engagement – I do moderate the forum, and this takes up time as I read virtually every thread which shows movement; as well as write for other sites, and of course try to maintain a day job … But I will ping in now and then as I did in this instance. Thank you.

Fair enough.

I will look for your posts and engage accordingly then.

Until then, we can conclude our give an take on this particular issue with a pleasant "agree to disagree" agreement.

Good luck.

[Dipanker]

Kashmir valley population is some 30 Lakhs and not all of them are anti-India.

This should knock your socks off, more recent population of Kashmir valley is over 80 lakh.

[SRoy]

rsangram is correct in one respect, albeit partially.

Partition was nothing but a land deal. What if the Brits disagreed to territorial division? There would have been a full blown civil war. It would have been better. We would have lost more, Punjab and Bengal complete graveyards (I wouldn't be typing here ... lol ),but it would have given us completely Muslim free population.
Partition was just a deal to avoid that civil war, but that idiot MKG didn't allow a full scaled population transfer as a part of the deal. Borders were open till 1965 for voluntary movements.

Hence, back to rsangram's question. It will buy some peace for a decade or so. But J&K is not really a problem, it is a symptom of a larger problem. If we give away K part of the J&K, tomorrow it will be districts of Bengal and Assam, some parts of Kerala.

So, the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about is the Muslim population of India.

Few days ago I asked what is the endgame in J&K. Many people answered. In fact JEM posted a good response, unfortunately the Muslim population part (ever ready for Jihad) was not addressed.

Internationally, we are in a position where territorial adjustment with force imposed upon us is out of question. Pakis and their 3.5 friends had that opportunity window in early 90s. That time is gone.

So, its time we think what could be our strategy to deal with slipping demographic advantage across India. J&K would be only a subtext of that solution.

[pankajs]

Tomorrow there is a Con Mafia, its political chela parties, NGOs and aman ki asha gang will be holding a conclave.

The two *expose* are critical to the counter narrative.

1. Hisb. Muj. commander for Kashmir declaring that the fight is in the name of Islam and not jamooriat , insaniyat and kashmiriyat (whatever that means). Not that it was not known but the video on loop on Indian TV will allow the GOI to undercut the opposition/activist gameplan in the eyes of mangos.
2. The India Today *sting* on the hurry-rat's funding from bakistan will allow the GOI to push back on talks with ALL sections of Kashmiri society without any per-condition.

The thing to remember is that the main audience for all such maneuvering is the mango Indian and the above two points hands the current GOI two very potent narrative *shaping* events. In fact, the first tape will play mighty well in front of bestern audience too.

I am highly suspicious of the timing of the two events.

[Supratik]

SRoy,

It can be done. But patience and grit is required. You have to wear down the KMs e.g. if you extrapolate the number of KM men dead in the jihad from 1990 to UP it would come to 2 million. That is a very large number in just 25 years. A larger population can sustain it but I don't think a 6 million population can sustain it against 1.3 billion over the long run. So you have to play the game of attrition. Yes, we loose young, fine men too in the process. Next, should come Art 370. If it can be removed investments are going to come specially in the Jammu area and with it will come migrants from all over India.Right now no one can invest in J&K due to this law, so there is very little economic activity outside tourism. Third, trifurcate the state so that the Kashmir valley becomes what it is about 9000 sqkm. All this you can do while appealing to the hearts and minds which is generally for international players.

[Karthik S]

For those of you saying population transfer will not stop assaults etc, there is a difference, in that scenario, we'd be dealing with our enemies at the border rather than inside our own territory as we are have been doing thus far.

[Marten]

Supratik, 20,00,000 people dead over 30 years is impossible. Not sure where you get these numbers from but they are wrong.

[rsangram]

rsangram is correct in one respect, albeit partially.


Hence, back to rsangram's question. It will buy some peace for a decade or so. But J&K is not really a problem, it is a symptom of a larger problem. If we give away K part of the J&K, tomorrow it will be districts of Bengal and Assam, some parts of Kerala.

So, the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about is the Muslim population of India.

Few days ago I asked what is the endgame in J&K. Many people answered. In fact JEM posted a good response, unfortunately the Muslim population part (ever ready for Jihad) was not addressed.


So, its time we think what could be our strategy to deal with slipping demographic advantage across India. J&K would be only a subtext of that solution.

I am the one who is addressing the Muslim population issue in India. I am saying, transfer them out, in exchange for whatever deal we can get.

I think, what people are missing is the fact that the Hindu culture and the Hindu population itself is under great existential threat. I believe that if we continue on the trajectory that we are on, we Hindus will not survive and be extinct in a 100 years. How will that happen ? Via conversion and genocide. People here call this scare mongering, but I think people are just not only being complacent, but downright delusional, as it is so obvious and yet most people dont see it. You can call it "bury the head in the sand" syndrome or "Dilli abhi door hai" syndrome.

The entire solution set is different, depending on whether you believe in the premise of this immediate existential threat with a very real chance of extinction of Hindus within the next 100 years or so (that kind of time frame). If one does not believe that there is that kind of threat and that kind of immediate threat, then the status quo looks alright to them. If you believe in the threat and its immediate imminence, with great urgency to counter, then the solution will have to be something along the lines that I propose.

If the threat is imminent and my time frames are roughly correct, then my argument is that an abbreviated Hindu Nation with zero muslim population gives a better chance for survival of Hindu populations than the current status quo. An abbreviated land with no muslims gives us a chance, a space and time, to heal, to regroup, to strengthen ourselves and create an unabashed and unconditional safe haven for Hindus. Being more homogeneous then, will give us a better chance to fortify ourselves and jettison this so called "democracy", which is nothing by kleptocracy, which will allow us to evolve a form of system of governence better suited for a long offensive war and not defensive war, which is inevitable against Islam. Then we can militarize, regimentize and create an order within our society, which hopefully, will be much better equipped to save us. With the muslim population in the numbers that they are, present in India, we will have nothing but confusion, corruption, self goals, chaos, more and more Islamization and ultimately Islamic mass murder of Hindus assisted by Hindus' own suicidal tendencies.

People are correct in saying here that the Islamists will not let up, just because we give away territory. These same people, are deliberately, though, putting words in my mouth, by saying that I am saying that the Islamists will give us peace against territory. I am under no such illusion or delusion. I am only advocating giving up territory as a means of transferring our entire muslim population out, not in the hopes that the Islamists will give up their Ghazwa-e-Hind. My only contention is that we will be much better equipped for a war against Islam, without our muslim population, even if it means giving away some of our land.

Once we fortify and secure ourselves, then we should embark on a 1000 year offensive war against the Islamists to regain all our lost territories from Afghanistan to Indonesia. Obviously, reclaiming the lost territories of the subcontinent will be the first target in that fight.

What else can be done ? The other alternative can be to flood Nepal will large number of Hindus form India, have it be converted back to a Hindu nation and then use that as a safe haven for Hindus and a launch pad for a Hindu revival and embark on the battle from there to reclaim all our lost territories.

Of course, that leads us to this question. For those, who oppose any territory give away under any circumstances, how about starting a mass movement and massive push for at least disregard 370 (even if we cannot legally do away with it) and flooding Jammu and Ladakh areas with Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains and animists and thereby, change the demographics of J&K state, even if we cannot change the demographics of the KAshmir Valley. THAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL SOLUTION. Those who jump on me for even contemplating a tradeoff in territory in exchange for transferring all Indian muslims out, should explain how, when India cannot even settle other Indians in any numbers in Jammu and Ladakh, where we dont have terrorists to contend with, for the most part, nor do we have local hostile populations to contend with, for the most part, should explain how can we keep JK from breaking apart ?

And that is the end game in J&K, Sroy. One of the following 4.

1. Continue status quo, which will surely result in due course to defeat for India and loss of territory WITHOUT population transfer within just 10 or 15 years - meaning utter and complete defeat, which will hasten the complete demise of Hindus in all of India, even sooner than I predict - and my prediction is 100 years.

2. Negotiate a transfer of ALL Indian muslim population, with no exception in exchange for some territory.

3. Flood Nepal, convert it into a Hindu nation and use that as a Hindu safe haven, beach head, launching pad for Hindu revival and reclaiming of lost Hindu territories, starting with flooding Hindus as "illegal" immigrants backed by a Hindu militia supplied from Nepal into Ladakh, which would require a supply corridor to be established via Uttarakhand and Himachal within India. This assumes that there will always be a Hindu friendly government in India which will permit such a "migration" , movement and "supplyline" via the Ittranchal and Himachal corridor. Very long shot, but a theoretical possibility.

4. Directly settle Hindus in Jammu and LAdakh, change the demographics of J&K, by disregarding 370 in at least those parts of JK and then go from there.

Clearly, in my view, of all the end game scenarios, number 4 is most desirable, but I am afraid number 1 is most likely. Number 3 is ok too, although a real long shot and I am even willing to settle for number 2.

Why cant we do number 4 now, and can you, Sroy, or anyone else lay out a timeline by when it will be possible, and by what year such a scenario will be possible as a function of our military readiness and political will, in India ?

[Dipanker]

Don't we have a fantasy thread? Lot of crap being posted on this thread can be moved over to the fantasy thread.

[Supratik]

Marten,

I used the words "extrapolate to UP" as in uttar pradesh. Most neutral observers believe 60-70000 Kashmiris are dead (the govt gives a much lower number and the terrorists a much higher number). My analysis suggest it is ball park correct. It means 2% of the KM male population is dead. If you extrapolate to UP it means 2 million of the population is dead. Just to give you an idea of the scale of death.

It seems our Lucknowi nababs just like chacha Nehru are still having fantasies, while eating gihloti kabab, of giving away our land (not theirs) for population exchange. That window has passed.

[Marten]

I'm sorry Sir. That makes very less sense. Extrapolation of that sort is also not a practical approach.

[Supratik]

OK, if you don't understand extrapolation just keep it at about 2% of the male population is dead.

[Supratik]

Chachaji was smart. He wanted to be PM with ahimsa. So he kept his lands UP and Kashmir valley and gave away other peoples land. Let the Bengalies, Punjabis, Sindhis die and run like dogs, become destitute overnight and get raped. Bhatijas now want to give more of "other peoples" land. Apparently, now, "they are promising" we will get rid of Muslims.

[Marten]

OK, if you don't understand extrapolation just keep it at about 2% of the male population is dead.

My understanding has no issues. The extrapolation is inexplicable. And the number and the thought is still wrong! Esp. if you continue quoting 2mn dead without understanding this is genocide.

[Dipanker]

Current population of Kashmir valley is 8+ million, 2% of that would be 160,000, that is quite a bit more than the SATP site numbers which I believe are closer to the actual figures. SATP compiles these numbers on weekly/monthly/yearly basis.

SATP site 1988 - 2017

Civilian 14,760
Security 6,296
Terrorists 23,179
Total 44,235

Initially upto 70% those killed used to be foreign/Paki terrorists, only 30% Kashmiris, in the recent years the ratios may be 50 - 50 or 40 - 60.

Thus an estimate of 2% KM dead is order of magnitude higher than the actual figures, it is more like 0.25 - 0.5%, that is a insignificant number.

[CRamS]

Don't we have a fantasy thread? Lot of crap being posted on this thread can be moved over to the fantasy thread.

Like what? Like Sonia queen and her slaves' desire to sell India down the Indus river and make love to TSP in the Kashmir valley through "joint sovereignty" and hail that as an extension of their "secularism?? Now, thankfully, and hopefully, ModiJi has put an end to that fantasy. I mean you will come back back with some bogus links to prove otherwise, but her decision to hire a Paki scum bag to sell down the Indus river on Enron as well lets the cat out of the bag on their India TSP bhai bhai fantasy worldview. Ackk Thoo.

[rsangram]

Don't we have a fantasy thread? Lot of crap being posted on this thread can be moved over to the fantasy thread.

Like what? Like Sonia queen and her slaves' desire to sell India down the Indus river and make love to TSP in the Kashmir valley through "joint sovereignty" and hail that as an extension of their "secularism?? Now, thankfully, and hopefully, ModiJi has put an end to that fantasy. I mean you will come back back with some bogus links to prove otherwise, but her decision to hire a Paki scum bag to sell down the Indus river on Enron as well lets the cat out of the bag on their India TSP bhai bhai fantasy worldview. Ackk Thoo.

CRAMS - + 100

[Dipanker]

Don't we have a fantasy thread? Lot of crap being posted on this thread can be moved over to the fantasy thread.

Like what? Like Sonia queen and her slaves' desire to sell India down the Indus river and make love to TSP in the Kashmir valley through "joint sovereignty" and hail that as an extension of their "secularism?? Now, thankfully, and hopefully, ModiJi has put an end to that fantasy. I mean you will come back back with some bogus links to prove otherwise, but her decision to hire a Paki scum bag to sell down the Indus river on Enron as well lets the cat out of the bag on their India TSP bhai bhai fantasy worldview. Ackk Thoo.

No links this time, I will just repeat what I told you last time, you are entitled your CT's and opinion but you are not entitled to you facts.

[wig]

on sunday, 21 may a conference was organized by a social association named, "Jammu for India". Jammuites from diverse backgrounds spoke therein.
topic

The seminar was held on the topic 'Betrayal of Jammu' here on Sunday in which the situation in Jammu and Kashmir was discussed.

the panelists

The panelists, who participated in the seminar, were former Jammu and Kashmir DGP M M Khajooria, Bar Association of Jammu (BAJ) President B S Salathia, former minister Pawan Gupta, Panun Kashmir Chairman Ajay Chrungoo, Panun Kashmir Convenor Dr Agnishekhar, JFI Convenor Hari Om among others.

gist of the panelists opinions

He accused them of being complicit in compromising the integrity of Jammu region and facilitating the nefarious designs of anti-national elements to subvert peace, harmony and communal amity. "For over two years the Indian State was perceived to be on retreat in Kashmir. Indian Army, its strong arm, the ultimate instrument for asserting the state authority, was systematically demonised," he claimed.

"Government of India abetted this crime against the nation by acts of commission and omission," Khajuria said. Salathia said the BAJ was committed to protect the national interest as well as interest of the people of Jammu and would be ready for any sacrifice to safeguard it. Gupta claimed that the government's present policy on Jammu and Kashmir had outrightly failed and the state was facing a malicious, communal and seditious movement.

it was a colossal tragedy that the BJP has chosen to abandon people of Jammu who gave it such a huge mandate and enabled it to form a government in the state "The recruitment in the state during the BJP-PDP rule clearly demonstrated that Jammu has been marginalised from all recruitment processes. Not only that the entire developmental process in the state has transformed into an overwhelmingly Kashmir-centric process," he said.

Zorawar Singh Jamwal, chairman Team Jammu and secretary of press club Jammu said the state was facing a number of dangers ranging from drug abuse to terrorism. "Jammu is facing multitude of problems which also includes settlement of Rohingya and Bangladeshi Muslims. Jammu will defeat the anti-national forces as it has done in the past. There is a necessity for all positive forces to unite and strategise," he said.

Chungroo said that the long list of betrayals was justified by many in the name of strategy, tactics and politics to further national interests. Hari Om alleged that it was an abnormality of Indian
state which was eager to accommodate the enemies of the nation, empower them and at the same time weaken and marginalise the patriots. "We are fighting a battle in Jammu which has far-
reaching implications. We have to fight it alone and let the nation join us because in case this doesn't happen, India may perish," he added.

http://www.firstpost.com/india/kashmir- ... 65752.html

[Supratik]

Marten,

My last on this as you are not getting the point. It is the percentage of the concerned population dead which I am talking about. So 2% of the KM male population is dead which is very large. Forget about UP as you are not getting it.

Dipanker, the KM male population is around 3-4 million. The overwhelming numbers of dead are males. Yes there are many sources and claims including SATP. SATP numbers are closer to government claims. So that may be their source. My estimate is based on studying various claims and numbers over the last 20 years. The separatists claim 1 lakh dead but that is not supported by most researchers.


But the bottomline that I am trying to make is that the KMs have a very high level of death for a relatively small population and cannot sustain a war of attrition with a much larger and stronger opponent. So the outcome will depend on who can sustain it longer.

[Marten]

Supratik, you are rambling here. There is no 2%. It is not even close to 0.5% by even the most radical elements. You brought in UP, and probably do not understand the context of what you are saying wrt scale or genocide.

Think about it once again, this very high number of deaths that you quote is not a plus for India. Do you know the number of deaths of armed forces in the same region for the same tenure? If you did, you would drop this line of reasoning and thought. Sustaining the situation is not an option for India -- why else would BJP tie up with one of the most dangerous political elements out there! They understand the need for a change in the ground situation.

PS: I don't think you are reading what is being said -- in trying to prove your point. Humbly request you to read it once again and grasp the enormity of your statements!

[Supratik]

Why are you repeatedly calling it genocide? You are making your own conclusions from my posts. These are deaths that happened during the conflict. Genocide is what happened in Bdesh.

My point is in response to crazy suggestions like giving up more territory and having population exchange. What I am saying is that it is not possible to sustain the jihad beyond a point without great pain. The only way it can be sustained is by foreign backing like Pak and even that is going to bring great pain to the local population. They can only win if Indians panic or loose the will to fight or a power stronger than India backs them militarily.
Pak cannot defeat India in Kashmir militarily. I don't see any solution without defeating the jihad militarily. Even a BJP-PDP govt can't do much politically without fulfilling this basic criteria. And it is going to take time due to the trans-national nature of jihad. So people should have patience.

[Marten]

Why are you repeatedly calling it genocide? You are making your own conclusions from my posts. These are deaths that happened during the conflict. Genocide is what happened in Bdesh.

My point is in response to crazy suggestions like giving up more territory and having population exchange. What I am saying is that it is not possible to sustain the jihad beyond a point without great pain. The only way it can be sustained is by foreign backing like Pak and even that is going to bring great pain to the local population. They can only win if Indians panic or loose the will to fight or a power stronger than India backs them militarily.
Pak cannot defeat India in Kashmir militarily. I don't see any solution without defeating the jihad militarily. Even a BJP-PDP govt can't do much politically without fulfilling this basic criteria. And it is going to take time due to the trans-national nature of jihad. So people should have patience.

Killing of 2mn people would be genocide in any dictionary.