Resolution is there to implement.why we vacate forces when there is no will from indian side to apply this resolution? You have no answer to this argument.
Islamic Republic of Pakistan : News, Discussions & Updates
- Thread starter Butter Chicken
- Start date
India's turn to follow the resolution comes at the 2nd step not the first. So how can you say that India is not willing to listen when its not India's turn to comply. Admit it what you want is not what's in the resolution but unilateral concessions from India. We all know that won't happen.
The way you argue on about whether we want to apply the resolution or not when the ball is clearly on your side of the court, seem to suggest very poor understanding of international law/resolutions/agreements. Not surprising given the domestic law and order situation of Pakistan.
Ever wonder why you guys lose so many international litigation/cases ? You don't have to look beyond the past few weeks.
This is the resolution - your first step has to be done. Do it now. And then talk.
- In the first step, Pakistan was asked to secure the withdrawal of all tribesmen and Pakistani nationals, putting an end to the fighting in the state.
- In the second step, India was asked to "progressively reduce" its forces to the minimum level required for keeping law and order. It laid down principles that India should follow in administering law and order in consultation with the Commission, using local personnel as far as possible.
- In the third step, India was asked to ensure that all the major political parties were invited to participate in the state government at the ministerial level, essentially forming a coalition cabinet. India should then appoint a Plebiscite Administrator nominated by the United Nations, who would have a range of powers including powers to deal with the two countries and ensure a free and impartial plebiscite. Measures were to be taken to ensure the return of refugees, the release of all political prisoners, and for political freedom.
I agree but why vacate when India don't want to implement? This resolution can only be adopted if both parties sign some kind of written agreement.without any trust,why pakistan vacate? I agree that our condition is first.
Sir they are conditions but without any written agreement or without indian will to apply resolution,why pakistan follow 1st step? This is my point.
Not interested in drivel. Pull out your troops and administration in areas IMMEDEATELY and conform with the resolutions.
Do you remember Musharraf wanted to vacate our side and even indians were ready to apply conditions but it stalled and now we are facing same old problem. question is is there any trust left? Do they want to apply this resolution or do they want to sign any written agreement in front of the whole world.this is important.
Hahahaha without any written agreement or without any will from indian side,nobody will vacate.indians call it bilateral issue so you should better ask your government to solve this issue based on resolution and not some bilateral mess.
Trust works both ways. If you can't trust us to follow the resolution, how can we trust you to not interfere in the plebiscite ? or try an invasion when Indian forces pull out of Kashmir ? To be fair you have a history with that, remember Kargil ?
Stop the nonsense of resolution and track 2 dialogues as most of it usually ends in a terrorist attack.
you have alredy put your signature on the resolution so pull out your troops. If you agree it's a bilateral then stop talking about any US resoltuion because then it is not a bilateral issue.
We vacate first so we must fear that india will occupy our part.why you fear? Your fear is not realistic.problem is only trust.do you trust pakistan? Forget kargil.we forget 71.it was painful but it is reality so we move on.
what india wanted?
-to get counsellor access.
-stay the order of military court.
-Nullify the order of military court.
-fair trial.
-release Kulbhushan jadhav.
What India Got?
-all of above excluding release.
What pakistan wanted?
-The case is out of ICJ’s jurisdictions.
-Kulbhushan jadhav is a terrorist(alleged) so can’t grant the requests of india.
What pakistan Got?
-india’s request of release of KJ denied.
NOTE:- ICJ told pakistan to hold Fair trial again in civilian court(means order of military court is not acceptable)
Trial on civilan court can run for many years.this is not a victory.icj accepted Irani passport of kulbhushan and basically it accepted kulbhushan as spy.no release means India can't interfere in this case.india can only hire another lawyer for him through counselor access.you are doomed.lol
Lol ICJ said you violated Geneva Convention And you can not execute him.
You have to show all the documents and evidence to india.
Now we can tell the world how you tortured him We will know what you have done to him.
we have already signed the rsoltuion. As for Pakistan, your $hitty demands doesn't deserve any additional signatures and arguments from our side. You are universally considered the biggest douchebags on the planet. guess what?
a) Bangladesh separating from Pakistan is a GOOD thing. Without a monkey like you on their back they are doing great and advancing leaps and bounds
b) Kashmir not coming to Pak is what the whole world wants. No one wants one more place to become a dumpyard at your end.
Let @Guynextdoor handle him. They're cut from more or less the same cloth.Hence made for each other. One reason why I stopped engaging with him.
I know of another member who'd have drained him out - @Kshitij Sharma. Unfortunately @Falcon showed him the way out.His absence today when confronting the likes of Arsalan is keenly felt.
Last edited:
Donald Trump hails Hafiz Saeed’s arrest, says ‘great pressure’ exerted to find him
The great secret behind Pakistan's arrest of Hapig Saeed uncovered.
The great secret behind Pakistan's arrest of Hapig Saeed uncovered.
you missed the point....he thought Hafiz was hiding like OSama and they had to find him...