What's new

1971 War Facts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by miroslav@Oct 31 2005, 11:15 PM
....You are not getting. It's not a matter of one or two.

It was estimated 90,000 soldiers.
Correct attitude! Trained soldiers are really precious for any army. Better to surrender than lose thousands of them.

However your numbers are incorrect. We had 40,000 troops in East Pakistan. Out of 86,000 POWs, the rest were Pakistani government officials.

Hind sight is always 20/20. Blaming Pak Generals is pretty idiotic. They did what was supposed to be done according to the plan. Separatists in most situations are not treated fairly. Few examples of peaceful separation in recent history are the ones from Czechoslovakia or the Timur area of Indonesia. On the other hand, there are plenty of examples where separatists all over the world are crushed with full force of the state. Here are some examples:

1. Bharat (Kashmir, Punjab, Naga)
2. USA (civil war of 1860)
3. Kurds in Iran, Iraq, and Turkey.
4. Basc separatists in Spain

etc.
 
Originally posted by antiobl@Nov 18 2005, 06:34 PM
Correct attitude! Trained soldiers are really precious for any army. Better to surrender than lose thousands of them.

However your numbers are incorrect. We had 40,000 troops in East Pakistan. Out of 86,000 POWs, the rest were Pakistani government officials.

Hind sight is always 20/20. Blaming Pak Generals is pretty idiotic.
[post=3097]Quoted post[/post]​
40,000 is a big amount of soliders and they can fought for many days if there leaders want and you know that military remount and emo depot have always good stock of food and emunation to face all sort of situations so incase even if they starts the war it was possible to survive for a long period. one thing more in military, personals streangth dont metter much some time Strategy counts a lot eaxmples are there. just like US has not a very big army like China or india but because they are much more professional, they are capable to defeat any other military around the globe. most of u know the facts of 71 so i think they surender because they were not that much mentaly strong because their moral was not high. and hows about their Charactor????
 
Originally posted by Bravo@Nov 19 2005, 10:50 AM
....... just like US has not a very big army like China or india but because they are much more professional, they are capable to defeat any other military around the globe. most of u know the facts of 71 so i think they surender because they were not that much mentaly strong because their moral was not high. and hows about their Charactor????

Bad apples do exist in every army or group and Pakistan army is no exception. However 1971 defeat cannot be attributed simply to the character of Pakistani army.

Here is a question for you. Most of the vociferous attacks on Pakistan army's 1971 character come from Bharatis and Awami League extremists. However both of them fail to recognize the fact that they had 40,000 POWs from Pak army including generals and officers. Had these generals committed any crime, why there was NO trial for the war crimes?
 
The War of Liberation began on 26 March 1971 and ended with the liberation of Bangladesh on 16 December 1971. The armed struggle was the culmination of a series of events, situations and issues contributing to the progressively deteriorating relations between East and West Pakistan. The questions of land reforms, state language, inter-wing economic and administrative disparities, provincial autonomy, the defense of East Pakistan and many other consequential questions had been straining the relations between the two wings of Pakistan ever since independence of the country from Britain in 1947.

It is estimated that more than three million innocent Bangladeshi (Bengali) civillians were killed by the Pakistani forces. The genocide committed by the Pakistani forces is one of the worst holocausts in world history.

Download the facts:
http://bdmilitary.com/main/reports/analysi...nd_Pakistan.pdf

1971 War Photo Gallery:
http://www.bdmilitary.com/gallery/v/hist/1971/
 
Originally posted by bdmilitary@Nov 23 2005, 05:49 PM
......It is estimated that more than three million innocent Bangladeshi (Bengali) civillians were killed by the Pakistani forces. The genocide committed by the Pakistani forces is one of the worst holocausts in world history.......
Almost all the Pakistani army generals and officers were POWs for many years. Why were they not tried in the court of Bharat or by Awami League?
 
Originally posted by antiobl@Nov 24 2005, 10:26 AM
Almost all the Pakistani army generals and officers were POWs for many years. Why were they not tried in the court of Bharat or by Awami League?
[post=3561]Quoted post[/post]​

That is also my question too. The failure to prosecute real war criminals by Shiekh Mujib and India angers many Bangladeshis. But I presented you all with the facts about why the two nation theory was a failure as I believe it should have been a three nation theory as West Pakistanis did not even consider Bengal as any equal partner even though we all very well know that when it came to eating East Pakistani funds and income they were the experts.

The society of Pakistan was controlled fully by Punjabis. Bengalis to this day resent the activities of the Punjabis.

Ideologically Bengalis and Punjabis are not matching partners because of the fact that we Bengalis always wanted democracy and resented military rule or dominance by any particular groups.

East Pakistan had a population of 70 million while the West had 60 million.The development funds mainly went to the West and also if you look at the figures in that PDF file it clearly shows that East Pakistan exported more than all of West Pakistan combined.

This was wholly unfair and unacceptable. Also high ranking government jobs went to West Pakistanis though it is a well known fact that East Pakistan always had a larger intellectual and educated base than the Western part of the country.

In the military their was a huge inequality and the military was dominated by Punjabis even though most of the population of Pakistan was Bengali.

Bengali troops proved themselves successful in all past wars in infantry, armour, pioneers, engineers and other support corps.

In the air force we produced some of the finest pilots to ever serve in the PAF. PAF's first genuine Ace pilot was of Bengali origin, our technicians were also well experienced (that is why it was so easy to form the BAF after independence because of non shortage of experienced and well trained pilots and crew).

In the Navy we were also experts. No one knows the seas like us. Technological superiority and seamanship was proven.

But what is most unfair is that we were the majority yet we were suppressed from speaking our own native language and abandon it for a relatively new and under developed language such as Urdu.

Bengali culture is perhaps the most rich when it comes to poetry, songs, formal talks. In nowhere in the world can you find an example where the majority of the country's population was supressed and exploited by the monority. To me it is unheard of.

If Bangladesh became a seperate entity in 1947 then I can gurantee you that it would have been the most developed country in the subcontinent but 1971 set us back a few years though if you visit Bangladesh you will see that the country is thriving and it is same if ot better than it's neighbours to live in.

My sincere advice to Pakistan and Pakistanis is that you should learn from your past experiences and never let another 1971 occur. All ethnic groups and religions should be treated with equal love and respect. Follow this formula and perhaps you can really have a great nation because to build a great nation you must have a great mind and clear thoughts.

Bangladeshis have applied this theory and I can gurantee you that Muslims, Hindus, Chrsitians, Buddhists are living side by side as we believe that their is "No majority, no minority" we are all Bangladeshis.

I wish Pakistan success and if it needs help with social development the Bangladeshis will always be their to assist.
 
Originally posted by Hawk@Nov 17 2005, 10:56 PM
What ever the Pakistani soldiers did to bangladeshi women and men, are kufr and they are Kafirs. Because who ever kills a muslim becomes kafir. A hadith says he is muslim from whose mouth and hand other muslims are safe but those Pakistanis did the dirty works and they're kufrs.
[post=3052]Quoted post[/post]​
Soorat Noor and this is the QURAN not the hadith! sais those whome think they are doing right but know not will e given what they have earned in sin as naiki but for those who know but still have a greater hand (ie convincing others its right), awaits a terrible doom...

the attrocitys where slightly exagurated...it all happened with the Floods after which insurgency started and the drunken yahya khan gave the orders to supress the insurgents...

every man in politics is driven by greed...it is but only natural for him..if i paied nawas sharif 1 billion dollers to let me marry his doughter for 1 week and restore him to power..hell marry me with all his daughters and if he could through in his wife and mother aswell...

that is the extent of greed!
 
Originally posted by Yahya@Nov 24 2005, 07:06 PM
every man in politics is driven by greed...it is but only natural for him..if i paied nawas sharif 1 billion dollers to let me marry his doughter for 1 week and restore him to power..hell marry me with all his daughters and if he could through in his wife and mother aswell...

that is the extent of greed!
[post=3592]Quoted post[/post]​

I agree with you.

Miro
 
I dont agree that Pakistan and Bangladesh are better off separate. the reason is that when it was one nation, trade was much greater. It was like a free trade agreement and investment and capital could also travel freely.

If Pakistan and Bangladesh today have a free trade agreement with free flow of capital and labour i would say that a political union would have no extra benefits. Unfortunately there is no free trade agreement, no free flow of capital and certainly no free movement of labour.

When it was a single nation, the huge common market gave large economies of scale to businesses who could have used to propell themselves into exporting worldwide.

Separation occured because of the pig-headedness of the Pakistani leadership. They considered greater autonomy and local control a dirty word and to be ignored. The result was a brutal civil war. If Greater Autonomy was the price to be paid for firstly an economic and secondly a political union it was a price worth paying a thousand times over.

Even today all is not lost, aggressive talks on free trade, free movement of capital and one day hopefully free movement of labour should be set up with Bangladeshi authorities. But i have little hope for such talks when people want a confederate south east asian muslim confederacy but want to rule it ruthlessly from Karachi. The above talks will only succeed when all groups have local autonomy and society has tolerance for differnecs in culture, language and traditions.

Look at Aceh in Indonesia. They have hopefully solved it not with a gun, but with large autonomy for Aceh within Indonesia.
 
Originally posted by sigatoka@Nov 27 2005, 09:50 AM
I dont agree that Pakistan and Bangladesh are better off separate. the reason is that when it was one nation, trade was much greater. It was like a free trade agreement and investment and capital could also travel freely.

If Pakistan and Bangladesh today have a free trade agreement with free flow of capital and labour i would say that a political union would have no extra benefits. Unfortunately there is no free trade agreement, no free flow of capital and certainly no free movement of labour.

When it was a single nation, the huge common market gave large economies of scale to businesses who could have used to propell themselves into exporting worldwide.

Separation occured because of the pig-headedness of the Pakistani leadership. They considered greater autonomy and local control a dirty word and to be ignored. The result was a brutal civil war. If Greater Autonomy was the price to be paid for firstly an economic and secondly a political union it was a price worth paying a thousand times over.

Even today all is not lost, aggressive talks on free trade, free movement of capital and one day hopefully free movement of labour should be set up with Bangladeshi authorities. But i have little hope for such talks when people want a confederate south east asian muslim confederacy but want to rule it ruthlessly from Karachi. The above talks will only succeed when all groups have local autonomy and society has tolerance for differnecs in culture, language and traditions.

Look at Aceh in Indonesia. They have hopefully solved it not with a gun, but with large autonomy for Aceh within Indonesia.
[post=3895]Quoted post[/post]​



I totally agree wth you :BVICTORY: :BVICTORY: :BVICTORY: :clapping: :clapping: :thumbsup:
 
Originally posted by bdmilitary+Nov 24 2005, 07:21 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(bdmilitary &#064; Nov 24 2005, 07:21 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>......I wish Pakistan success and if it needs help with social development the Bangladeshis will always be their to assist.
.......[/b]

Dear BDM,

Thank you. Likewise.

<!--QuoteBegin-bdmilitary
@Nov 24 2005, 07:21 AM
That is also my question too. The failure to prosecute real war criminals by Shiekh Mujib and India angers many Bangladeshis. But I presented you all with the facts............[/quote]
How come your question hasn&#39;t been answered in 35 years? I mean who stopped "many Bangladeshis" to setup war-crime office and bring charges against Pak generals?

Let me give you a slightly less emotional reason for not bringing up war crime tribunals. That is "most of the deaths and rapes occurred in Bharati camps where East Pakistanis were held captive during 9 months of civil war".

Any effort to bring up charges against Pak army would have brought in Sh. Mujib, EPR (East Pakistan Rifles), Mukti Bahini, and Manekshaw (the general in-charge of Bharati invasion).

However Bharat and Sh. Mujib continued paying lip service to "atrocities" for keeping the anti-Pak hatred alive.

I am glad that the hatred is not there any more. It is clear from your brotherly offer of help to Pakistani people.

Best regards

May peace be upon you.

p.s. I am an ardent student of Bengal history. Time permitting, I plan to touch the two nation theory, and economic issues in a separate thread.
 
Originally posted by sigatoka@Nov 28 2005, 12:50 AM
I dont agree that Pakistan and Bangladesh are better off separate. the reason is that when it was one nation, trade was much greater. It was like a free trade agreement and investment and capital could also travel freely.

If Pakistan and Bangladesh today have a free trade agreement with free flow of capital and labour i would say that a political union would have no extra benefits. Unfortunately there is no free trade agreement, no free flow of capital and certainly no free movement of labour.

When it was a single nation, the huge common market gave large economies of scale to businesses who could have used to propell themselves into exporting worldwide.

Separation occured because of the pig-headedness of the Pakistani leadership. They considered greater autonomy and local control a dirty word and to be ignored. The result was a brutal civil war. If Greater Autonomy was the price to be paid for firstly an economic and secondly a political union it was a price worth paying a thousand times over.

Even today all is not lost, aggressive talks on free trade, free movement of capital and one day hopefully free movement of labour should be set up with Bangladeshi authorities. But i have little hope for such talks when people want a confederate south east asian muslim confederacy but want to rule it ruthlessly from Karachi. The above talks will only succeed when all groups have local autonomy and society has tolerance for differnecs in culture, language and traditions.

Look at Aceh in Indonesia. They have hopefully solved it not with a gun, but with large autonomy for Aceh within Indonesia.
[post=3895]Quoted post[/post]​


We will probably never know how it would have been with united Pakistan though from what was happening the picture did not look good as greed, racism, and false sense of pride took over and Islamic values were cast aside by the Politicians and the elite.

They control Pakistan, whatever they say, the people of Pakistan will follow and believe so they deliberatly misled the normal people and created an uneasy situations.

We cannot blame India or Britain for everything because if we were united then Indian politicians could not have succeeded but the fact is the Pakistani politicians failed.

Sheikh Mujib actually did not want an independent state at first, he wanted equality and autonomy and the right of Bengalis to speak their own language (which is spoken more widely) in East Pakistan.

We could have had English as the medium like in India and Bengali as official language of East Pakistan, Urdu as opfficial language of West Pakistan.
 
Originally posted by bdmilitary@Dec 3 2005, 07:35 PM
......Sheikh Mujib actually did not want an independent state at first, he wanted equality and autonomy and the right of Bengalis to speak their own language (which is spoken more widely) in East Pakistan.
........
Dear BDM, There is no denying that Sh. Mujeeb was not the most favorite of Pakistani leadership and the "misled" masses. He was imprisoned, threatened, cajoled, or begged from, to change his false propaganda against Pakistani masses. He didn&#39;t listen and that was fine with Pakistani masses.

However Pakistanis didn&#39;t butcher him and his whole family bar one. Don&#39;t you think Bangladeshis proved by their actions the low value of Mujeeb and his ideals?

As a I said the other day, Pakistanis did make mistakes with Mujeeb and we apologize for our actions. Hind sight is always 20/20. We have proven with our actions that we love people from BD. We accepted our mistakes and moved on. 30 years have gone by since the fateful year of 1971. So please let go of spreading misinformation as if Sh. Mujeeb is still alive.


Best regards

Peace on Earth.

p.s. Let’s quit spreading the same falsehood. Bangali was one of the languages of Radio Pakistan, besides Urdu and English. Bengali was used in the then East Pakistan at the time of civil war. You are trying to bring out the old ghosts of 1948 that were long buried by 1960s.
 
Antibiol Sheikh Mujib won the national elections with an overwhelming majority yet he was not allowed to become the President of Pakistan.

He at first wanted only autonomy but later he was forced to declare independence seeing that to stay with Pakistan will only mean trouble for Bengalis as our system of political thinking is different to that of West Pakistan. We believe in democracy and are commited to it whereas West Pakistan has never had an independently and democratically elected head of state complete a full term of office. Their is a difference their.

Sheikh Mujib was a good war time leader though after the war his family members and hang arounds abused his power and authority to control Bangladesh and the people and Army did not like it as we do not want to relive the undemocratic political situation. He created a single party system and created his own paramilitary force who would not salute anyone in the army under the rank of major.

With the Army being full of self pride and awareness of the problems they decided to take action against Sheikh Mujib and his family.

But I do commend his leadership during war time. He was just not a good peacetime PM.
 
Originally posted by ARKhan@Dec 4 2005, 07:44 AM
....Sheikh Mujib won the national elections with an overwhelming majority yet he was not allowed to become the President of Pakistan.

He at first wanted only autonomy but later he was forced to declare independence .......
Dear Mr. Khan,

Please look at your post. You can&#39;t have it both ways. In one sentence you claim Mujib&#39;s majority, and the second sentence you say he was for autonomy and the third sentence you say he was for independence. These are the contradictions within your post. Please read them again and hopefully you would see them too.

Coming back to Sh. Mujib.

1. His overwhelming majority was only in one province out of 5. Poor guy didn&#39;t win much of anything in the rest of the 4 provinces. This hardly made him a national leader.

2. You accept that he was a good war-time leader and not a good peace-time leader. Don’t you think that rest of the Pakistan never wanted a war and they just needed a peace-time leader?

3. Awami League didn&#39;t put up consensus based candidates in Punjab, Frontier, Sindh, and Balochistan. Why?


Best regards
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom