India revokes Kashmir’s and Jammu’s special status

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indiatoday.in/amp/india/story/kashmir-unrest-amit-shah-parliament-reservation-bill-amendment-artcle-370-1577275-2019-08-05


https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/india-introduces-plan-to-end-kashmirs-special-status.html

Great News

[OSR stands with Israel]

Bad, Bad decision. India seems to be hell bent to try what China has done in Xinjiang. The Abolition of Article 370&35A would allow for people from other parts of (hindu-majority) India to be settled in Kashmir and permanently change its demographics from Muslim to Hindu, something that was previously restricted under J&Kashmirs laws.

If you impose permanent martial law, imprison even the moderate political leaders and take away their autonomy, then that is how you create terrorists.

Um what’s so bad about giving people the right to move wherever they want in their own nation .

[OSR stands with Israel]

Such is Hindu nature...

Dude no

Why not? Stand with your people against the enemy.

Hindus are not my enemy

Bagel and Santander are very much representative of the split in the Kashmiri resistance movement: It did not use to be sectarian, it was mostly secular actually. In the 90s this changed, especially with the Hindu pandit expulsion. The indian administration has used this in very Machiavellian ways: similar to what Assad did with the opposition, they have tried to poison the Kashmiri movement, by cracking down hard on the secular militants and inflaming the sectarian nature of the conflict. Now most of the Kashmiri militants are extremist Islamists, and this has led to the discrediting of the Kashmiri cause in much of the West. In that sense the Indian Government has been successful.

I would actually compare this to Israel vs Palestine ,with now India fully taking the Israel role (which is good)

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would actually compare this to Israel vs Palestine ,with now India fully taking the Israel role (which is good)

You mean as in Netanyahu tacitly tolerates Hamas rule in the Gaza strip, because it discredits the palestinians and makes a palestinian state very unlikely? That is a interesting point.


One more thing i would like to add: Kashmir is actually not the only state to impose internal Immigration restrictions: The small christian-majority states in the north-east of India have them too. They have never been controversial and are supported by the central government. Only with Kashmir it is an issue, for reasons that hardly need explaining.

Ok what would be your reaction if Texas or some other state arbitrarily bans people from other states from moving in .


Kashmir is part of India so yes Indians from all around India should be allowed to move in

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would actually compare this to Israel vs Palestine ,with now India fully taking the Israel role (which is good)

You mean as in Netanyahu tacitly tolerates Hamas rule in the Gaza strip, because it discredits the palestinians and makes a palestinian state very unlikely? That is a interesting point.


One more thing i would like to add: Kashmir is actually not the only state to impose internal Immigration restrictions: The small christian-majority states in the north-east of India have them too. They have never been controversial and are supported by the central government. Only with Kashmir it is an issue, for reasons that hardly need explaining.

Ok what would be your reaction if Texas or some other state arbitrarily bans people from other states from moving in .


Kashmir is part of India so yes Indians from all around India should be allowed to move in

The (at least White) people of Texas are given full rights under our law system. Meanwhile, the Kashmiris live under an oppressive regime that rapes, beats down, and marginalizes them at any and every moment.

This thread is a glaring example of exactly how this attitude of oppressive indifference transcends borders into the politics of other nations.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/north/story/indians-are-not-descendants-of-aryans-study-148337-2011-12-10


The people who currently living in India are indigenous.



I talked to my dad about this and he said people who oppose this while they support liberal immigration policies are being hypocritical and said all his friends who support even congress support this .


 He also said that reason this is done is once the US leaves Afghanistan , the only nation who can deal with terrorism in the region is India so they are taking actions to deal with it so Tailban insurgents don’t come to Kashmir and commit attacks in India . He said like Israel , India has to take strong actions to stop radical Islamic terrorists from committing attacks .


Lastly he said it clear that Kashmir is part of India and always has been so it should be a full state .

 

[OSR stands with Israel]

I don't think that this is a good decision but I respect India's right to do this. This is definitely a huge gamble. If there isn't this huge wave of terrorism hitting in India in the coming months in years, it would probably turn out to be a great decision. I really don't think we should be leaving Afghanistan. If India wants to deal with what we have been dealing with for the last almost 20 years, bully to them.

All of this being said, this is probably taking an unacceptable risk. However, if this is the issue that kept you power, you pretty much have to do this. 

India has no choice but to deal with it since they are extremely close to that region . On the other hand the US just cannot stay in Afghanistan forever so India has to prepare for the day when we leave .

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would actually compare this to Israel vs Palestine ,with now India fully taking the Israel role (which is good)

You mean as in Netanyahu tacitly tolerates Hamas rule in the Gaza strip, because it discredits the palestinians and makes a palestinian state very unlikely? That is a interesting point.


One more thing i would like to add: Kashmir is actually not the only state to impose internal Immigration restrictions: The small christian-majority states in the north-east of India have them too. They have never been controversial and are supported by the central government. Only with Kashmir it is an issue, for reasons that hardly need explaining.

Ok what would be your reaction if Texas or some other state arbitrarily bans people from other states from moving in .


Kashmir is part of India so yes Indians from all around India should be allowed to move in

The (at least White) people of Texas are given full rights under our law system. Meanwhile, the Kashmiris live under an oppressive regime that rapes, beats down, and marginalizes them at any and every moment.

This thread is a glaring example of exactly how this attitude of oppressive indifference transcends borders into the politics of other nations.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/north/story/indians-are-not-descendants-of-aryans-study-148337-2011-12-10


The people who currently living in India are indigenous.



I talked to my dad about this and he said people who oppose this while they support liberal immigration policies are being hypocritical and said all his friends who support even congress support this .


 He also said that reason this is done is once the US leaves Afghanistan , the only nation who can deal with terrorism in the region is India so they are taking actions to deal with it so Tailban insurgents don’t come to Kashmir and commit attacks in India . He said like Israel , India has to take strong actions to stop radical Islamic terrorists from committing attacks .


Lastly he said it clear that Kashmir is part of India and always has been so it should be a full state .

 

It's already kind of happening now, granted those militants in Kashmir are mostly not like the brand name Taliban, they are like generic or knockoff brands of them (also most aren't ethnic pashtuns) and the conditions in places like the territories and Kashmir make for prime breeding ground for these types of groups to grow. Multiple groups on both sides are at fault for this obviously, and India is certainly one, and they could be doing better to help stop it.

Wouldn’t be happening if Pakistan actually took strong action against radical islamists but the fact is they not only don’t do that but Pakistan helps them directly or indirectly. That has to stop and until it does India and in fact the world shouldn’t trust the Pakistanis

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would actually compare this to Israel vs Palestine ,with now India fully taking the Israel role (which is good)

Does that mean you support the right of Palestinians (at least all in the West Bank) to vote for the Knesset?

I’m comparing it to Jerusalem where it should be Israeli just like Kashmir should be in in India

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would actually compare this to Israel vs Palestine ,with now India fully taking the Israel role (which is good)

You mean as in Netanyahu tacitly tolerates Hamas rule in the Gaza strip, because it discredits the palestinians and makes a palestinian state very unlikely? That is a interesting point.


One more thing i would like to add: Kashmir is actually not the only state to impose internal Immigration restrictions: The small christian-majority states in the north-east of India have them too. They have never been controversial and are supported by the central government. Only with Kashmir it is an issue, for reasons that hardly need explaining.

Ok what would be your reaction if Texas or some other state arbitrarily bans people from other states from moving in .


Kashmir is part of India so yes Indians from all around India should be allowed to move in

The (at least White) people of Texas are given full rights under our law system. Meanwhile, the Kashmiris live under an oppressive regime that rapes, beats down, and marginalizes them at any and every moment.

This thread is a glaring example of exactly how this attitude of oppressive indifference transcends borders into the politics of other nations.

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/north/story/indians-are-not-descendants-of-aryans-study-148337-2011-12-10


The people who currently living in India are indigenous.



I talked to my dad about this and he said people who oppose this while they support liberal immigration policies are being hypocritical and said all his friends who support even congress support this .


 He also said that reason this is done is once the US leaves Afghanistan , the only nation who can deal with terrorism in the region is India so they are taking actions to deal with it so Tailban insurgents don’t come to Kashmir and commit attacks in India . He said like Israel , India has to take strong actions to stop radical Islamic terrorists from committing attacks .


Lastly he said it clear that Kashmir is part of India and always has been so it should be a full state .

 

Yeah, but the various people have the south have no right to create a protectorate for themself to settle in Kashmiri land.

You literally cannot tell the difference between legal immigration in which the immigrants are treated the same, and the full blown colonialism being pushed by the Hindutva state. Great job on creating the most tone deaf post of the year.

Kashmir is part of India so yes people from other states in India have the right to move there . And Hidutva state just lmao, India is a very secular nation and still is under Modi.


Modi is no more right wing on religious issues than George W Bush was here

[OSR stands with Israel]

Bad, Bad decision. India seems to be hell bent to try what China has done in Xinjiang. The Abolition of Article 370&35A would allow for people from other parts of (hindu-majority) India to be settled in Kashmir and permanently change its demographics from Muslim to Hindu, something that was previously restricted under J&Kashmirs laws.

If you impose permanent martial law, imprison even the moderate political leaders and take away their autonomy, then that is how you create terrorists.

Um what’s so bad about giving people the right to move wherever they want in their own nation .

You dont have the right to move to a reservation. Although in no other way remotely analogous to reservations, Kashmir also has special status under the Indian constitution.

As somebody else said, the goals of this are to emulate Israeli Likudnites. Except India is nowhere near as powerful vs Pakistan as Israel is with respect to its neighbors if you believe might makes right.

I don’t consider this to be a bad thing lol

[OSR stands with Israel]

It's funny seeing liberals in this thread complain about how this will make people in Kashmir a demographic minority and induce demographic change and seeing those same poster's say that people who talk about demographic change with relation to other countries are racists.

They are massive hypocrites

[OSR stands with Israel]

Very revealing look into the mindset of certain people in this thread: suddenly any attachment to liberty or individual rights or constitutional norms or federalism goes flying out the window because of AUGH MUSLIMS. I wish you guys would be honest though: rather than pretending this is just about Article 370, admit you think it is OK and proper for the government of the "world's largest democracy" to unilaterally and illegally abolish a state with no forewarning and place a population of 12.5 milllion under military rule, stripping all democratic rights from its people, preemptively detaining any potentially dissenters and cutting off all communication.

Im going to use a source which is not at all pro India: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/08/kashmir-special-status-explained-articles-370-35a-190805054643431.html

The article, which came into effect in 1949, exempts Jammu and Kashmir state from the Indian constitution.

It established a separate constitution and a separate flag and denied property rights in the region to the outsiders.

That means the residents of the state live under different laws from the rest of the country in matters such as property ownership and citizenship.

The article, referred to as the Permanent Residents Law, also bars female residents of Jammu and Kashmir from property rights in the event that they marry a person from outside the state. The provision also extends to such women's children.

This seems more like India's version of Reconstruction and just like how the Union was justified to implement the policies of reconstruction, India is justified to do this

[OSR stands with Israel]

Very revealing look into the mindset of certain people in this thread: suddenly any attachment to liberty or individual rights or constitutional norms or federalism goes flying out the window because of AUGH MUSLIMS. I wish you guys would be honest though: rather than pretending this is just about Article 370, admit you think it is OK and proper for the government of the "world's largest democracy" to unilaterally and illegally abolish a state with no forewarning and place a population of 12.5 milllion under military rule, stripping all democratic rights from its people, preemptively detaining any potentially dissenters and cutting off all communication.

Im going to use a source which is not at all pro India: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/08/kashmir-special-status-explained-articles-370-35a-190805054643431.html

The article, which came into effect in 1949, exempts Jammu and Kashmir state from the Indian constitution.

It established a separate constitution and a separate flag and denied property rights in the region to the outsiders.

That means the residents of the state live under different laws from the rest of the country in matters such as property ownership and citizenship.

The article, referred to as the Permanent Residents Law, also bars female residents of Jammu and Kashmir from property rights in the event that they marry a person from outside the state. The provision also extends to such women's children.

This seems more like India's version of Reconstruction and just like how the Union was justified to implement the policies of reconstruction, India is justified to do this

It is not justified to completely take over control of the government however giving it less autonomy than any other region,temporarily increasing military presence to counter any insurgency tactics is fine, but actively destroying the government is not

The South was given less autonomy during Reconstruction than the other states and this is India's version of reconstruction.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Very revealing look into the mindset of certain people in this thread: suddenly any attachment to liberty or individual rights or constitutional norms or federalism goes flying out the window because of AUGH MUSLIMS. I wish you guys would be honest though: rather than pretending this is just about Article 370, admit you think it is OK and proper for the government of the "world's largest democracy" to unilaterally and illegally abolish a state with no forewarning and place a population of 12.5 milllion under military rule, stripping all democratic rights from its people, preemptively detaining any potentially dissenters and cutting off all communication.

Im going to use a source which is not at all pro India: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/08/kashmir-special-status-explained-articles-370-35a-190805054643431.html

The article, which came into effect in 1949, exempts Jammu and Kashmir state from the Indian constitution.

It established a separate constitution and a separate flag and denied property rights in the region to the outsiders.

That means the residents of the state live under different laws from the rest of the country in matters such as property ownership and citizenship.

The article, referred to as the Permanent Residents Law, also bars female residents of Jammu and Kashmir from property rights in the event that they marry a person from outside the state. The provision also extends to such women's children.

This seems more like India's version of Reconstruction and just like how the Union was justified to implement the policies of reconstruction, India is justified to do this

It is not justified to completely take over control of the government however giving it less autonomy than any other region,temporarily increasing military presence to counter any insurgency tactics is fine, but actively destroying the government is not

The South was given less autonomy during Reconstruction than the other states and this is India's version of reconstruction.

Yes coz being isolationist is completely comparable to a full scale revolt supporting slavery

Kashmir women law is literally a law only Radical Islamists now days would support. It is deplorable, and Kashmir has lots of problems with insurgencies and my dad said many of their leaders were sympathetic to the insurgencies.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Very revealing look into the mindset of certain people in this thread: suddenly any attachment to liberty or individual rights or constitutional norms or federalism goes flying out the window because of AUGH MUSLIMS. I wish you guys would be honest though: rather than pretending this is just about Article 370, admit you think it is OK and proper for the government of the "world's largest democracy" to unilaterally and illegally abolish a state with no forewarning and place a population of 12.5 milllion under military rule, stripping all democratic rights from its people, preemptively detaining any potentially dissenters and cutting off all communication.

Im going to use a source which is not at all pro India: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/08/kashmir-special-status-explained-articles-370-35a-190805054643431.html

The article, which came into effect in 1949, exempts Jammu and Kashmir state from the Indian constitution.

It established a separate constitution and a separate flag and denied property rights in the region to the outsiders.

That means the residents of the state live under different laws from the rest of the country in matters such as property ownership and citizenship.

The article, referred to as the Permanent Residents Law, also bars female residents of Jammu and Kashmir from property rights in the event that they marry a person from outside the state. The provision also extends to such women's children.

This seems more like India's version of Reconstruction and just like how the Union was justified to implement the policies of reconstruction, India is justified to do this

It is not justified to completely take over control of the government however giving it less autonomy than any other region,temporarily increasing military presence to counter any insurgency tactics is fine, but actively destroying the government is not

The South was given less autonomy during Reconstruction than the other states and this is India's version of reconstruction.

Yes coz being isolationist is completely comparable to a full scale revolt supporting slavery

Kashmir women law is literally a law only Radical Islamists now days would support. It is deplorable, and Kashmir has lots of problems with insurgencies and my dad said many of their leaders were sympathetic to the insurgencies.

Unlike you, I don't believe everything my parents say when it comes to India, We get it you hate China and want super tarrifs because you want India to overtake them. It is not ok to completely overthrow a democratically elected government and place it under house arrest.

No I want Tarrifs because the Chinese have been waging a trade war against the US . They have stolen our intellectual property, engage in dumping , and have broken all sorts of rules but the Anti American WTO refuses to do anything about it.


This is why I think the US-Israel-India should form a pact because its clear many world organizations dislike the US , Israel and India.  Another reason is China and Radical Islam should not be given one more inch as they are the biggest threat in the world today



Note: I do support new elections to be held ASAP