Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

some users are mixing the concept of martial law with war against Pakistan. We don't need martial law for a war. This is a strategic decision that the ministry of defence/ armed forces may take. We had war with Pakistan a number of times and still hostilities continue from time to time.  

Exactly. Whatever may be  strategy, be it a war or Martial Law, Hostilities of Pakistan should be arrested once and for all. Today Rajnath Singh in the SAARC Home ministers meet held in Islamabad, Pakistan highlighted this Terrorist activities. Additionally he added that India will not tolerate any terrorist activities in its neighboring countries. These will be dealt with Iron hand.

rambabu wrote:

MG Singh wrote:

rambabu wrote:

anil wrote:

rambabu wrote:

I'm sure you did not understand my thread at all. What I said was, either martial Law or any such measure to bring peace to the Kashmir Valleu

No Martial law only governor rule.In martial law civil rights of citizen suspended for some time.

OK.Whatever it may be. The idea is to  Keep the Kashmir valley peaceful.

 Going to war with Pak is not an option because of the geo-political situation and China factor. Also the result cannot be forecast. The only option is for parliament to declare martial law in the valley and I am sure the seperatist leaders ( hurriet et all) will be tackled.Martial law based on the doctrine of necessity has been held as valid in many countries including the UK and by famous jurists as well. Maybe I will write sometime on the Doctrine of necessity.

 

If 'Martial Law based on the doctrine of necessity' has been held as valid, in many countries,including UK which is a Democratic Country like India, Why Martial Law should not be imposed in India? do you think the President of India is not aware of this fact ? If he is aware and understands the situation in Kashmir, then naturally the President should agree to impose Martial Law in the Kashmir Valley. I know, things are not as easy as they look to be. If India wants to end the Kashmir problem forever, it should think of a solid solution on an urgent basis. More delays, more disasters.

For most of people meaning of Martial law is capturing power by army general and all leaders send behind bars. It is not possible in India. Situation in Kashmir is much serious. Present PDP government have some soft corner of separatist.

 

 

 

 

Martial law does not necessarily mean army general takes over. It merely means that martial law regulations will be enforced. In Pakistan for some time after the exit of Yahiya Khan , The Chief martial law administrator was ZA Bhutto( a civilian). Mussolini seized power on the basis of Doctrine of necessity in Italy and he was a civilian. In India, martial law can be enforced but the basic character of Hindus is too shy away from violence and hence I do not ever envisage martial law being promulgated in India.

Our political leadership will prefer to lose Kashmir than apply the martial law.

rambabu wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

some users are mixing the concept of martial law with war against Pakistan. We don't need martial law for a war. This is a strategic decision that the ministry of defence/ armed forces may take. We had war with Pakistan a number of times and still hostilities continue from time to time.  

Exactly. Whatever may be  strategy, be it a war or Martial Law, Hostilities of Pakistan should be arrested once and for all. Today Rajnath Singh in the SAARC Home ministers meet held in Islamabad, Pakistan highlighted this Terrorist activities. Additionally he added that India will not tolerate any terrorist activities in its neighboring countries. These will be dealt with Iron hand.

I am afraid what all Rajnath Singh said is just plain rhetoric and bluster. His words do not match the ground reality where the security forces are not given a free hand. If this is the position who will ever enforce martial law? Not Modi, no one.

 

MG Singh wrote:

rambabu wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

some users are mixing the concept of martial law with war against Pakistan. We don't need martial law for a war. This is a strategic decision that the ministry of defence/ armed forces may take. We had war with Pakistan a number of times and still hostilities continue from time to time.  

Exactly. Whatever may be  strategy, be it a war or Martial Law, Hostilities of Pakistan should be arrested once and for all. Today Rajnath Singh in the SAARC Home ministers meet held in Islamabad, Pakistan highlighted this Terrorist activities. Additionally he added that India will not tolerate any terrorist activities in its neighboring countries. These will be dealt with Iron hand.

I am afraid what all Rajnath Singh said is just plain rhetoric and bluster. His words do not match the ground reality where the security forces are not given a free hand. If this is the position who will ever enforce martial law? Not Modi, no one.

What Rajnath said in the SAARC Home Ministers meet targeting Pak was with the consent of Modi and his Government. His statement in no uncertain terms say, any individual or an institution or a Country who abet terrorism will be firmly dealt with. I feel, his statement or warning whatever you say is India is determined to retaliate in the same manner as Pak has done earlier.

 

 

rambabu wrote:

MG Singh wrote:

rambabu wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

some users are mixing the concept of martial law with war against Pakistan. We don't need martial law for a war. This is a strategic decision that the ministry of defence/ armed forces may take. We had war with Pakistan a number of times and still hostilities continue from time to time.  

Exactly. Whatever may be  strategy, be it a war or Martial Law, Hostilities of Pakistan should be arrested once and for all. Today Rajnath Singh in the SAARC Home ministers meet held in Islamabad, Pakistan highlighted this Terrorist activities. Additionally he added that India will not tolerate any terrorist activities in its neighboring countries. These will be dealt with Iron hand.

I am afraid what all Rajnath Singh said is just plain rhetoric and bluster. His words do not match the ground reality where the security forces are not given a free hand. If this is the position who will ever enforce martial law? Not Modi, no one.

What Rajnath said in the SAARC Home Ministers meet targeting Pak was with the consent of Modi and his Government. His statement in no uncertain terms say, any individual or an institution or a Country who abet terrorism will be firmly dealt with. I feel, his statement or warning whatever you say is India is determined to retaliate in the same manner as Pak has done earlier.

If they had been determined to retaliate, they would have done so long ago. There have been opportunities to do that until now! 

 

 

The Indian government believes in verbal warfare which is  the basis of the formation of present government. They can not hit back. They are afraid of being hit in return.

Kalyani Nandurkar wrote:

rambabu wrote:

MG Singh wrote:

rambabu wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

some users are mixing the concept of martial law with war against Pakistan. We don't need martial law for a war. This is a strategic decision that the ministry of defence/ armed forces may take. We had war with Pakistan a number of times and still hostilities continue from time to time.  

Exactly. Whatever may be  strategy, be it a war or Martial Law, Hostilities of Pakistan should be arrested once and for all. Today Rajnath Singh in the SAARC Home ministers meet held in Islamabad, Pakistan highlighted this Terrorist activities. Additionally he added that India will not tolerate any terrorist activities in its neighboring countries. These will be dealt with Iron hand.

I am afraid what all Rajnath Singh said is just plain rhetoric and bluster. His words do not match the ground reality where the security forces are not given a free hand. If this is the position who will ever enforce martial law? Not Modi, no one.

What Rajnath said in the SAARC Home Ministers meet targeting Pak was with the consent of Modi and his Government. His statement in no uncertain terms say, any individual or an institution or a Country who abet terrorism will be firmly dealt with. I feel, his statement or warning whatever you say is India is determined to retaliate in the same manner as Pak has done earlier.

If they had been determined to retaliate, they would have done so long ago. There have been opportunities to do that until now! 

Indian leaders have always taken a defensive attitude and defended when they were attacked by Pakistan in the past three wars. No wonder then that Pakistan tends to take us for granted. At least now that Rajnath Singh has made a start with an impactful speech, let us hope that also transcends to action . There should be single minded commitment to stopping infiltration and terrorism and all voices of dissent and double speak by Kashmiri leaders like Mehbooba, Omar etc etc should be silenced..Of course the biggest hinderence would be the opposition parties, but with the support of the citizens, they too can be put in their place.But what is needed is a strong will by the central government !

MG Singh wrote:

Martial law does not necessarily mean army general takes over. It merely means that martial law regulations will be enforced. In Pakistan for some time after the exit of Yahiya Khan , The Chief martial law administrator was ZA Bhutto( a civilian). Mussolini seized power on the basis of Doctrine of necessity in Italy and he was a civilian. In India, martial law can be enforced but the basic character of Hindus is too shy away from violence and hence I do not ever envisage martial law being promulgated in India.

You know better that me. I wrote here what I read in news papers. I read little bit about Mussolini. He was dictator. 

Our political leadership will prefer to lose Kashmir than apply the martial law.

anil wrote:

MG Singh wrote:

Martial law does not necessarily mean army general takes over. It merely means that martial law regulations will be enforced. In Pakistan for some time after the exit of Yahiya Khan , The Chief martial law administrator was ZA Bhutto( a civilian). Mussolini seized power on the basis of Doctrine of necessity in Italy and he was a civilian. In India, martial law can be enforced but the basic character of Hindus is too shy away from violence and hence I do not ever envisage martial law being promulgated in India.

You know better that me. I wrote here what I read in news papers. I read little bit about Mussolini. He was dictator. 

Our political leadership will prefer to lose Kashmir than apply the martial law.

I am not agree with you, I think Modi is waiting for right time. Pakistan government insulted home minister Raj Nath during his latest visit of Pakistan. It may be proved U turn.