Not done anymore in Australia . Our aboriginals would hit the roof over this . All bones are even wanted back by our tribes . <| sep |> Wait you bought everything but didn ' t play it ? <| sep |> IX at least still has the three members of Tantalus to add , and maybe Lani too . But to be fair , I think we ' re past the point where new events are dictated by characters we ' re still missing . Now it ' s just who needs to be powercreeped . <| sep |> Nice to see someone with a varied collection ! It ' s pretty close to mine ! <| sep |> It ' s a journey discovering the soundtrack by itself AFTER playing the game , huge spoilers ! Anyone who finished thegame and is curious about the soundtrack should read this analysispart 1 part 2 <| sep |> This is why it is pointless to get into arguments with people who don ' t know or have studied the history of the dispute . You have been repeating the same thing over and over without grasping my point at all . Pakistan signing the agreement under forced terms is not the same as Pakistan signing the agreement under forced terms that will affect its future national interests that are not even foreseen yet . You keep failing to understand the point that what is written in the agreement relates to every future potential conflict that could prevent arbitration from an international body . That is why Pakistan does not abide by the agreement . Imagine the Kashmir issue get resolved tomorrow . but even then Pakistan will not abide by the Simla agreement . You seem to not understand this point . The agreement in itself is inherently puts Pakistan in a position where it becomes difficult to protect its interests at any point in the future on any point of conflict . This is why Pakistan does not abide by this agreement . not solely because of the Kashmir issue . That in and of itself makes such an agreement very difficult baseless because on country will never abide by it . This isn ' t about having settler ' s remorse . you don ' t seem to grasp how geopolitics works . Pakistan signing the agreement in no way shape or form makes the agreement enforceable on it . If Pakistan chooses to it can at any point choose to not abide by it which it has done for the past 40 years . A lot of countries back out of agreements that they feel are one sided and do not benefit them in any way . In 1950 s . there were terrorists and islamic militants in Kashmir ? Okay you really don ' t know your history now . The mandate was Pakistan keeps 3 , 500 troops rest leave and India keeps more and rest leave . Entire area is demilitarised . That was the first mandate given to both countries over 60 years ago . India categorically refused it . My source is the speech given by the Indian delegation at the UN when they handed in their complaint . what the fuck ? You really must be joking here . UN has not dropped the Kashmir issue resolution 47 is still active , stop making up stuff . Pakistan can renounce it because it is an agreement between 2 countries with no one backing it . India cannot back out of the IWT because the World fucking Bank is the guarantor of the agreement . There is a huge difference , Modi has tried to scrap it or find loopholes within is and he hasn ' t been able to or won ' t be able to due to the immense international pressure he will draw . There is a difference between agreement only between 2 countries and when some institution is backing it . Huge difference .