We are looking at events in 1947 and during the framing of the Constitution with the glasses of today and that is muddling the issue greatly. Article 370 is an outcome of the wisdom of those times. Right or wrong that is the reality. Casting aspersions on Nehru that his only aim was to please Sheikh Abdullah is not fair and is based on the current moves to build a new ideology by humiliating the old ideology of a particular person. The National Conference (NC) has kept the state with India and for this they have been viciously attacked by separatist groups. They are not communal. If they were then in 1947 they could have swung it way from India. In today's electoral euphoria let us not forget the good of the past. Let us not pass judgments with half knowledge.

Yes Kashmiri Pandits must go back with respect. Yes there should be a debate for need for Article 370 or its removal. But not under threats. Yes the problem is limited geographically to the valley and Ladakh and Jammu regions are for full integration with India. So it is a challenge to win the trust of the valley residents even when a good number of them are for India. Both threats and patronizing attitudes will be counter productive.This is a challenge before the Central govt.

I agree that National conference is not communal. But they could not protect Kashmiri Pandits from communal elements. I agree that discussion should be in amicable environment, there should be no undue haste in repealing article 370. Also I have to reiterate that you cannot talk about Kashmiri only ignoring Jammu and Ladakh.

J&K today is one because of article 370. Once it is removed the State will break up into Ladakh, Valley and Jammu going in three different directions because neither language nor religion binds them together. One of them will feel perhaps much ore alienated than it is today.

Article 370 just defines the relation and functions of center and state. It is fallacious to say that the state will break in three parts if article 370 is removed. However, states can always be reorganized. There is nothing wrong if Ladakh is taken out and administered as union territory.

We have had states breaking up even under normal circumstances so that can easily be tackled....The removal of article 370 actually gives more power, freedom and scope for growth in the entire region and more importantly gives less reason for Pakistan to make a major issue out of it..

True...and when one has already decided that Nehru is simply too great and infallible, then one can present all sorts of arguments about how he is being wrongly judged from today's point of view and so on and so forth. These same people chose to remain silent on more critical issues of Kashmiri pandits, chose not to say anything when they were chased out of their homes and state and now that issue of repealing article 370 has been brought forth, they are crying out how it separate Kashmir from India, which seems rather silly!

Let is not be personal and judgmental. Views are being placed without prejudice for sharing and moving discussion forward. Accusing others shows weakness in one's own views and lack of tolerating contrary views. For someone who is only two days old in the forum how do you conclude that voices were not raised on the issue of Pandits by persons like him. While placing views in a public forum use of words like silly etc should be avoided. In a democracy every one has a right to express their views without offending others. Rest is up to you as you are much senior in the forum.

We are looking at events in 1947 and during the framing of the Constitution with the glasses of today and that is muddling the issue greatly. Article 370 is an outcome of the wisdom of those times. Right or wrong that is the reality. Casting aspersions on Nehru that his only aim was to please Sheikh Abdullah is not fair and is based on the current moves to build a new ideology by humiliating the old ideology of a particular person. The National Conference (NC) has kept the state with India and for this they have been viciously attacked by separatist groups. They are not communal. If they were then in 1947 they could have swung it way from India. In today's electoral euphoria let us not forget the good of the past. Let us not pass judgments with half knowledge.

Yes Kashmiri Pandits must go back with respect. Yes there should be a debate for need for Article 370 or its removal. But not under threats. Yes the problem is limited geographically to the valley and Ladakh and Jammu regions are for full integration with India. So it is a challenge to win the trust of the valley residents even when a good number of them are for India. Both threats and patronizing attitudes will be counter productive.This is a challenge before the Central govt.

I agree that National conference is not communal. But they could not protect Kashmiri Pandits from communal elements. I agree that discussion should be in amicable environment, there should be no undue haste in repealing article 370. Also I have to reiterate that you cannot talk about Kashmiri only ignoring Jammu and Ladakh.

J&K today is one because of article 370. Once it is removed the State will break up into Ladakh, Valley and Jammu going in three different directions because neither language nor religion binds them together. One of them will feel perhaps much ore alienated than it is today.

Article 370 just defines the relation and functions of center and state. It is fallacious to say that the state will break in three parts if article 370 is removed. However, states can always be reorganized. There is nothing wrong if Ladakh is taken out and administered as union territory.

We have had states breaking up even under normal circumstances so that can easily be tackled....The removal of article 370 actually gives more power, freedom and scope for growth in the entire region and more importantly gives less reason for Pakistan to make a major issue out of it..

True...and when one has already decided that Nehru is simply too great and infallible, then one can present all sorts of arguments about how he is being wrongly judged from today's point of view and so on and so forth. These same people chose to remain silent on more critical issues of Kashmiri pandits, chose not to say anything when they were chased out of their homes and state and now that issue of repealing article 370 has been brought forth, they are crying out how it separate Kashmir from India, which seems rather silly!

Let is not be personal and judgmental. Views are being placed without prejudice for sharing and moving discussion forward. Accusing others shows weakness in one's own views and lack of tolerating contrary views. For someone who is only two days old in the forum how do you conclude that voices were not raised on the issue of Pandits by persons like him. While placing views in a public forum use of words like silly etc should be avoided. In a democracy every one has a right to express their views without offending others. Rest is up to you as you are much senior in the forum.

No one is being personal or judgmental here and if one's personal views were not tolerated here, the discussion would not have been taking place here at all! If you can stick to your own convictions firmly, so can others do that. Use of words such as silly etc. is actually very general and commonly used in forums. But if that has offended you, then I do ask for your forgiveness. As far as the discussion is concerned, no where have I indicated that your or anyone else's views are not tolerated or are welcome. If that were the case, the discussion would have been ended. You are free to add your views as are others!

No one is being personal or judgmental here and if one's personal views were not tolerated here, the discussion would not have been taking place here at all! If you can stick to your own convictions firmly, so can others do that. Use of words such as silly etc. is actually very general and commonly used in forums. But if that has offended you, then I do ask for your forgiveness. As far as the discussion is concerned, no where have I indicated that your or anyone else's views are not tolerated or are welcome. If that were the case, the discussion would have been ended. You are free to add your views as are others!

Thank you for your sweet reply. I appreciate the fact that discussions take place because views are freely expressed and tolerated. Perhaps Article 370 has been tolerated too long!

We are looking at events in 1947 and during the framing of the Constitution with the glasses of today and that is muddling the issue greatly. Article 370 is an outcome of the wisdom of those times. Right or wrong that is the reality. Casting aspersions on Nehru that his only aim was to please Sheikh Abdullah is not fair and is based on the current moves to build a new ideology by humiliating the old ideology of a particular person. The National Conference (NC) has kept the state with India and for this they have been viciously attacked by separatist groups. They are not communal. If they were then in 1947 they could have swung it way from India. In today's electoral euphoria let us not forget the good of the past. Let us not pass judgments with half knowledge.

Yes Kashmiri Pandits must go back with respect. Yes there should be a debate for need for Article 370 or its removal. But not under threats. Yes the problem is limited geographically to the valley and Ladakh and Jammu regions are for full integration with India. So it is a challenge to win the trust of the valley residents even when a good number of them are for India. Both threats and patronizing attitudes will be counter productive.This is a challenge before the Central govt.

I agree that National conference is not communal. But they could not protect Kashmiri Pandits from communal elements. I agree that discussion should be in amicable environment, there should be no undue haste in repealing article 370. Also I have to reiterate that you cannot talk about Kashmiri only ignoring Jammu and Ladakh.

J&K today is one because of article 370. Once it is removed the State will break up into Ladakh, Valley and Jammu going in three different directions because neither language nor religion binds them together. One of them will feel perhaps much ore alienated than it is today.

Article 370 just defines the relation and functions of center and state. It is fallacious to say that the state will break in three parts if article 370 is removed. However, states can always be reorganized. There is nothing wrong if Ladakh is taken out and administered as union territory.

We have had states breaking up even under normal circumstances so that can easily be tackled....The removal of article 370 actually gives more power, freedom and scope for growth in the entire region and more importantly gives less reason for Pakistan to make a major issue out of it..

True...and when one has already decided that Nehru is simply too great and infallible, then one can present all sorts of arguments about how he is being wrongly judged from today's point of view and so on and so forth. These same people chose to remain silent on more critical issues of Kashmiri pandits, chose not to say anything when they were chased out of their homes and state and now that issue of repealing article 370 has been brought forth, they are crying out how it separate Kashmir from India, which seems rather silly!

Let is not be personal and judgmental. Views are being placed without prejudice for sharing and moving discussion forward. Accusing others shows weakness in one's own views and lack of tolerating contrary views. For someone who is only two days old in the forum how do you conclude that voices were not raised on the issue of Pandits by persons like him. While placing views in a public forum use of words like silly etc should be avoided. In a democracy every one has a right to express their views without offending others. Rest is up to you as you are much senior in the forum.

No one is being personal or judgmental here and if one's personal views were not tolerated here, the discussion would not have been taking place here at all! If you can stick to your own convictions firmly, so can others do that. Use of words such as silly etc. is actually very general and commonly used in forums. But if that has offended you, then I do ask for your forgiveness. As far as the discussion is concerned, no where have I indicated that your or anyone else's views are not tolerated or are welcome. If that were the case, the discussion would have been ended. You are free to add your views as are others!

I saw the relevant post regarding use of word 'silly'.. There appears no offence to anybody. This is only about a particular thing 'that seems silly'.

Any discussion can progress only when members are able to take different view points regardless of how senior or junior the member is, anyway Kalyani is one of the oldest member of this forum and she always gives very valuable and well balanced inputs to any discussion that goes on here - Article 370 is a very sensitive issue to most Indians and esp the Kashmiris who are all time at the receiving end !
When such is the issue, it is but natural that we tend to point fingers at those who brought in a measure which to me seems half baked and spelt trouble even at that time. At least they should have had the sense to either abolish it or take steps to amend it to suit the needs of our country.When our so called eminent leaders fail to do any such thing it is but natural that they get criticized for their hindsight and selfishness...

I am making a simple point that decisions are taken in a particular period and environment. Subsequently they may not turn around as intended. At that point they should be rectified. This is not done and blame game starts. Blaming persons who took the decision is not fair unless it was a malafide decision, the one's who follow and do not act should be held responsible. In case of Article370, it is said that Indira Gandhi had signed an accord with Sheikh Abdullah in 1975 vide which he was made CM of J&K, and was to prepare the ground in the valley for repealing the art 370. He had begun doing so. But In 1977 Indira lost the elections. The Janata govt and its PM were so anti Indira that they did not follow up this accord and it fell through. Subsequently it did not materialize. Now who should be blamed.

I am making a simple point that decisions are taken in a particular period and environment. Subsequently they may not turn around as intended. At that point they should be rectified. This is not done and blame game starts. Blaming persons who took the decision is not fair unless it was a malafide decision, the one's who follow and do not act should be held responsible. In case of Article370, it is said that Indira Gandhi had signed an accord with Sheikh Abdullah in 1975 vide which he was made CM of J&K, and was to prepare the ground in the valley for repealing the art 370. He had begun doing so. But In 1977 Indira lost the elections. The Janata govt and its PM were so anti Indira that they did not follow up this accord and it fell through. Subsequently it did not materialize. Now who should be blamed.

It is no use making criticism or even praise of anything done in past. May be the concerned ministers. bureaucrats would have used their best judgment in interets of nation. It is now for the current generation of leaders to look at the things in current perspective and do what is best now in consultation with concerned parties.

I am making a simple point that decisions are taken in a particular period and environment. Subsequently they may not turn around as intended. At that point they should be rectified. This is not done and blame game starts. Blaming persons who took the decision is not fair unless it was a malafide decision, the one's who follow and do not act should be held responsible. In case of Article370, it is said that Indira Gandhi had signed an accord with Sheikh Abdullah in 1975 vide which he was made CM of J&K, and was to prepare the ground in the valley for repealing the art 370. He had begun doing so. But In 1977 Indira lost the elections. The Janata govt and its PM were so anti Indira that they did not follow up this accord and it fell through. Subsequently it did not materialize. Now who should be blamed.

It is no use making criticism or even praise of anything done in past. May be the concerned ministers. bureaucrats would have used their best judgment in interets of nation. It is now for the current generation of leaders to look at the things in current perspective and do what is best now in consultation with concerned parties.

Exactly. You have hit the nail on the head. Your stated approach can lead to an agreed solution. Blaming will harden stands and mislead people delaying decision making for a long time. That is what vested interests want and many well meaning but half knowledge persons fall in the trap.

No one is being personal or judgmental here and if one's personal views were not tolerated here, the discussion would not have been taking place here at all! If you can stick to your own convictions firmly, so can others do that. Use of words such as silly etc. is actually very general and commonly used in forums. But if that has offended you, then I do ask for your forgiveness. As far as the discussion is concerned, no where have I indicated that your or anyone else's views are not tolerated or are welcome. If that were the case, the discussion would have been ended. You are free to add your views as are others!

Thank you for your sweet reply. I appreciate the fact that discussions take place because views are freely expressed and tolerated. Perhaps Article 370 has been tolerated too long!

Vijay, thanks a lot for taking it lightly, once again I am sorry to have offended you. No one is old or new in the forums, it is each individual's knowledge and talent that is much more appreciated rather than seniority. In the heat of arguments, we do tend to lose our heads occasionally but that is all temporary. You, as a member and an author, are as equally valued as another person or a moderator is valued. :cheer:

Glad to see the discussion is back on track! :)

No one is being personal or judgmental here and if one's personal views were not tolerated here, the discussion would not have been taking place here at all! If you can stick to your own convictions firmly, so can others do that. Use of words such as silly etc. is actually very general and commonly used in forums. But if that has offended you, then I do ask for your forgiveness. As far as the discussion is concerned, no where have I indicated that your or anyone else's views are not tolerated or are welcome. If that were the case, the discussion would have been ended. You are free to add your views as are others!

Thank you for your sweet reply. I appreciate the fact that discussions take place because views are freely expressed and tolerated. Perhaps Article 370 has been tolerated too long!

Vijay, thanks a lot for taking it lightly, once again I am sorry to have offended you. No one is old or new in the forums, it is each individual's knowledge and talent that is much more appreciated rather than seniority. In the heat of arguments, we do tend to lose our heads occasionally but that is all temporary. You, as a member and an author, are as equally valued as another person or a moderator is valued. :cheer:

Glad to see the discussion is back on track! :)

This is the spirit exactly needed here in discussions. I laud you whole heartedly for bringing back the discussion on its track. All is well that ends well.