[Cronos]

The problem with India is that if you disagree with the govt, you get labeled as a terrorist group. Freedom of association is not readily available in India.

The Indian govt allows all the freedom of speech within limits (not inciting violence), like ours. If they did not, how can you explain the plethora of political parties with different views? If freedom of association was NOT allowed, then you'd have a one party state like in the slammie or commie world. THe last I heard they've got so many parties, they have had coalition governments for over a decade.

[FirstPrinciple]

I agree that freedom fighters don't use violence against women and children. The Indian army, however, thinks differently. Why can't we have democracy in Kashmir? The kashmiris have been denied to choose their destiny since 1947, when the UN actually asked India to hold a plebiscite. That hasn't happened yet. I am very intrigued, but not surprised, that if Punjab became independent then you say the Indian govt should kick out all Sikhs from other parts of India. Why? Sikhs and non-Sikhs should all be able to live in free Punjab, like they have for centuries. There are plenty of Punjabis who wanted a peaceful separation from India, but the Indian govt never allowed that, and to top it all of laid a seige on the holiest Sikh shrine which ticked off average Sikhs. Is Pakistan behind it? Possibly. But Pakistan doesn't create these problems. These are problems created by India, which Pakistan takes advantage of. BTW, Kashmir and Punjab are not the only two states who want to have nothing to do with India. Some north-eastern and southern states want separation as well.