India is incomplete without Pakistan: Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajapayee

[Raj-Hindustani]

Thanks for the example. My understanding is that all the foolish people are on one side of the border which is in Pakistan.

Would you call Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Rajnath Singh, Mohan Bhagwat "foolish people " . That's sacrilege !

So what you're saying is...Pakistani fools make youtube videos and are lampooned routinely, while Indian fools, like Vajpayee, Bhagwat and their colourful progeny run a country of 1.5 billion?

Here is Yogi uncle:

India a ‘Hindu Rashtra’, ‘Akhand Bharat’ will come true, says Yogi Adityanath

Pakistan can amalgamate into India, said the CM while answering a question on Pakistan’s decline.

www.thehindu.com

Please get back to me when Hamid Gul becomes Chief Minister of a Pakistani state.

" ‘Akhand Bharat’ will transform into reality, and it will be in the interest of Pakistan to amalgamate into India. “Pakistan is not a reality in the spiritual world. If something is not reality, it is fortunate that they survived for so long. It is in their interest to quickly amalgamate into India,” said the CM while answering a question on Pakistan’s decline. “Akhand Bharat is a reality, it will happen,” he said. "

It must be tough being some sort of Shashi Tharoor Temu version holding up masks for the saffronists and littering this thread with your "reassurances", while your nation's leadership openly repeats exactly what Pakistani members here are claiming.

.
We can called them foolish, i don't mind at all but expect Atal ji.

This story will no one buy, when you talks outside from even india and Pakistan.

 

[arjunk]

Wrong. UNSC Resolution 47 required Pakistan to withdraw first, not equal withdrawal. Pakistan never complied, so the process stopped there.

Wrong. UNSC Resolution 80 states both sides withdraw at the same time.

By the way, Resolution 47 was also rejected by India.

Later, the Simla Agreement made Kashmir a bilateral issue.

Bilateral treaties cannot override UN resolutions, and regardless, the Simla agreement does not bind India and Pakistan to solely resolve Kashmir bilaterally.

Now India doesent care

You are welcome to adopt this head-in-the-sand attitude, but then also be prepared to face the consequences -- don't start crying when the Kashmiris fight back and you have bloodbaths in Pahlgham, Pulwama and Mumbai.

 

[Dalit]

An answer to those who say India has no imperialist ambitions:
To those who don't understand Hindi a detailed translation will be given,
Basically Atal Bihari Vajpayee said India's Independence is incomplete and he will reunite Pakistan back into India. and he mentions some provinces of Pakistan by name.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Rediff On The NeT: Vajpayee issues fresh warning to Pakistan

Extract :

Flaying Pakistan for its continued interference in Kashmir, he remarked, "The fact is that the war is not for Kashmir but for the Pakistani psyche; and until they cease to think that Pakistan is incomplete without Kashmir, this will not come to an end."

Here, while he referred to his talks with Sharief during the course of his stay in Lahore, Vajpayee recalled, "I told the Pakistani prime minister to realise what would come out of this in case we also started thinking that India is incomplete without Pakistan.

I love these reminders from Hindutva grandpas across the border.

 

[Muji.Iqbal]

India is incomplete without Pakistan. Without thier Muslim ruling class they don't know what to do.

We should build DHA Delhi as a mercy.

Muslims ruling India? You got to be kidding me. Hindus can have their land. We just want Kashmir, what we should have gotten.

 

[Muji.Iqbal]

Wrong. UNSC Resolution 47 required Pakistan to withdraw first, not equal withdrawal. Pakistan never complied, so the process stopped there.

Later, the Simla Agreement made Kashmir a bilateral issue.

You can’t ignore the conditions for decades and then demand a reset. Now India doesent care

Wrong. UN resolutions say both India and Pakistan need to vacate their military from Kashmir
It is not just Pakistan. Otherwise how can there be a fair plebiscite in Kashmir?

 

[samsite84]

This thread is the kind of "Churan" that is sold to masses. Build a "proxy" and then wage a war against it - the only way to put wool in day to day problems. India has categorically never usurped any territory of neighbors by force and while border conflicts exist most have been solved through dialogue vs military - particularly in case of Nepal, Sri-Lanka, Myanmar and Bangladesh.

 

[Baibers_1260]

This thread is the kind of "Churan" that is sold to masses. Build a "proxy" and then wage a war against it - the only way to put wool in day to day problems. India has categorically never usurped any territory of neighbors by force and while border conflicts exist most have been solved through dialogue vs military - particularly in case of Nepal, Sri-Lanka, Myanmar and Bangladesh.

Then why THIS Churan ?

Sindh’s separation from India, and potential return | The Lowdown

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh’s remark on Sindh’s potential return to India underscores a deep historical and cultural paradox, contrasting Sindh’s ancient ties to India with its complex political identity in Pakistan today.

www.indiatoday.in

 

[Baibers_1260]

India has categorically never usurped any territory of neighbors by force and while border conflicts exist most have been solved through dialogue vs military

Absolutely !

Goa falls to Indian troops ( Link )​

Goa fell to Indian troops on December 19th 1961.



One of the problems vexing the Indian prime minister Jawarhalal Nehru in the 1950s was what to do about Goa. It was still a Portuguese colony – as it had been for four and a half centuries – and the Portuguese dictator Antonio Salazar had no intention of letting go of it.

The situation began to come to a head in 1955 when a group of Goanese and Indian protesters staged a ‘liberation march’ in Goa and more than 20 of them were shot and killed. Nehru’s reaction was influenced by his belief that non-violence, as advocated by Gandhi, was frequently the most effective way in politics. He announced that Portuguese control of Goa could be tolerated no longer and instituted a blockade, which the Portuguese regime evaded by building an airport into which to fly supplies and by opening up trade with Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

Salazar tried to drum up international support from world leaders. President Kennedy wrote to Nehru advising him not to use force and the Portuguese ambassador in London reminded the British government that under the terms of the Anglo-Portuguese alliance of 1899 it was obliged to come to Portugal’s assistance if any Portuguese colony was attacked.

There were more incidents and in November 1961 the Portuguese in Goa opened fire on Indian fishing boats. Nehru lost patience and mounted a military, naval and air attack on Goa using overwhelming force on December 17th. The Portuguese governor, who had at the most 3,000 men to oppose an Indian army of 30,000, blew up a few bridges to delay the invaders but his situation was plainly hopeless and he hoisted the white flag and surrendered. There had been almost no resistance and few casualties.

At the United Nations the US, the UK, France and Turkey proposed a resolution condemning the Indian invasion, but it was blocked by the USSR and other countries. The United States and the UK did not lift a finger to help Portugal in any practical way. Nor did anyone else.

Could this happen to Pakistan?

 

[Baibers_1260]

Absolutely !

Goa falls to Indian troops ( Link )​

Goa fell to Indian troops on December 19th 1961.


View attachment 175119
One of the problems vexing the Indian prime minister Jawarhalal Nehru in the 1950s was what to do about Goa. It was still a Portuguese colony – as it had been for four and a half centuries – and the Portuguese dictator Antonio Salazar had no intention of letting go of it.

The situation began to come to a head in 1955 when a group of Goanese and Indian protesters staged a ‘liberation march’ in Goa and more than 20 of them were shot and killed. Nehru’s reaction was influenced by his belief that non-violence, as advocated by Gandhi, was frequently the most effective way in politics. He announced that Portuguese control of Goa could be tolerated no longer and instituted a blockade, which the Portuguese regime evaded by building an airport into which to fly supplies and by opening up trade with Pakistan and Sri Lanka.

Salazar tried to drum up international support from world leaders. President Kennedy wrote to Nehru advising him not to use force and the Portuguese ambassador in London reminded the British government that under the terms of the Anglo-Portuguese alliance of 1899 it was obliged to come to Portugal’s assistance if any Portuguese colony was attacked.

There were more incidents and in November 1961 the Portuguese in Goa opened fire on Indian fishing boats. Nehru lost patience and mounted a military, naval and air attack on Goa using overwhelming force on December 17th. The Portuguese governor, who had at the most 3,000 men to oppose an Indian army of 30,000, blew up a few bridges to delay the invaders but his situation was plainly hopeless and he hoisted the white flag and surrendered. There had been almost no resistance and few casualties.

At the United Nations the US, the UK, France and Turkey proposed a resolution condemning the Indian invasion, but it was blocked by the USSR and other countries. The United States and the UK did not lift a finger to help Portugal in any practical way. Nor did anyone else.

Could this happen to Pakistan?

Classic false flag and then invasion.

Pakistan is on the chopping block based on the Sundarji Plan.
Note: There was NO Pahalgam, Phulwama, or Uri to trigger Operation Brasstacks and Pakistan was nearly overrun in the winter of 1986-87 . Pakistan claimed to have functioning nuclear weapons when in fact it didn't.
This was the largest known deployment of troops after World War 2 , much larger than any NATO exercise.
The rationale for the war was the "reunification " of Pakistan with India; a Rajeev Gandhi-Arun Nehru secular dream.
It very nearly went through but for the withdrawal of support from the Gorbachov era Soviet Union which withheld aerospace reconnaissance and intelligence on the Pakistan Air Force.
@Panzerkiel @arjunk .




"Nobody can undo Pakistan or take us for granted. We are here to stay and let it be clear that we [Pakistan] shall use the [nuclear] bomb if our existence is threatened," a rattled Abdul Qadeer Khan, then Pakistan's chief nuclear scientist, told Indian journalist Kuldip Nayar. It was late January 1987, and the height of Operation Brasstacks of 1986-87, which was India's largest military exercise and saw half a million Army personnel, armoured and tank divisions, positioned within 180 km of the Pakistan border, nearly triggering a full-scale war...."

 

[Muji.Iqbal]

Then why THIS Churan ?

Sindh’s separation from India, and potential return | The Lowdown

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh’s remark on Sindh’s potential return to India underscores a deep historical and cultural paradox, contrasting Sindh’s ancient ties to India with its complex political identity in Pakistan today.

www.indiatoday.in

View attachment 175116

This Rajnath Singh got to be kidding?

How can Muslim majority Sindh be part of India again? LOL!

This guy is funny!

 

[Muji.Iqbal]

Wrong. UNSC Resolution 80 states both sides withdraw at the same time.

By the way, Resolution 47 was also rejected by India.

Bilateral treaties cannot override UN resolutions, and regardless, the Simla agreement does not bind India and Pakistan to solely resolve Kashmir bilaterally.

You are welcome to adopt this head-in-the-sand attitude, but then also be prepared to face the consequences -- don't start crying when the Kashmiris fight back and you have bloodbaths in Pahlgham, Pulwama and Mumbai.

Correct, United Nations Resolution 80 says both India and Pakistan need to withdraw military forces for a fair and free plebiscite to happen in Kashmir.

Clearly it shows that India is at fault.

Shimla agreement does not nullify the UN resolutions and the UN resolutions have no expiry date or time limit on them.

 

[Master Chief]

India has categorically never usurped any territory of neighbors by force

What on earth have they done to your history syllabus??

 

[Muji.Iqbal]

What on earth have they done to your history syllabus??

Tell our Indian guests to hold a plebiscite in Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh then. lol.

 

[samsite84]

Tell our Indian guests to hold a plebiscite in Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh then. lol.

Plain old regurgitation of lies. There were so many conditions that have to be fulfilled before plebiscite.

1) Pakistan to vacate all of the occupied territory (including Galgit Baltistan) - when is Pakistan doing this. Also, get back the land given to China. Reverse the demographic change.

2) India will vacate, only a small force left to hold elections. If Pakistan does 1, we will pressure Indian on this. We will also repopulate vacated lands with Kashmiri pundits.

3) Hold plebiscite. India will QB this - rest assured we will follow through the decision of people as we have done over 75 years now.

Till you do 1, don't bring UN charter or whatever - or educate yourselves

 

[Master Chief]

Plain old regurgitation of lies. There were so many conditions that have to be fulfilled before plebiscite.

1) Pakistan to vacate all of the occupied territory (including Galgit Baltistan) - when is Pakistan doing this. Also, get back the land given to China. Reverse the demographic change.

2) India will vacate, only a small force left to hold elections. If Pakistan does 1, we will pressure Indian on this. We will also repopulate vacated lands with Kashmiri pundits.

3) Hold plebiscite. India will QB this - rest assured we will follow through the decision of people as we have done over 75 years now.

Till you do 1, don't bring UN charter or whatever - or educate yourselves

If you're referring to Resolution 47, open a thread and put up its exact wording, not your fanciful interpretations. Or refer simply to one of the historic threads that exists on the matter instead of derailing this one. This post of yours is complete nonsense.