Kashmir: The Problem is Muslim Extremism
Sita Ram Goel passed away recently and the world lost a strong defender of Hindu civilization.
Mr. Goel believed that Hindu Dharma has much to offer to contemporary human civilization, just as it has enriched the world in the past in many different ways. He pleaded that in order to understand human suffering, we must do a first hand study and evaluation of totalitarian ideologies masquerading as religions, instead of indulging in clichéd explanations.
Reading his article about the situation in Kashmir, I had several "aha" moments as in "this is happening to western society right now".
This article is a brief examination of the history of "what is called the Kashmir problem but what, in fact, is the problem presented by terrorist and totalitarian ideologies operating under religious cloaks. And it must be admitted that none of these questions can be answered except with the help of history."
Although the author begins by identifying "terrorist and totalitarian ideologies" as the problem, his subsequent article makes it quite clear that it is the imperialist nature of Islam that is the problem.
--
The author calls Kashmir an integral part of the historical region of Bharatvarsha which comprises the present day states of Afganistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal and Bangladesh. This region, an ancient cradle of Hindu spirituality, resisted Muslim invasion for a number of centuries:

"Again, it goes to the credit of Kashmir that its kings supported the Turki and Hindu Shahiyas of Kabul and Zabul in repelling one invasion after another till the north-western gateway stood closed to Islamic inroads effectively and the Islamic imperialists at Damascus and Kufa were forced to seek another avenue of advance through Makran and Baluchistan.
Finally Kashmir not only threw back the Islamic army which advanced towards its borders from Sindh and Multan under Mohammed Bin Qasim (712-715 CE) but also forged an alliance with China which was facing the same menace in Central Asia. At the same time it fought tooth and nail with the Tibetans who were at that time in alliance with Islamic imperialism."

While fighting direct invasion, Hindu rulers allowed some Sufi missionary activity and continued to hire Turk mercenaries even after the Turks became Islamicized. When a coup staged by an Islamicized army occurred, the populace was not resistant:

"Perhaps the odds were too overwhelming, or perhaps a psyche of surrender had been crystallizing over a period of time. The latter seems to be the case if we consult the record of Kashmiri Hindus subsequent to that period.
What is the record? Starting with Jonaraja (15th century CE), the author of the second Rajatarangni, and coming down to Jawahar Lal Nehru (20th century CE) it is an endless saga of sycophancy and kowtowing on the part of Kashmiri Hindus before the aggressors."

Contained in this summary are already two "aha moments":
Hmmm, Muslims in the army
Hmmm a populace made docile by Muslim abuse (i.e. aggression combined with control/coercion over what you can think and say).
One more:

"Small wonder that the hoodlums strut around not only in the valley but in the capital city of Delhi with airs of injured innocence."

Substitute Dearborn for Delhi and it still rings true. Hmmm.
This is what dhimmitude looks like when it plays itself out in history:

"The record shows a progressive degeneration of the Hindu psyche vis-a-vis Muslim sultans. Jonaraja had the decency at least to detail the brutalities committed by the Islamic sultans. For Jawahar Lal Nehru that dark chapter in the history of Kashmir does not exist at all."

And this is the kind of political lack of confidence that a history of dhimmitude creates:

"Having watched the scene all these years, I feel that the secularist forces in India have never felt sure that Kashmir is an integral part of India like the rest of our states. It is only when someone else says that Kashmir does not belong to India that they make some half-hearted noises for fooling the people of India. This is the meaning of Article 370 and of propping up one Muslim leader after another in the valley in the fond hope that world events will some day solve the problem one way or the other."

Afterword:

The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying from within.

~ W. Durant, "Story of Civilization"
In Kashmir, the Muslim conquest is not complete. Hindus are fighting it tooth and nail. America and France can easily be in the same position in the future. So can anyone; it is just a matter of who is next in Islam's unrelenting drive to take over the world for Allah.