Bluebell 🦋

The funny thing is Pakistanis never wanted a ‘Greater Pakistan’ they’ve never been expansionist, unlike all their neighbours. But neighbours refusing to respect their borders has literally created a ‘Greater Pakistan’ response by some Pakistanis. Now let’s see how this plays out.

I'm honestly very fkn upset! Israel's Defense Minister just blatantly said they will occupy 10% of Lebanon even AFTER the war, and over 600k people that have their homes there cannot return! And also today, Netanyahu is saying that after the Iran war, the Strait of Hormuz needs to be bypassed using pipelines from Saudi to the Mediterranean I'm trying to be objective on everything, but after the destruction of Gaza, recent unwarranted bombing of Syria a few days ago, and now this, I am struggling to remain objective! Israel needs to reconsider its foreign policy or the cycle of violence won't stop! You cannot occupy Lebanon and expect the Government to disarm the militia that was founded BECAUSE of Israeli occupation decades ago! You cannot bomb Syria non stop and expect the people and the Government to sit idly and normalize relations You cannot wipe out Gaza and keep occupying it, then pass a law where the death penalty applies to Palestinians and not Israelis, and expect Palestinians to not be radicalized and fight back You cannot expect to bomb Iran, then propose a pipeline that benefits you, and expect the Arab world to become allies I want Hezbollah gone. I want the Iranian regime gone. I want Palestinian radicalization gone. But this is NOT the way to do it! This is NOT the way to achieve peace in the region!

@wagarrwal The Pak Pashtuns I know definitely don’t want to be part of Afghanistan. Afghans around the world r being forced to return. So it’s not like it’s a country that people want to join/ be a part of. They should focus on development not expansion & be realistic about what they can do

@BluebelleBellaa Difference is Pakistan got almost everything it wanted, other than Kashmir, so it had no reason to be as expansionist. Afghanistan didn't get what it wanted, so the claims stuck.

The funny thing is Pakistanis never wanted a ‘Greater Pakistan’ they’ve never been expansionist, unlike all their neighbours. But neighbours refusing to respect their borders has literally created a ‘Greater Pakistan’ response by some Pakistanis. Now let’s see how this plays out.

@wagarrwal That was the whole point of my original tweet Pak has not been expansionist, its original vision always included Kashmir. It’s never claimed that Afghan or Chinese land belongs to them, whilst Afghans claim upto Attock belongs to them which is in Punjab. Yes it’s time to move on!

Why doesn't Pakistan fight Iran or Afghanistan for more land? Why doesn't Pakistan try to fight China for its Uyghur Muslim regions? ‘Gul Khan’ was coined by KPK Pashtuns and just means Uncle Tom. It's similar to saying ‘Sarkari Pashtun’ or ‘Sarkari Punjabi’ to those that are extreme government loyalists, it's not a racial slur like daalkhor. I personally think it's time for Afghanistan to accept the border so we can become friends, and that nothing productive comes from continuing the dispute, but it was injustice what happened in 1947 and I think it made sense for Afghanistan to not accept it in 1947. But it's been 70+ years now and it's unproductive to let it hold us back forever.

@wagarrwal Maybe there wouldn’t be a conflict between Afghanistan & Pakistan today if that had happened. Who knows. Although I don’t know why you would want that as it means KPK would also have suffered US occupation & be under Taliban rule atm, completely war torn, no girls education etc

Many Kashmiris also live in Delhi, many Muslims live in India, etc. Afghanistan's military was vastly inferior to that of the British, so had to accept the border since they had no capability to take any land from Britain. And one ruler of Afghanistan doesn't represent the whole country forever. But regardless of your points, this doesn't change the fact that we would have zero conflict today if Pashtun regions were were not gifted to Pakistan. It is what it is now, but Afghanistan, or at least British Raj Pashtuns, were done injustice by the British and challenging it made sense at the time.

@minato550651 Yikes do you even read the international news or just WhatsApp university? Countries around the world are lining up to buy JF17s from Pakistan after they shot down your jets last May. telegraph.co.uk/world-news/202… aje.io/kclp3s

@BluebelleBellaa DHA Srinagar? Your property dealers in uniform couldn't even hold onto DHA Dhaka. Tejas flies beautifully; you're confusing it with your grounded Chinese JF-17s. Stick to selling plots in Lahore before the TTP decides to set up their own cantonment there.

@minato550651 Yeah DHA Srinagar coming soon dw. How’s ur Tejas jets doing btw? Still crashing at international air shows?

@BluebelleBellaa If Kashmir is your jugular vein, it perfectly explains why your state is currently brain-dead. The GHQ uses this 'dispute' just to keep the fauj's DHA plots secure. We don't need Akhand Bharat; we are quite happy watching you tear your own country apart from across the LOC.

@Rajbarage @wagarrwal I know it’s hard for your people to accept that the Brahmin Pandit King of Kashmir chose to convert to Islam peacefully after learning the true religion. But we did & you need to end ur obsession. Also even Hindu Kashmiris look down on Indians, our culture & language is different

@BluebelleBellaa @wagarrwal It most certainly was, you pigs trying to take it doesn't change it's cultural, historic and legal status.

@minato550651 Kashmir is Pakistans jugular vein, and a disputed territory, fighting for that is not expansionist. Unlike your ‘Akhand Bharat’ delusions which is why all your neighbours hate you, even the Hindu ones.

@BluebelleBellaa "Never been expansionist." Right. I suppose the tribal raiders in 47, Operation Gibraltar, Kargil, and a three-decade obsession with 'strategic depth' in Afghanistan were just neighbourhood outreach programs. The sheer scale of historical amnesia here is quite spectacular.

@wagarrwal If that was the root of the issue then why does Karachi have the highest Pashtun population in the world? Not even in KPK. The root of the issue is Afghans sold off KPK themselves & then refused to accept Pakistan. Every Afghan border was created by Russia & Brits not only Durand

Show me where I said it belongs to India? I said British law dictates that it belongs to India. I have been consistently saying that will of the people matters more than British law. So how is that an endorsement for India when I'm literally condemning the British law that led to Indian occupation of Kashmir? I compared it to the Pashtun issue because not allowing Pashtuns any other viable options is at the root of the current conflict with Afghanistan, and you were comparing Afghan expansionism to Pakistan in the original post.

@dxxaeroker Ghazwa-e-Hind is an Islamic prophecy not about a particular nation state & was arguably already done by the Mughals etc. India is the country with the Akhand Bharat picture in their parliament, openly dreaming about taking over multiple countries. I’m talking about today’s world.

@BluebelleBellaa Another Churan overdosed! What the fuck is Gazab e hind then? You guys are living in some alternate timeline!

@wagarrwal It’s a idiotic comparison because we haven’t had our vote still! Honestly the audacity of u to first say kashmir belongs to India & then sidetrack into a ramble about a vote u had 80 years ago is despicable. Imagine u didn’t even get that vote & were violently occupied by India.

@BluebelleBellaa Where did I say I oppose a plebiscite for Kashmir? There's nothing wrong with comparing the two since they were both cases of whether the people's will matters more or British law matters more.

@wagarrwal Honestly you are completely ignoring the whole history of the Pakistan movement. The idea, struggle and creation of Pakistan. The independence was from the Brits & Hindus! Lots of micro Muslims states against a huge India would be a disaster for Muslims so I don’t support that.

You are supporting Britain saying that Pashtuns should be forced to choose between Pakistan and India with no option for Pashtunistan, no? I didn't ignore anything, I know the locals there opposed India. But Pakistan still got involved and annexed territory which goes against Britain saying princely state leaders should be the ones that get to choose. I think what Pakistan did is justified there, but the point is that it was in violation of British law.

@wagarrwal No your make a very dumb comparison and trying to equalise the two which is disrespectful to all the people of Kashmir who have been suffering and still waiting for their vote of self determination. Also there were Muslim rulers in India who acceded to Pak but weren’t allowed.

I am rejecting British law in both cases. I said in the beginning that British law was dumb. Kashmiris should've been allowed to join Pakistan regardless of what their Hindu ruler wanted. And Pashtuns should have been given a fair plebiscite with other options besides only Pakistan and India.

@wagarrwal @Johnzuit I mean your original comment on here was that J&K belongs to India & now you’re claiming u don’t support India on Kashmir. Your points are all over the place & inconsistent. The UN backed plebiscite on Kashmir offers the choice between India & Pakistan also btw, not Independance.

I don't support India on Kashmir. I think Kashmir should have been allowed to join Pakistan and it was wrong to leave that decision up to the ruler. I was criticising Pakistan for supporting British mandates on Pashtun territories but opposing British mandates on Kashmir. I think Britain's mandates were unfair in both cases. Britain was in the wrong for forcing Pashtuns to choose between only India and Pakistan. And Britain was also wrong for saying the princely state rulers are the ultimate authority on which country their state gets to join.

@wagarrwal When did I say I support British law? I cited the UN resolution on Kashmirs plebiscite. Also you ignored the Poonch rebellion and that the people of J&K rose up against the Dogra ruler BEFORE Pakistan got involved. The people on the ground made their wishes clear at the time.

It's disputed because Pakistan hypocritically opposed British law regarding Jammu & Kashmir. You think British law is what should decide borders, correct? Why go to war over Jammu & Kashmir in the first place then? The same British law that you support for saying everyone should be forced to choose between only India and Pakistan is the same British law that says princely state rulers are the ones that get to decide which country they want to join. So Pakistan annexing territory from Jammu & Kashmir without the ruler's permission was illegal according to British law. Palestine is inside Israel. It wanting freedom is separatist, not expansionist. If Jordan or Syria wanted to take land from Israel, then that would be expansionist (even if morally justified).

@SALHACHIMI What Muslim ever said they were obliged to do so? Weird Tweet

A brotherly reminder: - No Muslim is obliged in any way to defend Bajwa and the "Hafiz" Asim Munir's decision to throw Imran Khan in jail. - No Muslim is obliged to defend any injustice. Allah said in the Quran [5: 8] "O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do." - No Muslim is obliged to perform verbal gymnastics to suggest that an unjust act by Bajwa and Munir is justified because "it's politics" and "Imran Khan made a deal with them in the first place to get to power". - No Muslim is obliged to choose corruption and oppression over chaos, or cede their God-given dignity to the boots of the military. The "Farooq" Umar ibn Al-Khattab (RA) did not demand the former and the "Sword of Allah" Khalid Ibn Al-Walid (RA) did not demand the latter. - Security of a state is not protected first and foremost by a military, but by a commitment to justice. Caliph Umar Bin AbdulAziz was sent a letter by one of his governors in Khorasan who complained that he was surrounded by unruly tribes that threatened national security. He asked the Caliph for more military spending and security forces to resist them to "fortify the state with more troops". The Caliph declined to send more troops and responded instead with "fortify it with justice". How many mighty armies of oppression fell to smaller forces of justice? Pakistan's security is not threatened first and foremost by India or its neighbours. It is threatened by corruption, injustice, and normalisation of oppression in the name of "national security". Ibn Khaldun said: [such] oppression heralds the destruction of civilisation. Those who truly care about Pakistan are not those who tell you an innocent man in jail is necessary or a natural consequence of protecting stability and "national security". Those who care will call out injustice wherever it is desperately seeking to prevent the destruction of civilisation predicted by Ibn Khaldun and every civilisational historian worth their weight. May Allah protect Pakistan from the greatest threat it faces today.

@wagarrwal Your moral compass is all over the place. One second your rejecting British law, next your enforcing it on Kashmiris. Also look up the Poonch rebellion, the local people of J&K rose up to fight the Dogra ruler, Pakistan supported us later but we rejected India & the Dogra ourself

UN resolution is a later development because the two countries weren't able to resolve their dispute after going to war. Original British law dictated that the princely ruler alone gets the decide. Based on the original British law, all of Jammu & Kashmir belongs to India. Pakistan's invasion of Jammu & Kashmir, and annexation of the western part of Jammu & Kashmir is in violation of British law.

@wagarrwal Wanting to settle internationally recognised disputed territory isn’t expansionist. By that logic Palestine wanting the occupied Palestinian territories back is expansionist? If Pakistan wanted to take over Delhi that would be expansionist, like India’s vision of Akhand Bharat.

Of course you don't have a problem with that because it benefits Pakistan. If you were fair and cared about the true will of the majority, then you would say that both Kashmiris and Pashtuns should have been given an actual fair plebiscite that includes a third option (sovereign state) in 1947 instead of only those two options. But you know that we hate India, so you want to force us to choose between India and Pakistan since you know that allowing a third option would mean Pakistan loses territory. Pakistan's claim on Kashmir is expansionist because it is trying to take land that's governed by a different country. Just because you think it's morally justified doesn't change that it's expansionist.