Pervez Hoodbhoy says Jinnah was wrong and 1947 partition was a tragedy

Whatever happened in the past is done and gone - no point obsessing about it or crying over spilt milk.

But I see nothing wrong in wishing "Pakistan, one day, grows into a country where every citizen has exactly the same right and privileges as of any other, irrespective of their religion, language, class or race".

We will never let the people that gave their lives to create this country be forgotten and thrown into the dust. This country was founded on an unlikely idea, initially. However, through perseverance Pakistan became a reality.

Bornubus said:

Not at all,mughals were just a pawn in the hands of Marathas when British took control of India.

Few regional Muslim powers were Nijam and Nawab of Bengal were also contained.Sikhs were the rulers in North west,Dogra and other pahari Raja in Hills states while Maratha overrun entire North,central and Deccan.

Rajasthan rajputs continued their domination in Rajputana.

This is what a British said they they took control from Marathas,Rajputs,Sikhs and other Hindus/Sikhs.

View attachment 293543

Click to expand...

There were many autonomous regions which were under the control of central Muslim power. Just because the immediate rulers, of some of these regions, were non Muslims it does not mean that they were independent. The whole of India was subservient to a single Muslim ruler.

This is the problem with intellectuals. They think going against the mainstream option is considered as main stream.

Bornubus said:

Not at all,mughals were just a pawn in the hands of Marathas when British took control of India.

Few regional Muslim powers were Nijam and Nawab of Bengal were also contained.Sikhs were the rulers in North west,Dogra and other pahari Raja in Hills states while Maratha overrun entire North,central and Deccan.

Rajasthan rajputs continued their domination in Rajputana.

This is what a British said they they took control from Marathas,Rajputs,Sikhs and other Hindus/Sikhs.

View attachment 293543

Click to expand...

Maratha couldn't rule Lahore, Sindh, Kashmir, and KPK & Baluchistan. Swat ruler, Nawab of Bangal. So Clearly Pakistan was decadency of Mughals and other Muslim Rulers left. On the top, Even under Maratha rule, most of the hindus/Muslims still consider Mughals to be the rulers, and were expecting a come back.

Never the less, Bar-e-Sagheer fall was also because of Maratha's deed. Since they weaken the Mughal Empire and allow Britishers to take all rulers one by one.

It was a great tragedy when pervez hood nigga boi was born -

Mav3rick said:

I am not sure what the fuss is all about, a man has posted his opinion and so let it be!

Besides, I also think that the division should not have taken place and that the British should have returned rule of the whole of India to Muslims......as they had taken powers from Muslim rules. A whole India under Muslim rule would have been the best solution.

Click to expand...

yup we have Pakistan here as example. or for that matter is there any Muslim country as an example.

B4 He was YahoodBhai, Now He also become HanoodBhai.

kasper95 said:

yup we have Pakistan here as example. or for that matter is there any Muslim country as an example.

Click to expand...

Gotta agree...they can't rule themselves and they want to rule over others !

There goes the 2 nation theory in gutter

Fracker said:

Maratha couldn't rule Lahore, Sindh, Kashmir, and KPK & Baluchistan. Swat ruler, Nawab of Bangal. So Clearly Pakistan was decadency of Mughals and other Muslim Rulers left. On the top, Even under Maratha rule, most of the hindus/Muslims still consider Mughals to be the rulers, and were expecting a come back.

Never the less, Bar-e-Sagheer fall was also because of Maratha's deed. Since they weaken the Mughal Empire and allow Britishers to take all rulers one by one.

Click to expand...

Mav3rick said:

There were many autonomous regions which were under the control of central Muslim power. Just because the immediate rulers, of some of these regions, were non Muslims it does not mean that they were independent. The whole of India was subservient to a single Muslim ruler.

Click to expand...

Marathas ruled as far as Peshawar after successfully defeating Afghans both in Punjab and in peshwar albeit for a small duration as they were operating thousands of km away from their capital Pune.

They gave away the conquered territory to Adina Beg who recognized Martha suzerainty and gave tribute,Maratha Garrisons were placed in important cities.

@Fracker The next power or an empire which succeeded Marathas in north and North west were Sikhs not Muslims or Mughals.They defeated local Muslim rulers starting from Punjab and in NWFP Afghans and ruled from their capital Lahore.

They successfully annexed Peshawar from its parent country Afghanistan otherwise Indo Afghan border would be at Wagha.Similarly Kashmir was captured from them in 1819.

The British took the possession of those territories from Sikhs not Muslims.

Still a state called India exists. Those who think Jinnah was wrong and partition was blunder, can go and give a try living over there.
Pakistan is a reality now ! wake up or else call bunia to take their land back.

Agar partition na hotey to isko bhe kisi nay beef khanay par kharka diya hota

Go home hoodboy, you are drunk.

Little does he know the economic and social condition of Muslims in Sindh,Punjab and Hazara before partition and the slave like conditions Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan