# Disproving some genocide claims



## roadrunner

Claims of Hindu genocide in East Pakistan 

Some Indian websites (e.g. http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_histor...du_bangla.html or http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.co.../genocide.html and Bhorat)) think they prove that a Hindu genocide of 2.5 million Hindus occurred during 1971 in Bangladesh. 

They all over simplify their calculations by not taking into account fertility and migrational differences between the Hindus and rest of the population at the time (other differences would probably affect the figures as well, such as floods and famines etc, but will be ignored for the time being). 

The total population of Bangladesh in 1974 = 71.4 million 
The total population of East Pakistan in 1961 = 51 million 

Factor by which the population increased between 1961-1974 = 1.4 

This factor is used to calculate the expected Hindu population of Bangladesh in 1974 from most websites claiming a Hindu genocide occurred 
But this factor assumes similar fertilities of the Hindu and Muslim (majority) populations. This is not true as the following articles clearly show. 




> The Association for Land Reform and Development (ALRD), an NGO based in Dhaka states that "the implementation of Enemy Property Act \ Vested Property Act has accelerated the process of mass out-migration of Hindu population from mid 1960s onward. The estimated size of such out-migration (missing Hindu population) during 1964-1991 was 5.3 million, or 538 persons each day since 1964, with as high as 703 persons per day during 1964-1971...... during the same period, the fertility rate among the Hindu population was 13 per cent less than the fertility rates among the Muslim population (estimate based on recent contraceptive use rates). Due to the lack of any reliable fertility estimates, the rate for the Muslims was estimated using an indirect method (Mauldin measure), based on contraceptive prevalence rates
> 
> The Hindu Minority in Bangladesh: Legally Identified Enemies



Another article from the Journal of Biosocial Science confirms that the fertility rates of Hindus and Muslims in 1970s Bangladesh was not the same 



> Using a unique set of birth registration data from the Demographic Surveillance System of the International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh, for the period 1974-77, The age-specific fertility rates by religion show that Muslims had higher fertility at all ages in 1974 and 1977 and at older ages in 1975 and 1976. Overall, however, fertility of Hindus is consistently lower than that of Muslims, but the relative differences are under 10%.
> 
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...858&query_hl=2



So Hindu fertility rates were most likely between about 10 and 13% less than Muslim fertility rates between 1961-1974 (by extrapolating the information to the previous decade). 

So take the higher of the Hindu fertility rates quoted (10%, Journal of Biosocial Science), and adjust the factor of 1.4 to accommodate for the lower Hindu fertility rate. 

0.9 X 1.4 = 1.26 

Hindu population in 1961 in East Pakistan (modern day Bangladesh) = 9.4 million 
Expected Hindu population in 1974 = 
1.26 X 9.4 million = 11.8 million 
Actual Hindu population in Bangladesh in 1974 = 9.6 million 

Unaccounted for Hindus = 11.8 million - 9.6 million = 2.2 million. 

This figure does not include migration of Hindus out of Bangladesh during this period (very few Hindus immigrated into bangladesh during the same time and can be considered negligible) 

Accounting for migration 
The first article quoted above states that The estimated size of such out-migration (missing Hindu population) during 1964-1991 was 5.3 million, or 538 persons each day since 1964, with as high as 703 persons per day during 1964-1971 

Between the 8 years of 1964-1971, around 703 Hindu emigrations per day from Bangladesh took place 
Total Hindu emigrations between 1964-1971 = 703 X 365 X 8 = 2.1 million. This leaves only 0.1 million Hindus unaccounted for (2.2 million - 2.1 million) 

Between 1972-1974, there were perhaps 480,000 more Hindu emigrations ([5.3 million - 2.1 million] / 20 = 0.16 million emigrants per year. (Figure of 20 is years from 1972-1991). This figure is based on the article above, stating that "The estimated size of such out-migration (missing Hindu population) during 1964-1991 was 5.3 million, or 538 persons each day since 1964". 

This would completely account for any remaining Hindus expected to be in the population by 1974. 

I do realize that some Hindus on this board will be disappointed there is no proof of a Hindu genocide in that war, but let me assure you, killing is bad!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mujahideen

I BELIEVE THAT THEIR WAS GENOCIDE COMMITED IN BANGLADESH, BUT SOMETIMES IT IS OVER EXAGERATTED. NOW I REALLY DONT KNOW HOW MANY HINDU BENGALIS WERE KILLED, BUT ACCORDING TO SOME ESTIMATES THIER WERE 3 MILLION BENGALIS KILLED IN TOTAL. NOW ACCORDING TO BENGALI NEWSPAPERS THEY SAY MORE WERE KILLED AND IF YOU ASK A PAKISTANI NEWSPAPER THEY WILL SAY LESS PEOPLE WERE KILLED. EVERY PERSON HAS THEIR OWN BIAS, SO WE HAVE TO BE CARFUL WHOM WE ASK.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Neo

Dude, whats with the Caps in all your posts?


----------



## mujahideen

Neo said:


> Dude, whats with the Caps in all your posts?



MAN I ALWAY WRITE WITH CAPS. DONT WORRY ITS NOT SMYBOLIC FOR ANYTHING. ANYWAY FOCUS ON THE MAIN SUBJECT NOT MY WRITING.


----------



## Neo

Well we don't allow it here, please turn it off if you want to continue posting.
Thanks!


----------



## mujahideen

Neo said:


> Well we don't allow it here, please turn it off if you want to continue posting.
> Thanks!



My bad i didn't know that.


----------



## Neo

Thank you and welcome to the forum!

Post a little intro in members intro section so we can give you a proper welcome.

Neo


----------



## roadrunner

mujahideen said:


> I BELIEVE THAT THEIR WAS GENOCIDE COMMITED IN BANGLADESH, BUT SOMETIMES IT IS OVER EXAGERATTED. NOW I REALLY DONT KNOW HOW MANY HINDU BENGALIS WERE KILLED, BUT ACCORDING TO SOME ESTIMATES THIER WERE 3 MILLION BENGALIS KILLED IN TOTAL. NOW ACCORDING TO BENGALI NEWSPAPERS THEY SAY MORE WERE KILLED AND IF YOU ASK A PAKISTANI NEWSPAPER THEY WILL SAY LESS PEOPLE WERE KILLED. EVERY PERSON HAS THEIR OWN BIAS, SO WE HAVE TO BE CARFUL WHOM WE ASK.



It's been discussed in another thread. The 3 million is a mathematical impossibility. And even the Bangaldeshi Ambassador and people from Dhaka University dont agree with it. Discuss that in another thread though. This is for Hindu Bengalis. There was no genocide..Just manipulation of the data by some Hindutva sites.


----------



## mujahideen

roadrunner said:


> There was no genocide..Just manipulation of the data by some Hindutva sites.



Well about the genocide part, a discussion from both sides can be made. but it is true that some Hindu sites have exagerrated the whole thing, thier only purpose is to defame Pakistan, nd we as Pakistanis mustn't allow that to happen.


----------



## roadrunner

mujahideen said:


> Well about the genocide part, a discussion from both sides can be made.



Accusations need to be proven. And currently noone has provided any proof of a genocide. There is a thread on this. You can see the arguments there. Not one single bit of proof exists that points to a genocide taking place. 



> but it is true that some Hindu sites have exagerrated the whole thing, thier only purpose is to defame Pakistan, nd we as Pakistanis mustn't allow that to happen.



Give all your evidence for a genocide in the Bangladesh war thread. It's somewhere around. Noone presented any evidence, aside from lots of newspaper clippings, which hardly amount to any proof.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

The thread you are referring to starts from here I believe:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/1870-creation-bangladesh-7.html#post87754


----------



## salman nedian

To understand this first of all we need to go back to 1950s when language Movement started the Hindu professors of Dhaka university act as a catalyst in that movement also remember the concept of separate economies for both parts of Country(one of Sheikh Mujibs six points)was also given by the Hindu professors of Dhaka University. Actually the efforts to split the Eastern part were started by India way back in 1950s and at that time we were building our new country so our media was not powerful at that time and both the parts of country were separated from each other by 1000 miles the Hindus of East Pakistan participated actively in Indias game and due to lack of communication we were trapped. a little genocide may be the result of realization that Hindus were actively participating in the Indian efforts of disintegrating Pakistan other wise I dont believe that there were mass killings of Hindus in East Pakistan.


----------



## azmax007

I'm a Bangladeshi and I'm also a history major and I think the 3 million people genocide mark is a ridiculous lie. It's true that the Pakistani army committed atrocities of murder and rape but the number is soooo inaccurate. 

The Pakistani army at that time did not have that much advanced weapons or numbers to commit genocide at that level. Adolph Hitler couldn't even kill 3 million Jews in 9 months in the 1940s. 

I think it's ridiculous to accept this false historical fact. I just don't believe the Pakistani soldiers actually killed that many Bengalis.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## UnitedPak

RoadRunner summed it up pretty nicely: http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-general-history/8639-disproving-some-genocide-claims.html

The 3 million figure is an insane estimation by Hindus. It doesnt even sound realistic whatsoever.


----------



## hoodhood1

Yes! It was all Indian Propaganda to gain sympathy for Bangladesh in the world and dominate them. But now the people of Bangladesh are finding for themselves the True Facts and have started to hate the Indians for the hovac they created pretending to be Pakistani Army.


----------



## Tiki Tam Tam

UnitedPak

Absolutely it is insane a figure.

The world believing this figure beyond the Hindu thingamabob is actually insane and you are right.

hoodhood1

You are right.

And yet Bangladesh is doing rather well!

With no thanks to Pakistan, India or the world!

And unfortunately, they think independence is fine and that there is no requirement ot rejoin and get back to the dreams that was woven earlier in 1947.

Funny chaps, these Bangladeshis, what?

They don't know what is good for them, right?


----------



## mujahideen

Well the number could be disputed but I would never call what happened in East Pakistan Genocide. It is true many were killed in East Pakistan by the Army but you can't call it genocide. Genocide is when you are trying to eliminate a certain race or a certain group of people which wasn't the case in East Pakistan.


----------



## Tiki Tam Tam

azmax007 said:


> I'm a Bangladeshi and I'm also a history major and I think the 3 million people genocide mark is a ridiculous lie. It's true that the Pakistani army committed atrocities of murder and rape but the number is soooo inaccurate.
> 
> The Pakistani army at that time did not have that much advanced weapons or numbers to commit genocide at that level. Adolph Hitler couldn't even kill 3 million Jews in 9 months in the 1940s.
> 
> I think it's ridiculous to accept this false historical fact. I just don't believe the Pakistani soldiers actually killed that many Bengalis.



Then I am sure you will agree that they did not kill any Bengali either!

It is all a figment of imagination, right?

A Bengaldeshi propaganda, right?


----------



## Tiki Tam Tam

mujahideen said:


> Well the number could be disputed but I would never call what happened in East Pakistan Genocide. It is true many were killed in East Pakistan by the Army but you can't call it genocide. Genocide is when you are trying to eliminate a certain race or a certain group of people which wasn't the case in East Pakistan.



Of course you are right.

But one wonders what it was when so many were eliminated.

Maybe the ravage of insurrection, right?


----------



## azmax007

Salim said:


> UnitedPak
> 
> Absolutely it is insane a figure.
> 
> The world believing this figure beyond the Hindu thingamabob is actually insane and you are right.
> 
> hoodhood1
> 
> You are right.
> 
> And yet Bangladesh is doing rather well!
> 
> With no thanks to Pakistan, India or the world!
> 
> And unfortunately, they think independence is fine and that there is no requirement ot rejoin and get back to the dreams that was woven earlier in 1947.
> 
> Funny chaps, these Bangladeshis, what?
> 
> They don't know what is good for them, right?



What are you talking about, the world doesn't believe it, they actually put a question mark beside 3 million mark, the number is lower that that. Yes Pakistan did not benefit Bangladesh, however India will soon damage Bangladesh after the river linking project is completed. 

and NO, Bangladeshis will never reunite with Pakistan because the memories of genocide is still fresh. Instead Bangladeshis have a more friendly attitude toward Pakistanis of being allies, with warm Islamic brotherhood, something that the Pakistani government forgot at that time. India does not want peace between Bangla/Pak and I beleive the 3 million number is Indian propaganda of that time.


----------



## Tiki Tam Tam

azmax007 said:


> What are you talking about, the world doesn't believe it, they actually put a question mark beside 3 million mark, the number is lower that that. Yes Pakistan did not benefit Bangladesh, however India will soon damage Bangladesh after the river linking project is completed.
> 
> and NO, Bangladeshis will never reunite with Pakistan because the memories of genocide is still fresh. Instead Bangladeshis have a more friendly attitude toward Pakistanis of being allies, with warm Islamic brotherhood, something that the Pakistani government forgot at that time. India does not want peace between Bangla/Pak and I beleive the 3 million number is Indian propaganda of that time.



The river linking project has a huge opposition in India itself. Therefore, it is a moot point.

It was visualised when I was in school and it still has not been done.

This may interest you:



> *Bangla FDI bar off*
> 
> NISHIT DHOLABHAI
> 
> New Delhi, Jan. 3: India has lifted the ban on foreign direct investment (FDI) from Bangladesh.
> 
> A 1999 law had barred FDI from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. But Sri Lanka was exempt in 2000, and with Bangladesh joining the club, Pakistan is the lone country on the hot list.
> 
> The Indian gesture, pending for some time but notified without fanfare in November, comes at a time a $3-billion-dollar investment proposal by the Tatas is pending with the Bangladesh government. Delhi&#8217;s sweetener may also help speed up resumption of hilsa imports from Bangladesh.
> 
> The removal of the FDI restriction is expected to have a salutary impact on bilateral relations that have been steadily improving since an army-backed government took over in Bangladesh.
> 
> The Telegraph - Archives



And this is not an Indian site and they undertake their own research:

Gendercide Watch: Genocide in Bangladesh, 1971


----------



## Vinod2070

Has this guy been checked for being authentic about being from Bangladesh? Checking his IP will be a good start.

The 3 million claim is not Indian claim but was made by Mujib IIRC. He is the father of the Bangla nation, no?

Do Bangladeshis trust him? What is the figuure in Bangladeshi textbooks/history?


----------



## Venkat

3 million is exaggerated. But what is the official figure given by Pakistan? 3000? 30,000? 300,000? What number is acceptable?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## dabong1

salman nedian said:


> To understand this first of all we need to go back to 1950&#8217;s when &#8220;language Movement&#8221; started the Hindu professors of Dhaka university act as a catalyst in that movement also remember the concept of separate economies for both parts of Country(one of Sheikh Mujib&#8217;s six points)was also given by the Hindu professors of Dhaka University. Actually the efforts to split the Eastern part were started by India way back in 1950&#8217;s and at that time we were building our new country so our media was not powerful at that time and both the parts of country were separated from each other by 1000 miles the Hindus of East Pakistan participated actively in India&#8217;s game and due to lack of communication we were trapped. a little genocide may be the result of realization that Hindus were actively participating in the Indian efforts of disintegrating Pakistan other wise I don&#8217;t believe that there were mass killings of Hindus in East Pakistan.




Can you give be some links/info about these profs that started the &#8220;language Movement&#8221;.


----------



## salman nedian

there is no such names of those professors mentioned but you can get the idea from the below statements



February 23, 1948 
Direndra Nath Dutta, a Bengali opposition member, moves a resolution in the first session of Pakistan's Constituent Assembly for recognizing Bengali as a state language along with Urdu and English. 

source-http://www.virtualbangladesh.com/history/ekushe.html

Hindus and Buddhists in East Pakistan too joined hands against the imperial tendencies of West Pakistan. One of the principal demands was that Bengali and Urdu should be national languages of Pakistan and not Urdu alone.

source-http://www.policy.hu/roychowdhury/Bangladhaka.html


----------



## salman nedian

The education and economy of a country are the backbone of a countrys development and social status. Muslims of Bengal expected an improvement in their general conditions after independence. But the situation was otherwise. Education and economy was completely controlled by the Hindus. In East Bengal most of the government officers, lawyers, almost all the doctors, and school masters, nearly all the considerable landowners and most of the heads of business firms were Hindus. 

At the time of partition, they owned nearly 80% of the national wealth of East Bengal. The majority of urban buildings and properties, in some cases more than 85% were owned by the Hindus. 95% of 1,290 High schools and 47 colleges in East Bengal were privately organised and financed by them. The Hindus comprised not more than 25% of the East Bengal population. These Hindus used to earn from here and sent to West Bengal and Calcutta where their relations had settled. While commodities were smuggled to Calcutta, anti-Pakistani literature was pouring from across the border. A report submitted to Chaudhry M. Ali, the PM of Pakistan by H.M. Habibullah, Treasurer of the Pakistan Muslim League, stated that cheap communist literature infiltrated through China, Burma, and India could be seen everywhere in cafes, restaurants, public places, schools ... backed by Marwari Hindus, the communists had a free hand to create confusion, frustration and feelings of hatred. 

One of the most important factors, which sowed permanent seeds of mistrust and bitterness between the two provinces was the language problem. The controversy started when, in February, 1948, a Hindu member from East Pakistan, Mr. Dhirendranath Dutt, moved an amendment to the Constituent Assembly pleading that Bengali may also be made official language.

source-http://www.mediamonitors.net/syedsoherwordi1.html


----------



## salman nedian

Venkat said:


> 3 million is exaggerated. But what is the official figure given by Pakistan? 3000? 30,000? 300,000? What number is acceptable?



it is useless to find how many died the only thing which is of concern is that Indians had given the false numbers and now Bangladeshis are also saying this so Pakistan was right.Pakistan Zindabad


----------



## Venkat

26000 is the HRC report figure.

the figure does not includes the 3400 pak soldiers lost in the insurgency phase
the unknown number of beharis killed by the muktis
the mukti bahini killed by the pak army.

Actual war casualities of India and Pakistan once fighting began


----------



## roadrunner

Venkat said:


> 3 million is exaggerated. But what is the official figure given by Pakistan? 3000? 30,000? 300,000? What number is acceptable?



300,000 according to Bengali scholars, 30,000 according to most oher reports.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## never

a us based indian academi, bose i think after research claims the figure to be 30000.
the indians dont lie do they salim.
the humud rahman report spoke of the same.
the claims of massive programs of rape was also dismissed by the un.


----------



## Venkat

If you conduct a pop quiz in india, i bet 90&#37; of Indians cant even guess the number of bengalies claimed killed (they dont even know which year the war happened). But if you do it in Dacca 90%of the bangladeshis will tell you its 3 million. So all reeducation efforts should be aimed at Bangladesh, not India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Since most of the people I have come across who bring up the 3 million figure are Indians, I think discourse over the correct number of casualties needs to be conducted whenever the opportunity arises. Any Bangladeshis, and there are a few on this forum, can always pipe in to argue their version.


----------



## ejaz007

What I have been able to search from the net the figure is between 30000 endorsed as official figures (I have not been able to get official Pakistani figures) to around 300000 (Rummel's "death by government") to 3 million (though gendercide website does not say the figure was 3 million they do say the figure was almost certainly into seven figures). 
I personally believe (though I cannot at the moment produce any evidence in support of this argument) that every one including mukhti bahini just shifted their own genocide in armys account. One needs to look at every ones role and then try to find out the figure. Killing 3 million people out of a population of around 65 million is not as easy as is portrayed by some.


----------



## Venkat

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Since most of the people I have come across who bring up the 3 million figure are Indians, I think discourse over the correct number of casualties needs to be conducted whenever the opportunity arises. Any Bangladeshis, and there are a few on this forum, can always pipe in to argue their version.



Yes I would like to hear from the Bangladeshis as well what the actual figure is. (Not the figure that they *think* it is , but the figure that *actually* is)


----------



## blain2

3000,000 dead?

I would have to scan something by a BD writer here to put some perspective on what it would have taken troops from the Pakistan Army (which at the height of the 1971 war had three Divs 9, 14 and 16 deployed in EP) to kill 3 million people. 

Its an insane number per soldier and all of the troops combined would have gone nuts simply due to the guilt for having killed so many people... Since the airforce was not used in any mass bombing campaigns against the populace, factually speaking, the 3 million number is a hideous manipulation of the truth and an impossibility. 

30,000 - 40,000 dead including EPs, Biharis and Pakistani troops included is an unfortunately realistic number.

I do want to add that what PA or Pakistani government did to the East Pakistanis (now Bangladeshis) was outright wrong. Better sense should have prevailed on both sides but then again hindsight is always 20x20.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## azmax007

Vinod2070 said:


> Has this guy been checked for being authentic about being from Bangladesh? Checking his IP will be a good start.
> 
> The 3 million claim is not Indian claim but was made by Mujib IIRC. He is the father of the Bangla nation, no?
> 
> Do Bangladeshis trust him? What is the figuure in Bangladeshi textbooks/history?



Oh please, you can check my IP and it'll show that I'm writing from USA but Bangladesh is where I'm from.

Me and my family are against Mujibur Rahman. Yes he freed Bangladesh but at the same time he was un-Islamic, he took away "Muslim" from the Muslim Awami League, he established himself as president for life, he practiced nepotism, he practiced the same barbaric acts of the Pakistani soldiers as gang activities, he was responsible of killings after 1971, and he banned all political parties because he didn't want to give up power. He turned the good path after 1973 when he turned back to the Islamic way because his previous way of government was bullshit. He gave up "Joy Bangla" to "Khud Hafez".

The real father of the nation is General Ziur Rahman, he was in the front lines in 1971, he was in charge of the army, he started healing the relationship with Pakistan based in Islamic brotherhood and started SAARC. Mujibur Rahman just talked but he couldn't do **** that's why his own military killed him.


----------



## Vinod2070

azmax007 said:


> *Oh please, you can check my IP and it'll show that I'm writing from USA but Bangladesh is where I'm from.*
> 
> Me and my family are against Mujibur Rahman. Yes he freed Bangladesh but at the same time he was un-Islamic, he took away "Muslim" from the Muslim Awami League, he established himself as president for life, he practiced nepotism, he practiced the same barbaric acts of the Pakistani soldiers as gang activities, he was responsible of killings after 1971, and he banned all political parties because he didn't want to give up power. He turned the good path after 1973 when he turned back to the Islamic way because his previous way of government was bullshit. He gave up "Joy Bangla" to "Khud Hafez".
> 
> The real father of the nation is General Ziur Rahman, he was in the front lines in 1971, he was in charge of the army, he started healing the relationship with Pakistan based in Islamic brotherhood and started SAARC. Mujibur Rahman just talked but he couldn't do **** that's why his own military killed him.



Well, if you say so. I am still finding it hard to believe.

Anyway, many people in India find Bangladesh to be an utterly ungrateful country and its people the most ungareful ever (may be comparable to the French). Indian soldiers gave their blood to save you from the genocide. We took more than 10 million of your refugees before the war, fed them and sheltered them. Listen to the speech of your ambassador to Delhi of the time, it was a really moving speech in which he said that Bangladesh will be eternally thankful to India and he called Indira Gandhi the world's greatest leader.

And see how Bangladesh is sheltering all kinds of terrorists and separatists now and collaborating with anti-India terrorist forces! It is now believed to have one of the largest terrorist network in South Asia. All the recent terror attacks in Hyderabad have Bangladeshi footprint.

Even now there are 20-50 million Bangladeshis who are illegaly in India. If this anti-India attitude continues, they may be in trouble some day.

Its a real shame how ungrateful some people can be!


----------



## never

vinod are you three years old. 
ndia under took "helping" the bengladeshis to destroy pakistan, not because of alturism. there was no mass genocide. this was propegated by the indians and all genefral anti muslim elements in the world.
thankfully in reality the result of pakistans civil war was not at all favourable to mummy india.


----------



## sparten

I wish we had killed three million people! Would have put an end to the insurgency for sure. Of course we would have needed a few nukes. 

God how can anybody believe such an inane figure.


----------



## salman nedian

never said:


> vinod are you three years old.
> ndia under took "helping" the bengladeshis to destroy pakistan, not because of alturism. there was no mass genocide. this was propegated by the indians and all genefral anti muslim elements in the world.
> thankfully in reality the result of pakistans civil war was not at all favourable to mummy india.




What can u expect from a Democracy which supports occupiers and Land grabbers like Israel?


----------



## blain2

I will try to post something about this 3 million lie based on a book written by a Bangladeshi author. To anyone with a bit of logic, the claim about 3 million would sound illogical and superfluous after reading the excerpt.


----------



## Tiki Tam Tam

never said:


> vinod are you three years old.
> ndia under took "helping" the bengladeshis to destroy pakistan, not because of alturism. there was no mass genocide. this was propegated by the indians and all genefral anti muslim elements in the world.
> thankfully in reality the result of pakistans civil war was not at all favourable to mummy india.



India did not undertake to destroy Pakistan as such.

It was a Pakistan given opportunity that they seized wherein the Eastern front was degraded to a lower threat level.

Technically, it is very favourable to India.

As fas as Bangladesh being grateful and all that, I have a different view on that. There is nothing like "being grateful" and things like that in geopolitics. Its merely self interest.


----------



## Vinod2070

never said:


> *vinod are you three years old*.
> ndia under took "helping" the bengladeshis to destroy pakistan, not because of alturism. there was no mass genocide. this was propegated by the indians and all genefral anti muslim elements in the world.
> thankfully in reality the result of pakistans civil war was not at all favourable to mummy india.



I wish I could go back to that age!

The same can be said about Pakistan in reference to Afghan refugees. Its a matter of perception. 

I believe we helped Bangladeshis when there was no one else to help them avert a genocide. USA was under a callous administration trying to play cold war games and not paying heed to the reports of it's own Ambassador crying about the situation there.

Why would more than 10 millions of them flee to India as refugees if there was no problem there?

Anyway there are obviously different perceptions about the genocide. I have read international books containing reference to it. I have no intention of digging out links or references to it.

The figure of 3 million is not an Indian figure but given by Mujib who is considered the father of Bangladesh. So you need to convince Bangladesh and the world that the genocide didn't take place.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod,

"The World" does not believe a "genocide" took place. There is no "world authority for verifying genocides" that has confirmed this claim. What you have are various historians with differing points of views, some supporting the "genocide" claim, and others rejecting it, including many Bangladeshi/Bengali historians. Where you are correct is that discourse needs to continue, and flaws in the "3 million" allegation need to continue to be pointed out by those who disagree with the "genocide" claim.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Salim,

"Self-interest" - my reasons for arguing why some Indians need to get over the whole "Kashmir insurgency and Kargil" issue (and Pakistanis need to let the past go as well). Both countries have acted to take advantage of "given opportunities". There is very little room for "higher moral ground" to be taken by either side, and efforts to do so only vitiate the atmosphere and prevent rapprochement.

Learn from our history - yes. Turn it into an obstacle for better relationships with adversaries, no.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Never:

Please try and make your point without resorting to personal attacks (3 year old). Realize that debate will often occur with people who may have diametrically opposing views to yours, and you cannot go around calling everyone who disagrees with you a "three year old".


----------



## Venkat

Salim said:


> India did not undertake to destroy Pakistan as such.
> 
> It was a Pakistan given opportunity that they seized wherein the Eastern front was degraded to a lower threat level.
> 
> Technically, it is very favourable to India.
> 
> As fas as Bangladesh being grateful and all that, I have a different view on that. There is nothing like "being grateful" and things like that in geopolitics. Its merely self interest.



Most logical and realistic answer.

India got an opportunity, it took it, and succeeded.

Pakistan too got opportunities but they were not big enough or right enough to be 'converted' into another bangladesh.


----------



## Venkat

.. and really Indians shouldnt give a fig about 3 million being true or false. its a matter between pakistanis and bangladeshis and they can resolve it without our interference - right?


----------



## Vinod2070

Actually you are right.

This claim of the particular number is basically a Bangladeshi claim. It is up to them to defend it or otherwise.

India entered the war because the burden of the 10 million plus refugees was too great to bear.


----------



## roadrunner

Vinod2070 said:


> Actually you are right.
> 
> This claim of the particular number is basically a Bangladeshi claim. It is up to them to defend it or otherwise.
> 
> India entered the war because the burden of the 10 million plus refugees was too great to bear.



total bullshyt


----------



## Vinod2070

roadrunner said:


> total bullshyt



Care to explain!

Your one liners make sense only to yourself.


----------



## solid snake

Even the Nazis were not efficient enough to kill 3 million Jews in a short span of 9 months. It would take a monumental effort to ethnically cleanse that many people, it is ridiculous to suggest that Pakistan was able to kill that many people with it's meagre resources. We didn't even have any camps for them.

At most a few thousand Bengalis were killed by the army. And if you think that Bengalis themselves are angels, take a look at what they did to Bengalis loyal to Pakistan during the war, right after the war ended.

PVHas2bFN48[/media] - Stranded Pakistanis - NBC News Broadcast - December 21, 1971

December 21, 1971
NBC News Report:

"In Bangladesh, once East Pakistan, not a day has gone by without horrible reprisals against people who supported the Pakistani Government. There have been individual killings and there have been massacres. And here is a film of a rally in Dacca made last Friday at which men were incited to kill -- and did kill."

Here are pictures taken by two Associated Press men, of the death of one prisoner in Dacca. First he was tortured. Then he was bayoneted -- again he was bayoneted -- and finally he was killed -- and a child, a relative of one of the prisoners, was kicked and stamped to death."


----------



## blain2

blain2 said:


> I will try to post something about this 3 million lie based on a book written by a Bangladeshi author. To anyone with a bit of logic, the claim about 3 million would sound illogical and superfluous (as in PA did not need to kill this many to achieve its goals) after reading the excerpt.



Here is what I intended to post, may want to keep this for posterity sake. I also do not post this to offend Bangladeshis. In my opinion, even one Bangladeshi killed or raped is too much at the hands of their west Pakistani compatriots...however there is a need to insert some truth and reality into the much trumpeted claims of the 3 mill dead and 300K raped...I knew of officers who had served in EP and believe me, not one of them was as dishonorable as to go and rape EP women in some pogrom as this has been made out to be. Individuals did do things that were wrong (in terms of rape at least), and that is condemnable along with killings. However lets bring some reality into this discussion.

This is an excerpt from the book "The Myth of 3 Million" by Dr. M. Abdul Mumin Chowdhry. He writes:



> On 10th Jan 1972, the very day of his return to Bangladesh from prison in West Pakistan, he, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman publicly announced, 'Three million people have been killed. I believe that there is no parallel in the history of the world of such colossal loss of lives for the struggle for freedom.'
> 
> Yet only on 8 Jan 1972 in London, on his way back to Bangladesh, the same Mujib had claimed that, "one million people had been killed in Bangladesh."
> 
> It was reported that on arrival in Dhaka on 10 Jan 1972 the lobby behind fabrication of the absolutely impossible figure promptly briefed the returning Bangladeshi leader with added "fact" of three hundred thousand women raped, who in turn immediately went on parroting it. Thus the self serving fiction of "three million killed and three hundred thousand women raped" was created.
> 
> As has already been mentioned, according to Col. Akbar Hussain's disclosure in the National Assembly of Bangladesh, the number of claimants (war victims) did not exceed three hundred thousand. But according to Abdul Muhaimin, the Ministry of finance, Government of Bangladesh, had informed him that, only 72,000 claims were received. Of them, relations of 50,000 victims had been awarded the declared sum of money. There had been many bogus claims, even some from Razakars, within those 72,000 applications."
> 
> Whatever be the actual figure, the "victims" whose relations were compensated might not be all victims of Pakistan Army. *A large number of refugees, 1.6 million according to one Awami League journalist, died in Indian refugee camps*. Those who claimed compensation also included families of many such dead refugees. Besides there were also many false claims.
> 
> Rape Victims. The Bangladesh government opened a number of "Centers for Bangladesh heroines" at Dhaka and other places..
> 
> ...about a hundred of them were given in marriage at various centers. How many heroines were housed at such centres? How and when such centres were closed and what happened to the inmates (has) remained a closely guarded secret up to now...
> 
> *In order to kill three million the Pakistan Army would have had to kill 11,494 persons a day, non-stop from Marh 26 onwards. If, on the other hand, they were to kill one million people, their daily killing would come to 3,831. Seen in another way, for 60,000 Pakistan Army to kill three million and rape three hundred thousand women, each and every one of them had to kill 50 persons and rape 5 women.
> *
> Jauhri, a Bangladeshi journalist, wrote: "It is beyond me how three million people could get killed in a guerrilla war of eight month and 21 days. The raping of two hundred thousand women is also beyond my comprehension."

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EagleEyes

Vinod2070 said:


> Actually you are right.
> 
> This claim of the particular number is basically a Bangladeshi claim. It is up to them to defend it or otherwise.
> 
> India entered the war because the burden of the 10 million plus refugees was too great to bear.



I thought that 1965 "***" handover was too great to bear?


----------



## Venkat

1965 what? sorry your post was masked by filters.


----------



## Vinod2070

WebMaster said:


> I thought that 1965 "***" handover was too great to bear?



What about 1965? I thought that both the "Gibralter" and "Grandslam" operations were grand failures.

At best it was a stalemate.



> Operation Grand Slam is virtually synonymous with the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War. It refers to an audacious plan drawn up by the Pakistani Army, in May 1965, to attack the vital Akhnoor Bridge in Jammu and Kashmir, which was not only the lifeline of an entire infantry division in Jammu and Kashmir but could also be used to threaten Jammu, an important logistical point for Indian forces. The operation ended in a failure for Pakistan Army as the stated military objectives were not achieved and subsequently were forced to retreat following a counter attack by the Indian Army.


----------



## blain2

Lets get back to the topic on hand please.


----------



## salman nedian

Salim, Venkat and Vinod,

When it is a matter between Pakistanis and Bangladeshis then why are you interfering when even Bangladeshis start admitting that the figure is false India try to convince them. Yes Pakistan is not big enough to be converted into another Bangladesh but surely India is.

Yes, India is an opportunist and with their expansionist desires they can do any thing because they are simply opportunists and nothing to do with ethics and humanity.


----------



## Always Neutral

Its hard to believe 3 million were killed. It would take gas chambers, mass graves and be impossible in todays world to hide. 

I think its more a myth propogated by the Awami League as it suited their purpose with a lot of help with the Indian propoganda machine as it suited their purpose to.

Anyway Bangladesh was a cause waiting to happen for many reasons and it benefitted everybody.

Time to move on.

Regards


----------



## Always Neutral

While on Bangladesh I read this below gem on our UK Army Forum.

Regards

*At Jamalpur, near Dhaka, the Indian Brigadier, Hardit Singh Kler, surrounded a Pakistani unit led by Lt Col Ahmed Sultan. On 10 December the two officers exchanged letters. The first, written by the Indian Brigadier, was taken across the frontline by an elderly man who delivered it by hand

"To,
The Commander Jamalpur Garrison

I am directed to inform you that your garrison has been cut off from all sides and you have no escape route available to you. One brigade with full compliment of artillery has already been built up and another will be striking by morning. In addition you have been given a foretaste of a small element of our air force with a lot more to come. The siituation as far as you are concerned is hopeless. your higher commanders have already ditched you.
I expect your reply before 6.30 p.m. today failing which I will be constrained to deliver the final blow for which purpose 40 sorties of MIGs have been alloted to me.
In this morning's action the prisoners captured by us have given your strength and dispositions, and are well looked after.
The treatment I expect to be given to the civil messenger should be according to a gentlemanly code of honour and no harm should come to him.
An immediate reply is solicited.

Brigadier HS Kler. Comd."

The reply was sent a few hours later:

"Dear Brig,
Hope this finds you in high spirits. Your letter asking us to surrender has been received. I want to tell you that the fighting you have seen so far is very little, in fact the fighting has not even started. So let us stop negotiating and start the fight.
40 sorties, I may point out, are inadequate. Ask for many more. Your point about treating your messenger well was superfluous. It shows how you under-estimate my boys. I hope he liked his tea.
Give my love to the Muktis [Mukti Bahini were the Bangladeshi guerrillas fighting against the Pakistan Army]. Let me see you with a sten in your hand next time instead of the pen you seem to have such mastery over.
Now get on and fight.

Yours sincerely

Commander Jamalppur Fortress.
(Lt. Colonel Ahmed Sultan)"*


----------



## EagleEyes

salman nedian said:


> Salim, Venkat and Vinod,
> 
> When it is a matter between Pakistanis and Bangladeshis then why are you interfering when even Bangladeshis start admitting that the figure is false India try to convince them. Yes Pakistan is not big enough to be converted into another Bangladesh but surely India is.
> 
> Yes, India is an opportunist and with their expansionist desires they can do any thing because they are simply opportunists and nothing to do with ethics and humanity.



Very well said.


----------



## Vinod2070

salman nedian said:


> Salim, Venkat and Vinod,
> 
> When it is a matter between Pakistanis and Bangladeshis then why are you interfering *when even Bangladeshis start admitting that the figure is false India try to convince themYes Pakistan is not big enough to be converted into another Bangladesh but surely India is.*.
> 
> *Yes, India is an opportunist and with their expansionist desires they can do any thing because they are simply opportunists and nothing to do with ethics and humanity*.



As I said earlier this figure was given by Mujib and it is a Bangladeshi figure. India was a party to the 1971 liberation war. You can't wish it away.

Your post proves the objectivity you have. So I see no point in arguing further on this.

If you look at history objectively, you can find out who has always been an opportunist. You call Russian communists as Godless but have no problem with Chinese Godless communists who are having their own problems with their Muslim separatists and where Muslims are not even free to practice their religion!

I can go on and on about the so called opportunism but I see no point in that. Every state needs to protect its interests and they behave accordingly. No country in the world (except one) accuses India of being opportunistic. India can actually be a moral leader in the world if we get our act togather.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EagleEyes

> As I said earlier this figure was given by Mujib and it is a Bangladeshi figure. India was a party to the 1971 liberation war. You can't wish it away.



What don't you understand? Can't you read what has been discussed hundred times in the above discussions? It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Pakistan Army to kill the traitorous Bengalis in a million range. Whether it is Michael Jackson figure or Mujibs. The fact is that it is not true, and is a very valid common sense.

So do us all a favor, and keep your delusional nationality based denial out of this thread.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Folks, this thread was opened to have some rational discussion and possible refutation of the "genocide" and 3 million Bengalis killed claim. It isn't about Mujib claiming so and so - it is about quoting various sources, analyzing the claims and attempting to see what is plausible.

At this point Blain's, post that argues the improbability of the number of people each Pakistani soldier would have to kill and rape is quite convincing. There is the additional claim that the 3 million figure factored in the dead from cyclone earlier. I think the discussion needs to proceed in a more rational manner along these lines - provide sources and debate for or against their conclusions.


----------



## Vinod2070

WebMaster said:


> What don't you understand? Can't you read what has been discussed hundred times in the above discussions? It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Pakistan Army to *kill the traitorous Bengalis in a million range*. Whether it is Michael Jackson figure or Mujibs. The fact is that it is not true, and is a very valid common sense.
> 
> *So do us all a favor, and keep your delusional nationality based denial out of this thread.*



I don't remember having quoted this or any figure. If it is impossible, so be it. I don't carry a chip on my shoulder to prove or otherwise a particular figure. I think it can't be done through supposedly logical web posts alone and has to be done on the ground by reputed neutral researchers whose findings are then internationally accepted and most importantly accepted by the victims: The Bangladeshis.

The last part pretty much may apply as much to you too based on your response. But we all have different views based on our background.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Folks, this thread was opened to have some rational discussion and possible refutation of the "genocide" and 3 million Bengalis killed claim. It isn't about Mujib claiming so and so - it is about quoting various sources, analyzing the claims and attempting to see what is plausible.
> 
> At this point Blain's, post that argues the improbability of the number of people each Pakistani soldier would have to kill and rape is quite convincing. There is the additional claim that the 3 million figure factored in the dead from cyclone earlier. I think the discussion needs to proceed in a more rational manner along these lines - provide sources and debate for or against their conclusions.



I pretty much agree with you. It would indeed be astonishing for the PA to have murdered 3 million civilians in so little a time even if all the army did was murder all day long.

But even if the actual figure was much less (and no one seems to be presenting any neutral trustworthy sources for a particular number), even if it was 1/10 of that number that is a huge number of murders and certainly qualifies for genocide.

Just to keep things in perspective, Gujarat riots claimed a total of 766 Muslim victims and 268 Hindu victims (I know an American report prematurely claimed up to 2000 Muslim victims, but these are the final government figures) and these are universally called genocide by Pakistanis!

And even the 2 decade old Kashmir insurgency with so much terror thrown in has claimed much less victims.


----------



## BanglaBhoot

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The invitation to prove your claims is, as always, open on the 'Proving Bangladesh genocide' thread.



Sheikh Mujibur Rahman could not count properly so he unwittingly added an extra zero at the end of 300 000. What he meant to say was 300 000 killed not 3 million. Unfortunately the figure of 3 million has stuck ever since that interview with the BBC.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Hogwash and lies.
> 
> Keep repeating a lie long enough and you think it will come true.
> 
> Atrocities committed, yes, and they are to be regretted and condemned, but nothing close to this poppycock you continuously spout.
> 
> The invitation to prove your claims is, as always, open on the 'Proving Bangladesh genocide' thread. Do so or quit repeating a lie.



The number was not important. That's the number I have read in many places even international books, but it itself is not important.

What is important is that the large scale atrocities took place because of the reasons I mentioned.


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Vinod2070 said:


> The number was not important. That's the number I have read in many places even international books, but it itself is not important.
> 
> What is important is that the large scale atrocities took place because of the reasons I mentioned.



Atrocities were committed all round in that conflict. You should have seen how the Mukti Bahini and Mujib Bahini behaved. What is not documented is the Bengali on Bengali violence that occurred. Some of the killings of leftists were carried out on the orders of RAW. It is not clear how many deaths were caused by Indian policy of elimination and assassination.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> The number was not important. That's the number I have read in many places even international books, but it itself is not important.
> 
> What is important is that the large scale atrocities took place because of the reasons I mentioned.



You may have read the number in several publications, but that does not make it true, since the source itself is compromised and flawed. What we have attempted to do in the thread I mentioned is to try and counter that figure through empirical evidence, reasoning and accounts and estimates from other sources that contradict the 3 million figure.

If I gather your argument correctly, you are implying that the GoP specifically sent in the military with the intention of massacring a certain group of people. My understanding of the events of the time is that the atrocities were not pre-planned, but the result of a progressive spiraling out of control of the situation on the ground, in which atrocities were committed by both sides, with Indian support for certain groups, and the results were what we see today.

The country was being torn apart, and India was seen to be neck deep in exacerbating the situation - isolation and desperation rose, discipline broke down, anger rose, and regrettable and condemnable events took place. I am by no means trying to suggest the GoP was not to blame, but the insinuation that we went in there to massacre people left and right is completely wrong.


----------



## Flintlock

*Killing of Intellectuals * one of the most brutal and savage carnages in the history of Bangladesh. *It was a planned killing of the Bangali intellectuals- educationists, journalists, literateurs, physicians, scientists, lawyers, artists, philosophers and political thinkers - executed by a group of collaborators under the directive and guidance of the Pakistani military rulers during the war of liberation in 1971.* The blue print of crippling the intelligentsia is said to have been chalked out by Major General Rao Farman Ali, the military adviser to the governor of East Pakistan. The armed cadres of al-badr, a para-military force, is alleged to have executed the brutal killing having been provided with arms and support by the Pakistan army.


The killing of the intellectuals virtually began with the army crackdown in Dhaka on the night of 25 March, and continued till the surrender of the Pak-army on 16 December 1971. The act of killing was initiated in Dhaka and gradually spread over the whole of East Pakistan especially in the district and subdivisional towns. The brutality and killing took a serious turn especially in Dhaka during the days preceding the surrender of the Pak army, particularly on 14 December, the day now commemorated as Shaheed Buddhijibi Hatya Dibash (Martyred Intellectuals Day).

The killers used to abduct and carry away the targetted victims from their houses in gestapo style to particular camps or spots very often covering their face with black cloth. They mostly took advantage of curfew in the city and kidnapped the victims. The victims were physically tortured, brutaly killed mostly by indiscriminate bayonet charges. The main spots of execution in Dhaka city were the marshy land at Rayerbazar near Mohammadpur and another at Mirpur, where a huge number of dead bodies were found scattered in the ditches, plains and inside the heaps of bricks. The dead bodies, eyes covered and hands tied, were found wounded and swelled all over their bodies and bullet shots on the chest, head or back.

The number of intellectuals killed is estimated as follows: educationist 991, journalist 13, physician 49, lawyer 42, others (litterateur, artist and engineer) 16. [Muazzam Hussain Khan]

BANGLAPEDIA: Killing of Intellectuals

_____________________________________________________________
*
Bangladesh, 1971*

The war for liberation that broke out in March 1971 in Bangladesh stemmed from the election of the Awami League, which demanded independence for Bangladesh, in what was then East Pakistan. The genocidal "Operation Search Light" was carried out against Bengalis by the West Pakistan army as a response. The ten months of killing resulted in the deaths of an estimated 500,000 to 3 million people, mostly Hindus. "*Kill three million of them," then-Pakistani President Yahya Khan reportedly said at the time, "and the rest will eat out of our hands."* None of the Pakistani generals involved in the genocide has ever been brought to trial, and remain at large. 

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,338612,00.html


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> You may have read the number in several publications, but that does not make it true, since the source itself is compromised and flawed. What we have attempted to do in the thread I mentioned is to try and counter that figure through empirical evidence, reasoning and accounts and estimates from other sources that contradict the 3 million figure.
> 
> If I gather your argument correctly, you are implying that the GoP specifically sent in the military with the intention of massacring a certain group of people. My understanding of the events of the time is that the atrocities were not pre-planned, but the result of a progressive spiraling out of control of the situation on the ground, in which atrocities were committed by both sides, with Indian support for certain groups, and the results were what we see today.
> 
> The country was being torn apart, and India was seen to be neck deep in exacerbating the situation - isolation and desperation rose, discipline broke down, anger rose, and regrettable and condemnable events took place. I am by no means trying to suggest the GoP was not to blame, but the insinuation that we went in there to massacre people left and right is completely wrong.





> ***** President Yahya said,
> "Kill three million of them and the rest will eat out of our hands".*



AM, This has been recorded in many places. Just google for it and you will find innumerable references.

And this order was dutifully carried out AFAIK.

The civil disturbance and all else was there but to deny the racial and religious character of the events would be a mistake.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Thanks for that entirely 'unbiased' and 'neutral' source.

Here is the Pakistani version:
*
"The Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report (HCR), denied the involvement of Pakistan army personnel in the murders of Bengalis. Gen. Farman Ali categorically denied the charge levelled against him that he had 200 intellectuals killed. The Bengali's claimed these killings occurred on December 14, and not on December 16 of 1971, as General Farman contends. While the latter accepts that a sizeable number of corpses were found on the morning of December 17, he maintains that Pakistani army personnel could not have conducted the killings since they had already surrendered on December 16. According to Maj. Gen. Farman Ali on December 9 or 10, 1971, he was summoned by Maj. Gen. Jamshed to Peelkhana. On reaching the headquarters he says, he saw a large number of vehicles parked there. Maj. Gen. Jamshed was getting into a car and asked Maj. Gen. Farman Ali to come along. On the way, Gen. Jamshed informed Gen. Farman that they were thinking of arresting certain people. Gen. Farman Ali maintains he advised against it. On reaching General Niazi's headquarters he says, he repeated his advice, but neither Gen. Niazi nor Gen. Jamshed responded. Gen. Farman Ali states that he does not know what transpired after he left, but he thinks no further action was taken."*


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

*Vinod:*

""The historian branch of the State Department held a two-day conference on June 28 and 29 on US policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972, inviting scholars from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to express their views on the declassified documents.

During the seminar, Bangladeshi scholars acknowledged that their official figure of more than 3 million killed during and after the military action was not authentic.

They said that the original figure was close to 300,000, which was wrongly translated from Bengali into English as three million.

Shamsher M. Chowdhury, the Bangladesh ambassador in Washington who was commissioned in the Pakistan Army in 1969 but had joined his country&#8217;s war of liberation in 1971, acknowledged that Bangladesh alone cannot correct this mistake. Instead, he suggested that Pakistan and Bangladesh form a joint commission to investigate the 1971 disaster and prepare a report.

Almost all scholars agreed that the real figure was somewhere between 26,000, as reported by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, and not three million, the official figure put forward by Bangladesh and India.

Prof Sarmila Bose, an Indian academic, told the seminar that allegations of Pakistani army personnel raping Bengali women were grossly exaggerated.

Based on her extensive interviews with eyewitnesses, the study also determines the pattern of conflict as three-layered: West Pakistan versus East Pakistan, East Pakistanis (pro-Independence) versus East Pakistanis (pro-Union) and the fateful war between India and Pakistan.

Prof Bose noted that no neutral study of the conflict has been done and reports that are passed on as part of history are narratives that strengthen one point of view by rubbishing the other. The Bangladeshi narratives, for instance, focus on the rape issue and use that not only to demonize the Pakistan army but also exploit it as a symbol of why it was important to break away from (West) Pakistan.""
Sheikh Mujib wanted a confederation: US papers -DAWN - National; July 7, 2005

Note that while the link is a Pakistani newspaper, the original source of the information are declassified State Dept. documents.


----------



## Flintlock

^Duh. I don't expect Pakistani generals to admit that they killed these people.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> ^Duh. I don't expect Pakistani generals to admit that they killed these people.



The second post validates the Pakistani general, and your source offers no hard evidence supporting the allegations either.


----------



## Vinod2070

Are you denying that Yahya Khan stated these word?

Or that the order was implemented?


----------



## Flintlock

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The second post validates the Pakistani general, and your source offers no hard evidence supporting the allegations either.



How does it validate the General? 

All I can see so far is the defendant's words saying "I didn't do it".

_In East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) [General Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan and his top generals] also planned to murder its Bengali intellectual, cultural, and political elite. They also planned to indiscriminately murder hundreds of thousands of its Hindus and drive the rest into India. And they planned to destroy its economic base to insure that it would be subordinate to West Pakistan for at least a generation to come. This despicable and cutthroat plan was outright genocide_

STATISTICS OF PAKISTAN'S DEMOCIDE

B'deshi Source:
Martyr Intellectual day 2002: Homage to my martyr colleagues. Ajoy Roy

__________________

December 14th is mourned in B'desh as the day of martyred intellectuals. Am I to believe that they celebrate this day on a whim? 

EDITED

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> Are you denying that Yahya Khan stated these word?
> 
> Or that the order was implemented?



The evidence clearly shows the 'order' was not implemented, or if killings were ordered, they never reached the levels you have argued.

Whether Yahya actually said that I cannot say - there seems to be only one actual source for this reported claim, and the number is identical to that spouted by apologists for the Indian view point on this, so I am skeptical as to its authenticity.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> How does it validate the General?
> 
> All I can see so far is the defendant's words saying "I didn't do it".
> 
> _In East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) [General Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan and his top generals] also planned to murder its Bengali intellectual, cultural, and political elite. They also planned to indiscriminately murder hundreds of thousands of its Hindus and drive the rest into India. And they planned to destroy its economic base to insure that it would be subordinate to West Pakistan for at least a generation to come. This despicable and cutthroat plan was outright genocide_
> 
> STATISTICS OF PAKISTAN'S DEMOCIDE
> 
> B'deshi Source:
> Martyr Intellectual day 2002: Homage to my martyr colleagues. Ajoy Roy
> 
> __________________
> 
> December 14th is mourned in B'desh as the day of martyred intellectuals. Am I to believe that they celebrate this day on a whim?
> 
> In any case, the loss of intellectuals is apparent, with people like Munshi still filling the void.


Enough of the insults please, once can make a point without resorting to that kind of attitude, especially when the individual concerned isn't even responding to you in this instance.

I still see no evidence, you say its a general saying he didn't do it, but I don't see the people making this allegation proving their case either. Innocent till proved guilty.

The second post validates my argument that the atrocities were nowhere close to the numbers being claimed by India and some others. Therefore, if one claim could be exaggerated to such an extent, why not this one.


----------



## Flintlock

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Enough of the insults please, once can make a point without resorting to that kind of attitude, especially when the individual concerned isn't even responding to you in this instance.



I did not insult Munshi, as far as I can see.



> I still see no evidence, you say its a general saying he didn't do it, but I don't see the people making this allegation proving their case either. Innocent till proved guilty.



Well, if that's the way you want it to be....so be it.

You know and I know that there is not going to be a genocide trial. 

So lets stick to the happy version, since it makes us happy.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Here is another quote by Gen. Rao on the issue:



> In his book, How Pakistan got divided , Maj. Gen. Rao Farman does express the fear that "orders countermanding the earlier orders were perhaps not issued and some people were arrested. I do not till this day know where they were kept. Perhaps they were confined in an area which was guarded by mujahids. The corps or the Dacca garrison commander lost control over them after surrender and they ran away out of fear of the Mukti Bahini who were mercilessly killing mujahids. The detained persons might have been killed by Muktis or even by the Indian army to give the Pakistan army a bad name. Dacca had already been taken over by the Indians."


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> Well, if that's the way you want it to be....so be it.
> 
> You know and I know that there is not going to be a genocide trial.
> 
> So lets stick to the happy version, since it makes us happy.



Its not about sticking to the 'happy' version, its about sticking to the one that can be verified through evidence, logic and various accounts.

I find the declassified State Dept. documents and the Bangladeshi Ambassador and journalists response to those documents to be the strongest rebuttal of the version of events pushed by India.


----------



## Flintlock

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Its not about sticking to the 'happy' version, its about sticking to the one that can be verified through evidence, logic and various accounts.



Its about sticking to the happy version. Lets not have any pretensions about that.



> I find the declassified State Dept. documents and the Bangladeshi Ambassador and journalists response to those documents to be the strongest rebuttal of the version of events pushed by India.



I find no reason to trust the US documents, since they turned a blind eye to the atrocities during that period. 

The strongest evidence is the word of Bangladeshis themselves. Obviously, the figure is not 3 million, but then its not twenty either.

_____________________________________________________________

*The Sunday Times, London, June 13, 1971, *""The Government's policy for East Bengal was spelled out to me in the Eastern Command headquarters at Dacca. It has three elements:
1. The Bengalis have proved themselves unreliable and must be ruled by West Pakistanis; 2. The Bengalis will have to be re-educated along proper Islamic lines. The - Islamization of the masses - this is the official jargon - is intended to eliminate secessionist tendencies and provide a strong religious bond with West Pakistan;
3. When the Hindus have been eliminated by death and fight, their property will be used as a golden carrot to win over the under privileged Muslim middle-class. This will provide the base for erecting administrative and political structures in the future."

*NYT, Dec 19th, 1971*
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50C13F83C5E127A93CBA81789D95F458785F9


----------



## Flintlock

Here's a summary of the various estimates:

The high estimates of how many Bengalis were massacred are almost 10 times the low estimates:

* WHPSI: 307,013 deaths by pol.viol. in Pakistan, 1971.
* D.Smith says 500,000
* S&S: 500,000 (Civil War, Mar.-Dec. 1971)
* 1984 World Almanac: up to 1,000,000 civilians were killed.
* Hartman: 1,000,000 Bengalis
* B&J: 1,000,000 Bengalis
* Kuper cites a study by Chaudhuri which counted 1,247,000 dead, and mentions the possibility that it may be as many as 3,000,000.
* MEDIAN: 1,000,000-1,250,000
* Porter: 1M-2M
* Rummel: 1,500,000.
* Eckhardt: 1,000,000 civ. + 500,000 mil. = 1,500,000 (Bangladesh)
* Harff & Gurr: 1,250,000 to 3,000,000
* The official estimate in Bangladesh is 3 million dead. [AP 30 Dec. 2000; Agence France Presse 3 Oct. 2000;
* Rounaq Johan: 3,000,000 (in Century of Genocide: Eyewitness Accounts and Critical Views, Samuel Totten, ed., (1997))
* Compton's Encyclopedia, "Genocide": 3,000,000
* Encyclopedia Americana (2003), "Bangladesh": 3,000,000

Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> Its about sticking to the happy version. Lets not have any pretensions about that.
> 
> 
> 
> I find no reason to trust the US documents, since they turned a blind eye to the atrocities during that period.
> 
> The strongest evidence is the word of Bangladeshis themselves. Obviously, the figure is not 3 million, but then its not twenty either.
> 
> _____________________________________________________________


I find the accusation of the US not doing anything, and therefore not being 'trusted' not credible - there were varying accounts being reported, some grossly exaggerated, and this all happened in a relatively short timeline of months.

The US even owned up to its responsibility in causing a genocide in Guatemala, with Clinton apologizing for it - I doubt they would hide Pakistan's role in these declassified documents.

I find no reason to trust the accounts by Indians and others during that time since there were vested interests at play. The strongest argument is not that of the Bengalis, but that presented by official body counts, natural deaths, etc. (i.e. solid verifiable evidence) not rumor and innuendo.

The 'happy' version argument plays both ways, your arguments fit your side, in helping denigrate and demonize Pakistan by distorting history. That is why in this thread we argued why the higher end claims were statistically impossible. You can revisit those arguments and answer them.

Genocide is not something to be thrown around lightly - without evidence to support your claims there is nothing. I think we have provided enough accounts and evidence that contradict the Indian version.


----------



## Flintlock

I wonder why you keep referring to the higher estimates as the Indian version. 

Its the Bangladeshis who brought up the figure, not India. 

In any case, refer to the various estimates in my previous post.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> I wonder why you keep referring to the higher estimates as the Indian version.
> 
> Its the Bangladeshis who brought up the figure, not India.
> 
> In any case, refer to the various estimates in my previous post.



The estimates are just that, 'estimates' not really based on empirical evidence.

Estimates that are validated by taking into account the natural death rate, refugees who never returned, and actual body or grave counts are the ones that actually meet the test of being substantiated by empirical evidence, and those counts are far lower.


----------



## Vinod2070

I agree, referring to the atrocities as an Indian claim and thereby thinking that they stand disreputed is not a great way to logically present a claim.

The target of the atrocities were Bangladeshis. They are the ones who came up with the figure (their father of nation did).


----------



## Vinod2070

MBI Munshi said:


> Atrocities were committed all round in that conflict. You should have seen how the Mukti Bahini and Mujib Bahini behaved. What is not documented is the Bengali on Bengali violence that occurred. Some of the killings of leftists were carried out on the orders of RAW. It is not clear how many deaths were caused by Indian policy of elimination and assassination.



Whose side you are on? I can see now why your compatriots are calling you neo-Razakar on the internet.

You are justifying the murders and atrocities on your own people and making excuses for the people who did that! Just to get acceptance here and to feed the hatreds that you have for India.

Pathetic! Pathetic!


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> Whose side you are on? I can see now why your compatriots are calling you neo-Razakar on the internet.
> 
> You are justifying the murders and atrocities on your own people and making excuses for the people who did that! Just to get acceptance here and to feed the hatreds that you have for India.
> 
> Pathetic! Pathetic!



I don't think this is about choosing sides, it is about realizing that the conflict was not a clean 'black and white' one, and that with the emotions dying down, the 'victors history' needs to be reexamined and the truth found, as was suggested in the conference subsequent to the declassification of US documents pertaining to those events, by Bangladeshi and Pakistani officials and researchers.

Atrocities and massacres committed by both sides, there is no question about that, they contributed to the escalation and exacerbation of the situation, and the grey areas and complexities were complicated by Indian supported groups and militants.

Remember that I have often said that the intention for covert support for militant groups in Kashmir was not so innocents woudl be massacred, but some of the groups have gone out of control. It is likely the same happened in East Pakistan with the Indian supported militants.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> I don't think this is about choosing sides, it is about realizing that the conflict was not a clean 'black and white' one, and that with the emotions dying down, the 'victors history' needs to be reexamined and the truth found, as was suggested in the conference subsequent to the declassification of US documents pertaining to those events, by Bangladeshi and Pakistani officials and researchers.
> 
> Atrocities and massacres committed by both sides, there is no question about that, they contributed to the escalation and exacerbation of the situation, and the grey areas and complexities were complicated by Indian supported groups and militants.
> 
> Remember that I have often said that the intention for covert support for militant groups in Kashmir was not so innocents woudl be massacred, but some of the groups have gone out of control. It is likely the same happened in East Pakistan with the Indian supported militants.



While I see your point about it not being a black and white issue and appreciating the grey areas, my comments about Munshi's post remain valid. On this issue he always seems to convey the message that it was an issue for India only and not for Bangladeshis. The way he tried to justify the atrocities on his countrymen remains disgusting. And I think I identified the reasons he did so correctly.

I think the hatred for India has effected the faculty to see the issues in its context. Saying that atrocities happened from his countrymen also is one thing, using that to justify the military crackdown is another. I think even most sensible Pakistanis regret what happened in 1971.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> While I see your point about it not being a black and white issue and appreciating the grey areas, my comments about Munshi's post remain valid. On this issue he always seems to convey the message that it was an issue for India only and not for Bangladeshis. The way he tried to justify the atrocities on his countrymen remains disgusting. And I think I identified the reasons he did so correctly.
> 
> I think the hatred for India has effected the faculty to see the issues in its context. Saying that atrocities happened from his countrymen also is one thing, using that to justify the military crackdown is another. I think even most sensible Pakistanis regret what happened in 1971.



I think it is important to perhaps look at the atrocities in the context of the violence of partition, when atrocities and blood shed just spiraled by both sides - this is not making excuses for the atrocities, it is recognizing human nature and the capacity for humans to become animals in the pursuit of revenge. We saw it 1947, and we saw it in 1971 - it does not mean excuses are being made, just that both sides were responsible for the situation getting out of control.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

I agree there is no depth human beings can't sink to.

And there is no height they can't scale. Just different circumstances and the same person can be a devil or an angel.


----------



## Ali.009

Vinod2070 said:


> I agree there is no depth human beings can't sink to.
> 
> And there is no height they can't scale. Just different circumstances and the same person can be a devil or an angel.



Its all about ignorance and intelligence.


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Vinod2070 said:


> Whose side you are on? I can see now why your compatriots are calling you neo-Razakar on the internet.
> 
> You are justifying the murders and atrocities on your own people and making excuses for the people who did that! Just to get acceptance here and to feed the hatreds that you have for India.
> 
> Pathetic! Pathetic!



I am not justifying anything. I want to know the truth about the war not the BS version fed to us by India and their lackeys in Bangladesh.


----------



## Vinod2070

MBI Munshi said:


> I am not justifying anything. *I want to know the truth about the war *not the BS version fed to us by India and their lackeys in Bangladesh.



Whom are you trying to fool here? You can't fool me and there is no point in fooling yourself (nature has taken care of that).


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Vinod2070 said:


> You can't fool me



Fooling you is really not much of a challenge. What I said stands. Bangladeshis need to know the truth about 71.


----------



## Always Neutral

MBI Munshi said:


> I am not justifying anything. I want to know the truth about the war not the BS version fed to us by India and their lackeys in Bangladesh.



So take time and research it as you do that for a living but I doubt it will make you popular in bangladesh or Pakistan i suspect.

Regards


----------



## Vinod2070

And what seems to be preventing them from doing that?


----------



## Imran Khan

MBI Munshi said:


> Fooling you is really not much of a challenge. What I said stands. Bangladeshis need to know the truth about 71.



i think bangladeshi people know very well abut 71

you have half of your nation eye witness

books and that days new pepers

its not much old story friend

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

You can only take the horse to the water and no further.

And here its not even a horse we are talking about...


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Vinod2070 said:


> You can only take the horse to the water and no further.
> 
> And here its not even a horse we are talking about...



I suggest you stick to banging elephants but if you prefer horses thats your prerogative.


----------



## BanglaBhoot

imran khan said:


> i think bangladeshi people know very well abut 71



Actually they don't. We only know what has been fed to us by the Indian media. We only have half the story - the Indian version. Bangladesh is still creating its own independent understanding of the war. The Indian incitement on Shiekh Mujib in certain of his decisions is never discussed in Bangladesh. Indian intelligence infiltration from the 1960's in East Pakistan is also avoided. I assumed Pakistan would want Bangladeshis to clarify for themselves on these issues. Pakistanis should get away from the gut reaction that when a Bangladeshi raises the 1971 war it will be the same old Pakistan blame game. I want to look at issues from a fresh perspective and avoid the prejudices of the older generation. For Pakistan 1971 is a closed story for Bangladesh it is an open one as we reassess our relationship with India and understand New Delhi's motivations in assisting East Pakistan at that time. It will also help Bangladesh in its dealings with India today as it can now stop being the forever grateful recipient of Indian assistance. That has been a heavy burden to bear for the last 37 years but now we can lift it.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Vinod2070 said:


> Saying that atrocities happened from his countrymen also is one thing, using that to justify the military crackdown is another.



Where and when did I justify the crackdown? Stop making up stuff .....


----------



## Goodperson

MBI Munshi said:


> It will also help Bangladesh in its dealings with India today as it can now stop being the forever grateful recipient of Indian assistance. That has been a heavy burden to bear for the last 37 years but now we can lift it.



I never heard of Bangladesh talk of paying back India's assistance even if one forgets about interest above and over it still accepts assistance gracefully.


----------



## Vinod2070

MBI Munshi said:


> Where and when did I justify the crackdown? Stop making up stuff .....



What the hell is this then. if not pathetic justification for the murder of Bangladeshis:



MBI Munshi said:


> Atrocities were committed all round in that conflict. You should have seen how the Mukti Bahini and Mujib Bahini behaved. What is not documented is the Bengali on Bengali violence that occurred. Some of the killings of leftists were carried out on the orders of RAW. It is not clear how many deaths were caused by Indian policy of elimination and assassination.



And in another post you justified it by saying that Pakistan did it for keeping the country united.

In your hatred of India, you even forget that its your own countrymen who were the victims. But nothing else can be expected from a neo-Razakar like you. May be you were a Razakar back then.


----------



## Vinod2070

Goodperson said:


> I never heard of Bangladesh talk of paying back India's assistance even if one forgets about interest above and over it still accepts assistance gracefully.



The reality of his country belies the super inflated ego.

There is something called SELF ESTEEM. He may look for that word in a dictionary before trying to hide behind China's unwilling skirt every time he finds himself too small talking of India.

Actually for him India is just a means to try to gain stature being too small a man both figuratively and in reality.


----------



## Vinod2070

> For Pakistan 1971 is a closed story for Bangladesh it is an open one as we reassess our relationship with India and *understand New Delhi's motivations in assisting East Pakistan at that time*.



When you help some poor person, you feel that God will reward you in the after life. You are being a good Samaritan.

Does that mean that the poor person or the beggar needs to reassess why he is being given alms!

Pathetic logic again but very much expected.


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Seeking an explanation for certain incidents or events is not the same thing as a justification. 

I think the difference is too subtle for an elephant and horse banger. 

In 1971 India was also poor. India did not assist East Pakistan out of the goodness of its heart. First it doesn't have a heart and second its objectives were to create a slavish and subservient Eastern neighbor. This backfired in 1975.


----------



## salman nedian

Vinod2070 said:


> What the hell is this then. if not pathetic justification for the murder of Bangladeshis:
> 
> 
> 
> And in another post you justified it by saying that Pakistan did it for keeping the country united.
> 
> In your hatred of India, you even forget that its your own countrymen who were the victims. But nothing else can be expected from a neo-Razakar like you. May be you were a Razakar back then.



Why did Indians kill Sikhs???? Why Kashmiris are being slaughtered by Indian forces??

Indians entered in 1971 war because they wanted to prove that Two-Nation theory was wrong but unfortunately for you that despite of our fighting with Bangladeshis Two-Nation Theory still exists so your failed attempt to destroy our brotherhood is now forcing Indians to once again remind Bangladeshis to remain grateful for their help.


----------



## donrahul

Genocide happened, and people who died suffered horribly before dying.. There maybe argument about the numbers.. But it still does not make a difference.. Funny to see people who argue that a number of 300,000 is acceptable, which is infact very high.. so is a number of 30,000... Planned butchery.. 

Of course someone is going to point out, "what about Kashmir, What about Punjab?" The total number of deaths in Kashmir happening over a span of so many decades is far less than what happened in East Pakistan.. Again, I feel it is embarassing to quote that a lesser number of murders justifies it as lesser evil.

The nation of Pakistan split, because of West Pakistan's back biting in the elections and India had to do something to control the influx of Refugees.. If the number of refugees during Peace time is alarming, imagine, how a poor country like India would have coped with Refugees flooding in during 1971.. Also, there was something called as Self interest.. Half pakistan would mean, Halving the trouble which the country is facing @ both the borders..

Now we have people coming in and saying That India has expansionistic plans and all that assorted BS.. If it had such a plan, i wonder, why Bangladesh was not incorporated into WestBengal state of India , or why hadnt they put a India friendly or someone who is subservient to India.. I say guys, Think befor you shoot your mouths off.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## donrahul

salman nedian said:


> Why did Indians kill Sikhs???? Why Kashmiris are being slaughtered by Indian forces??
> 
> Indians entered in 1971 war because they wanted to prove that Two-Nation theory was wrong but unfortunately for you that despite of our fighting with Bangladeshis Two-Nation Theory still exists so your failed attempt to destroy our brotherhood is now forcing Indians to once again remind Bangladeshis to remain grateful for their help.



I am not sure if the 2 nation theory is right or wrong.. But One just has to open their eyes and look @ each other's country to see what is happening.. If you think you are in a better economic state and you are better than us in all ways, I would advise you to view things from a neutral position rather than being a nationalistic..


----------



## Vinod2070

MBI Munshi said:


> Seeking an explanation for certain incidents or events is not the same thing as a justification.
> 
> I think the difference is too subtle for an elephant and horse banger.
> 
> In 1971 India was also poor. India did not assist East Pakistan out of the goodness of its heart. First it doesn't have a heart and second its objectives were to create a slavish and subservient Eastern neighbor. This backfired in 1975.



Actually your problem in life is what you mentioned yourselves:



MBI Munshi said:


> It will also help Bangladesh in its dealings with India today as it can now stop being the forever grateful recipient of Indian assistance. That has been a heavy burden to bear for the last 37 years but now we can lift it.



You are a hateful character. You hate your smallness and insignificance and what better way than to bad mouth the big brother. That will help your pygmy self to feel taller by association.

But the same bad big brother protected your *** in 1971. So the hate drives you to live in denial and question the events and if that doesn't work than to question the reasons for the big brother's benevolence in saving you and liberating you.

Its just to justify your ungratefulness and to feed your hatred.

Stop living in the dreamland that it has anything to do with the _truth_.


----------



## donrahul

Reminds me of a saying that the a man would even forgive his most hated enemy,but he would never forgive his benefactor.. Coz it irks his esteem..


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> Genocide happened, and people who died suffered horribly before dying.. There maybe argument about the numbers.. But it still does not make a difference.. Funny to see people who argue that a number of 300,000 is acceptable, which is infact very high.. so is a number of 30,000... Planned butchery..
> 
> Of course someone is going to point out, "what about Kashmir, What about Punjab?" The total number of deaths in Kashmir happening over a span of so many decades is far less than what happened in East Pakistan.. Again, I feel it is embarassing to quote that a lesser number of murders justifies it as lesser evil.
> 
> The nation of Pakistan split, because of West Pakistan's back biting in the elections and India had to do something to control the influx of Refugees.. If the number of refugees during Peace time is alarming, imagine, how a poor country like India would have coped with Refugees flooding in during 1971.. Also, there was something called as Self interest.. Half pakistan would mean, Halving the trouble which the country is facing @ both the borders..
> 
> Now we have people coming in and saying That India has expansionistic plans and all that assorted BS.. If it had such a plan, i wonder, why Bangladesh was not incorporated into WestBengal state of India , or why hadnt they put a India friendly or someone who is subservient to India.. I say guys, Think befor you shoot your mouths off.



Indians have also been doing this planned butchery in Kashmir and it happened in 1984 for Sikhs as well. Calling Indians as innocent in 1971 conflict is something which cannot be justified. Those who are involved in killings of their own countrymen must shut their mouth upon the so called genocide in Bangladesh.

Indira Gandhi claimed that she sunk the Two-Nation Theory in the Bengal but after 37 years her claim is proved wrong and this is the reason why India could not merge Bangladesh with west Bengal.


----------



## Vinod2070

> this is the reason why India could not merge Bangladesh with west Bengal.



Any source that it was ever the Indian intention to do so?


----------



## salman nedian

Vinod2070 said:


> Any source that it was ever the Indian intention to do so?



Does India publish its policies???


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

donrahul said:


> Genocide happened, and people who died suffered horribly before dying.. There maybe argument about the numbers.. But it still does not make a difference.. Funny to see people who argue that a number of 300,000 is acceptable, which is infact very high.. so is a number of 30,000... Planned butchery..



I don't believe anyone has said that the lower numbers of deaths are acceptable, that is just you constructing a strawman argument.

It is a similar exercise, unfortunately, to Vinod's attempts at stifling constructive discourse over what actually happened, and how all parties shared blame to a different extent, by resorting to comments like 'justifying/excusing atrocities'.

What is also being argued is that the PA was not deployed in EP with the specific intent of massacring and raping the local population, but rather the atrocities that were committed were a result of events and the situation spiraling out of control, in which the Indians played a huge hand.


----------



## Vinod2070

salman nedian said:


> Does India publish its policies???



Why would you assume that it was India's policy?

Did you see India make any attempt to assimilate Bangladesh? We don't want it, they don't want it.

The question doesn't arise. Its a hypothetical scenario you are painting.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> I don't believe anyone has said that the lower numbers of deaths are acceptable, that is just you constructing a strawman argument.
> 
> It is a similar exercise, unfortunately, to *Vinod's attempts at stifling constructive discourse over what actually happened, and how all parties shared blame to a different extent, by resorting to comments like 'justifying/excusing atrocities'*.
> 
> What is also being argued is that the PA was not deployed in EP with the specific intent of massacring and raping the local population, but rather the atrocities that were committed were a result of events and the situation spiraling out of control, in which the Indians played a huge hand.



I will have to disagree here. My comment was specifically directed to an individual who behaved more loyal than the king in this case.

Anyway, the Yahya khan comment if true does indicate that the highest levels in the country were deliberately planning the crackdown. People like Tikka Khan and Yahya Khan were capable of that and you know that too.


----------



## Neo

MBI Munshi said:


> Actually they don't. We only know what has been fed to us by the Indian media. We only have half the story - the Indian version. Bangladesh is still creating its own independent understanding of the war. The Indian incitement on Shiekh Mujib in certain of his decisions is never discussed in Bangladesh. Indian intelligence infiltration from the 1960's in East Pakistan is also avoided. I assumed Pakistan would want Bangladeshis to clarify for themselves on these issues. Pakistanis should get away from the gut reaction that when a Bangladeshi raises the 1971 war it will be the same old Pakistan blame game. I want to look at issues from a fresh perspective and avoid the prejudices of the older generation. For Pakistan 1971 is a closed story for Bangladesh it is an open one as we reassess our relationship with India and understand New Delhi's motivations in assisting East Pakistan at that time. It will also help Bangladesh in its dealings with India today as it can now stop being the forever grateful recipient of Indian assistance. That has been a heavy burden to bear for the last 37 years but now we can lift it.



Excellent post Munshi Ji!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> I will have to disagree here. My comment was specifically directed to an individual who behaved more loyal than the king in this case.
> 
> Anyway, the Yahya khan comment if true does indicate that the highest levels in the country were deliberately planning the crackdown. People like Tikka Khan and Yahya Khan were capable of that and you know that too.



Vinod,

You accused him of excusing atrocities when all he did was point out that the dominant narrative in India and Bangladesh regarding the conflict may be wrong, the death toll inflated to destroy Pakistan's reputation and win a propaganda and psyops war, and that there were atrocities committed by both sides. Quite frankly I don't see how you can come to the conclusion you did on his comments, other then that you feel threatened that the traditional rhetoric of India and the narrative it has built up around East Pakistan is being demolished.

His comments:


> Atrocities were committed all round in that conflict. You should have seen how the Mukti Bahini and Mujib Bahini behaved. What is not documented is the Bengali on Bengali violence that occurred. Some of the killings of leftists were carried out on the orders of RAW. It is not clear how many deaths were caused by Indian policy of elimination and assassination.



If the Mukti and Mujib bahini committed atrocities, why shouldn't they be pointed out? If the scale of the atrocities is grossly inflated, why shouldn't it be argued and pointed out? Because India was supporting some of these groups and they committed massacres, and this demolishes the 'shining arse of India' myth? 

This is a completely valid argument, one that Pakistan has pointed out often, but it seems some Indians have been so brainwashed into believing that Pakistan is "Satan incarnate' that accepting any flaws in their own twisted version of history is just not acceptable.

You are free to argue your POV with links and sources, RR offered an excellent post at the beginning of this thread to make the case for why the atrocities were inflated. Why do we have to go into personal attacks instead of rational rebuttals?
The appropriate response would have been to ask him why he though what he die, and how you think he is incorrect, not accuse him of 'justifying atrocities', which he didn't.

You and some of the other Indians have not offered any constructive rebuttal of his or our points, choosing instead to construct strawman arguments of 'its not any better if fewer people were killed' or 'he's a razakar'.

On the Yahya issue, as I said to Flint, I can only find one original source for that comment, by a journalist who interviewed him. I cannot find any context for that remark, I do not know whether it was translated from urdu, etc. So I cannot say with certainty whether that comment is accurate or not.

Now we know full well that atrocities were indeed committed, atrocities are committed by Indian troops in IK as well i an attempt to control the population, but the point is that the reported scale makes no sense, nor does the argument that the PA specifically went in to massacre and rape people.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Flintlock

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> His comments...



If you observe carefully, it says "*what has not been documented..*.".

Now considering that you demand a "neutral" source for the tiniest of claims, and if that is provided, you claim that the only way you'll accept anything is if there is a trial and conviction or all the bodies are counted, it seems that the word of MBI Munshi (a self-confessed India hater) is enough to convince you of anything. 



> On the Yahya issue, as I said to Flint, I can only find one original source for that comment, by a journalist who interviewed him.



I think that should be more than enough proof, since far more serious allegations about India are taken as gospel without much backing-up.



> I cannot find any context for that remark, I do not know whether it was translated from urdu, etc. So I cannot say with certainty whether that comment is accurate or not.



Nothing is 100&#37; certain, which is why we accept a level of certainty.



> ...but the point is that the reported scale makes no sense, nor does the argument that the PA specifically went in to massacre and rape people.



Fair enough.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Vinod,
> 
> You accused him of excusing atrocities when all he did was point out that the dominant narrative in India and Bangladesh regarding the conflict may be wrong, the death toll inflated to destroy Pakistan's reputation and win a propaganda and psyops war, and that there were atrocities committed by both sides. Quite frankly I don't see how you can come to the conclusion you did on his comments, other then that you feel threatened that the traditional rhetoric of India and the narrative it has built up around East Pakistan is being demolished.
> 
> His comments:
> 
> 
> If the Mukti and Mujib bahini committed atrocities, why shouldn't they be pointed out? If the scale of the atrocities is grossly inflated, why shouldn't it be argued and pointed out? Because India was supporting some of these groups and they committed massacres, and this demolishes the 'shining arse of India' myth?
> 
> This is a completely valid argument, one that Pakistan has pointed out often, but it seems some Indians have been so brainwashed into believing that Pakistan is "Satan incarnate' that accepting any flaws in their own twisted version of history is just not acceptable.
> 
> You are free to argue your POV with links and sources, RR offered an excellent post at the beginning of this thread to make the case for why the atrocities were inflated. Why do we have to go into personal attacks instead of rational rebuttals?
> The appropriate response would have been to ask him why he though what he die, and how you think he is incorrect, not accuse him of 'justifying atrocities', which he didn't.
> 
> You and some of the other Indians have not offered any constructive rebuttal of his or our points, choosing instead to construct strawman arguments of 'its not any better if fewer people were killed' or 'he's a razakar'.



It was not only with respect to this single post but the entire history of his posts. This guy is a India hater (which in itself is no big deal) but this hate causes him to lose the context. He always sees the 1971 events as something that effected only India and not his own people. Just try to see his posts on the 1971 events and you will know what I am saying.



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> On the Yahya issue, as I said to Flint, I can only find one original source for that comment, by a journalist who interviewed him. I cannot find any context for that remark, I do not know whether it was translated from urdu, etc. So I cannot say with certainty whether that comment is accurate or not.



I think this is the most authentic source that you can get. This comment is widely published in several reputed publications.



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Now we know full well that atrocities were indeed committed, *atrocities are committed by Indian troops in IK as well i an attempt to control the population*, but the point is that the reported scale makes no sense, nor does the argument that the PA specifically went in to massacre and rape people.



*Were you serious when you wrote this? Where did you get the idea?*

PA may not have gone there to do that. I think I am getting forced to prove something which I am not interested in. Most German soldiers were not evil men. They just followed the orders and did what they thought was their duty.

A few bad people can cause such disasters. It does not mean that whole qaum has to be evil to perform such evil acts. Just a few evil men at the top are enough.


----------



## BanglaBhoot

I think it is absurd to call me an Indian hater. It is very subjective terminology and it is your definition. I think that Agnostic has understood correctly my position on the issue. The interpretation of Vinod on my comments is extremely prejudiced and unfair.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> If you observe carefully, it says "*what has not been documented..*.".
> 
> Now considering that you demand a "neutral" source for the tiniest of claims, and if that is provided, you claim that the only way you'll accept anything is if there is a trial and conviction or all the bodies are counted, it seems that the word of MBI Munshi (a self-confessed India hater) is enough to convince you of anything.


No, you completely misunderstood my post. I am not saying Munshi sahib is a 'source, I am merely pointing out that his arguments contesting the dominant narrative are valid, and do not in anyway reflect some sort of 'acceptance of atrocities'. 

This is what intellectual curiosity is supposed to be about, not just accepting something at face value, but digging deeper to ascertain more, if not all, the facts, and using our minds to rationally and logically analyze whatever claims are being made in the light of facts. As I mentioned, RR attempted to do just that at the beginning of this thread.




> I think that should be more than enough proof, since far more serious allegations about India are taken as gospel without much backing-up.
> 
> Nothing is 100&#37; certain, which is why we accept a level of certainty.


I am not dismissing that alleged quote out of hand. I just have certain reasons as to why I am uncertain about its veracity which I have outlined. Context is important, otherwise many things can be taken to imply something they were not intended to. Was it an off the cuff comment offered in a show of bravado to a journalist, and not a policy decision or order handed out to the Army/SF's? 

It certainly does not, and cannot, reflect official policy in EP if the only thing we have to go by is a quote by one man in an interview to a journalist.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> It was not only with respect to this single post but the entire history of his posts. This guy is a India hater (which in itself is no big deal) but this hate causes him to lose the context. He always sees the 1971 events as something that effected only India and not his own people. Just try to see his posts on the 1971 events and you will know what I am saying.


I think we had this discussion when you first joined this forum. I pointed out to you that I choose to try and analyze a posters argument based on the merits of that particular argument, not what he may or may not have posted before. In this particular case Munshi sahib has outlined arguments that are accepted by many neutral historians, that India supported militants in EP, and that atrocities were committed by both sides. Now I do not see why his previous posts should have any bearing on this, nor why this should be construed as 'justifying atrocities'.

Munshi sahib has certainly been critical of Indian policies, but so are many of you critical of Pakistan, sometimes (IMO) irrationally so. That does not prevent me from attempting to address your arguments rationally, though I may also point out that I view your comments as being reflective of an irrational dislike of Pakistan.


> I think this is the most authentic source that you can get. This comment is widely published in several reputed publications.


It is widely published, but it seems to always go back to that one quote made to one journalist, and it is the context of that quote and the background of it that I have been unable to find.


> *Were you serious when you wrote this? Where did you get the idea?*
> 
> PA may not have gone there to do that. I think I am getting forced to prove something which I am not interested in. Most German soldiers were not evil men. They just followed the orders and did what they thought was their duty.
> 
> A few bad people can cause such disasters. It does not mean that whole qaum has to be evil to perform such evil acts. Just a few evil men at the top are enough.


Of course I am serious, lets not start with a deluge of links from international organizations documenting atrocities by Indian troops in Kashmir. I am merely pointing out that the Indian military put into a similar (though not as inflamed) situation also committed atrocities.

There is a difference between the Nazi's and what happened in EP. The Nazi extermination of the Jews was an ideological evil, of a sense of superiority and an ideology of hate that specifically stated that the Jews should be eliminated.

What happened in EP was nowhere close to that. EP was the result of a conflict getting out of hand (in which India played a huge role), and the entity (the PA) responsible for maintaining security and order experiencing a breakdown in discipline amidst the chaos and looting. I think it is fair to say that, like partition, once each side had committed atrocities, the situation just fell apart in hate and anger. 

But I reiterate, there is distinct difference between the Nazis and EP in that the PA was not deployed to 'exterminate the Bengalis', nor was there any ideological hatred in play like that of the Nazi's. Could officers have given commands that could be considered war crimes? Absolutely, but the point is that nothing indicates that such orders were institutionalized as part of implementing some sort of official 'pogrom'.


----------



## Vinod2070

MBI Munshi said:


> I think it is absurd to call me an Indian hater. It is very subjective terminology and it is your definition. I think that Agnostic has understood correctly my position on the issue. The interpretation of Vinod on my comments is extremely prejudiced and unfair.



Well this is what I have observed over a long period. I think being antagonistic to India is not that big a deal, its that you tend to lose the context with that antagonism.

If you think I am being subjective, that is your prerogative. I think I am being objective and it has been from the history of your posts and the general thought process that you have shown.

To tell you frankly, I still like Bangladesh as a country and Bangladeshis in general. I feel happy when they achieve something. I feel happy when A Mohammed Younus gets the Nobel prize for his Grameen bank initiative that has helped many Bangladeshis and projected a positive image of the country and actually showed that Bangladeshis can show leadership in the region and the world.

Some people like you tend to destroy that positive image with your bigotry, but I always remind myself that you represent a very small minority of your country, no way representative of a great culture that I love and admire.


----------



## donrahul

It seems, everyone is accepting to everyone else's arguments, except when it comes to MBI Munshi.. Let me try to summarize everything, so we can stop the needless argument about Mr.Munshi is good or Bad..
1) There was a war in 1971.
2) B/W India and Pakistan.
3) War was over the East Pakistan issue.
4) India did not fight the war, to uphold democracy like our Big brother or any other Pious selfless motives.
5) There was a big flood of immigrants, badly affecting a very poor country.
6) East Pakistan rebelled and wanted a seperate country.
7) PA was given orders to quell the rebellion.
8) It is understandable that the army resorted to Killings..
9) The Local East Pakistanis formed a partisan group which also involved in killings, but whose number are either suppressed or lesser than that of PA's (atleast according to documented sources)
10) India did not incite the war, without ground support.. Else there would have been no formation of Bangladesh. There was a good support for breaking away from West Pakistan. (This is for Self styled barristers and scholars, who insist that Bangladesh creation was purely sculpted by the Ugly hands of RAW and India Inc)
11) The number of people massacred was put @ 3-5 million..
12) The first time I heard this , It sounded Absurd..
13) Irrespective of the source of the news, this has been corroborated by the Bangladeshi Regime..
14) It is quite likely and highly possible that the numbers have been considerably spiked up..
15) A lesser number does not justify it as a lesser evil, although everybody agrees that the number sounds irresponsibly high..
16) so everybody is now accepting that the numbers could be wrong..

End of Discussion. Period. 

I propose this coz, its sickening to argue on numbers..


----------



## salman nedian

Vinod2070 said:


> Some people like you tend to destroy that positive image with your bigotry, but I always remind myself that you represent a very small minority of your country, no way representative of a great culture that I love and admire.



The good thing is that the old wounds are healing. Bangladesh will always be closer to Pakistan because you can see that despite of all the Indian efforts of creating misunderstandings between the two wings of Quaid-e-Azams Pakistan, we are one. Once Faiz said:

Kab nazar mein aaye gi bedaagh sabze ki bahaar
Khoon de dhabbe dhulen ge kitni barsaaton ke baad

Translation:
When will we again see a spring of unstained green?
After how many monsoons will the blood be washed from the branches?

After 37 monsoons the blood is washing out and let it be washed out.


----------



## donrahul

salman nedian said:


> The good thing is that the old wounds are healing. Bangladesh will always be closer to Pakistan because you can see that despite of all the Indian efforts of creating misunderstandings between the two wings of Quaid-e-Azams Pakistan, we are one. Once Faiz said:
> 
> Kab nazar mein aaye gi bedaagh sabze ki bahaar
> Khoon de dhabbe dhulen ge kitni barsaaton ke baad
> 
> Translation:
> When will we again see a spring of unstained green?
> After how many monsoons will the blood be washed from the branches?
> 
> After 37 monsoons the blood is washing out and let it be washed out.



Would be lot more better if the wounds of Ind,Pak and Ban healed allowing free movement, trade and overall benefit for the entire subcontinent rather than sticking to ol'news....


----------



## Flintlock

MBI Munshi said:


> I think it is absurd to call me an Indian hater. It is very subjective terminology and it is your definition. I think that Agnostic has understood correctly my position on the issue. The interpretation of Vinod on my comments is extremely prejudiced and unfair.



Calling for the disintegration of India makes you an India-hater. 

That's pretty damned objective.


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> Would be lot more better if the wounds of Ind,Pak and Ban healed allowing free movement, trade and overall benefit for the entire subcontinent rather than sticking to ol'news....



We need to consider about uniting our country.


----------



## donrahul

salman nedian said:


> We need to consider about uniting our country.



Would Pakistanis like it, If Indians talked about reuniting Pakistan with India?? or Vice versa?  Off topic! though, I couldnt help myself


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> Would Pakistanis like it, If Indians talked about reuniting Pakistan with India?? or Vice versa?  Off topic! though, I couldnt help myself



Pakistan and India have different issues and we have land disputes but Pak and BD can increase cooperation and can emerge as a union of independent countries as we collectively gained independence from India in 1947 and other than 1971 we have no issue.


----------



## donrahul

salman nedian said:


> Pakistan and India have different issues and we have land disputes but Pak and BD can increase cooperation and can emerge as a union of independent countries as we collectively gained independence from India in 1947 and other than 1971 we have no issue.



Wake up buddy! Last heard it was pakistanis who were telling that they own India, that all the monuments and culture were given by the Mughals whose rightful successors are Pakistanis... and What Independance?? 


Ominous signs of


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> Wake up buddy! Last heard it was pakistanis who were telling that they own India, that all the monuments and culture were given by the Mughals whose rightful successors are Pakistanis... and What Independance??
> 
> 
> Ominous signs of



Having Issues with India and owning the monuments are two different things mate!

Waise if you want us to make your country Pakistan, you are more than welcome.


----------



## donrahul

salman nedian said:


> Having Issues with India and owning the monuments are two different things mate!
> 
> Waise if you want us to make your country Pakistan, you are more than welcome.



U better not be an Islamic Republic then.. make it plain Vanilla, Republic of Pakistan 

Lets get back to the topic @ hand.. What do u say for this.. and the post below it.. 
http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/8639-disproving-some-genocide-claims-9.html#post210491


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> U better not be an Islamic Republic then.. make it plain Vanilla, Republic of Pakistan
> 
> Lets get back to the topic @ hand.. What do u say for this.. and the post below it..
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/8639-disproving-some-genocide-claims-9.html#post210491



For topic my point is Pakistan did not commit genocide. India was attempting to destabilize Pakistan right from the beginning and the matter was not as simple as East Pakistanis were moving to India so India entered the war; remember the Agartala conspiracy case which is a solid proof of Indian efforts to destabilize Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## donrahul

The forum members would need far more than an allegation from one salman Nedian.. can you provide some neutral links?!


----------



## BanglaBhoot

donrahul said:


> The forum members would need far more than an allegation from one salman Nedian.. can you provide some neutral links?!



There are several books in Bangla which directly shows that conspiracies were perpetrated from the Indian High Commission and which culminated in the Agartala case.


----------



## donrahul

MBI Munshi said:


> There are several books in Bangla which directly shows that conspiracies were perpetrated from the Indian High Commission and which culminated in the Agartala case.



Did u read my post? *Neutral Links!*


----------



## BanglaBhoot

donrahul said:


> Did u read my post? *Neutral Links!*



Who could be more neutral than Bangladesh?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Of course I am serious,



*You shock me!

You are serious when you say this!*



> atrocities are committed by Indian troops in IK as well i an attempt to control the population



This is the first time I ever heard such absurdity.

Frankly it was disappointing to say the least.


----------



## Vinod2070

salman nedian said:


> The good thing is that the old wounds are healing. Bangladesh will always be closer to Pakistan because you can see that despite of all the Indian efforts of creating misunderstandings between the two wings of Quaid-e-Azams Pakistan, we are one. Once Faiz said:
> 
> Kab nazar mein aaye gi bedaagh sabze ki bahaar
> Khoon de dhabbe dhulen ge kitni barsaaton ke baad
> 
> Translation:
> When will we again see a spring of unstained green?
> After how many monsoons will the blood be washed from the branches?
> 
> After 37 monsoons the blood is washing out and let it be washed out.



India has nothing against what relations Pakistan and Bangladesh want to have as long as it is not directed against us.

Right now the relationship seeems to be more about allowing ISI to use Bangladesh as a base for terror attacks on India.


----------



## salman nedian

Vinod2070 said:


> India has nothing against what relations Pakistan and Bangladesh want to have as long as it is not directed against us.
> 
> Right now the relationship seeems to be more about allowing ISI to use Bangladesh as a base for terror attacks on India.



So you want friendly relations with Bangladesh which are directed against Pakistan?

Friend! The single issue between Pakistan and Bangladesh is also a humanitarian issue so we want good relations with them.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

donrahul said:


> It seems, everyone is accepting to everyone else's arguments, except when it comes to MBI Munshi.. Let me try to summarize everything, so we can stop the needless argument about Mr.Munshi is good or Bad..
> 1) There was a war in 1971.
> 2) B/W India and Pakistan.
> 3) War was over the East Pakistan issue.
> 4) India did not fight the war, to uphold democracy like our Big brother or any other Pious selfless motives.
> 5) There was a big flood of immigrants, badly affecting a very poor country.
> 6) East Pakistan rebelled and wanted a seperate country.
> 7) PA was given orders to quell the rebellion.
> 8) It is understandable that the army resorted to Killings..
> 9) The Local East Pakistanis formed a partisan group which also involved in killings, but whose number are either suppressed or lesser than that of PA's (atleast according to documented sources)
> 10) India did not incite the war, without ground support.. Else there would have been no formation of Bangladesh. There was a good support for breaking away from West Pakistan. (This is for Self styled barristers and scholars, who insist that Bangladesh creation was purely sculpted by the Ugly hands of RAW and India Inc)
> 11) The number of people massacred was put @ 3-5 million..
> 12) The first time I heard this , It sounded Absurd..
> 13) Irrespective of the source of the news, this has been corroborated by the Bangladeshi Regime..
> 14) It is quite likely and highly possible that the numbers have been considerably spiked up..
> 15) A lesser number does not justify it as a lesser evil, although everybody agrees that the number sounds irresponsibly high..
> 16) so everybody is now accepting that the numbers could be wrong..
> 
> End of Discussion. Period.
> 
> I propose this coz, its sickening to argue on numbers..



Thanks the list of your opinions, but this thread is primarily over the actual number of those killed, and for the last time, no one is saying that it is 'alright' that fewer people were killed - though it should in fact be a relief that nowhere close to the 3 million were killed.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> *You shock me!
> 
> You are serious when you say this!*
> 
> 
> 
> This is the first time I ever heard such absurdity.
> 
> Frankly it was disappointing to say the least.



I don't want to turn this into another Kashmir thread, you could start a similar thread if you wish to counter the accusations.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

donrahul said:


> Wake up buddy! Last heard it was pakistanis who were telling that they own India, that all the monuments and culture were given by the Mughals whose rightful successors are Pakistanis... and What Independance??
> 
> 
> Ominous signs of



And your evidence that all Pakistanis or the Pakistani government is advocating these policies?

I think you need to wake up and get back down to earth!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> India has nothing against what relations Pakistan and Bangladesh want to have as long as it is not directed against us.
> 
> Right now the relationship seeems to be more about allowing ISI to use Bangladesh as a base for terror attacks on India.



Ahh, thats identical to our complaint over the Indian-Afghan relationship.


----------



## donrahul

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> And your evidence that all Pakistanis or the Pakistani government is advocating these policies?
> 
> I think you need to wake up and get back down to earth!



I am of the staunch opinion that there should be Stereotyping. Apologies if it felt that way. I have gone thru a lot of threads in this Forum, especially related to history. The war of words b/w Road runner and Flintlock, some of the posts there made me to respond this way..


----------



## donrahul

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> And your evidence that all Pakistanis or the Pakistani government is advocating these policies?
> 
> I think you need to wake up and get back down to earth!



BTW yu missed the point behind the sarcasm. Pakistan and B'desh got independence from India huh??


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> BTW yu missed the point behind the sarcasm. Pakistan and B'desh got independence from India huh??



Yes! West and East Pakistan got independence from India in 1947.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

donrahul said:


> BTW yu missed the point behind the sarcasm. Pakistan and B'desh got independence from India huh??



No, Pakistan won its independence from the British, as did India.

Bangladesh won its independence from Pakistan.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

donrahul said:


> I am of the staunch opinion that there should be Stereotyping. Apologies if it felt that way. I have gone thru a lot of threads in this Forum, especially related to history. The war of words b/w Road runner and Flintlock, some of the posts there made me to respond this way..



And if you notice the unscientific poll at the top, and read through the posts, the majority of Pakistanis did not advocate the opinions you attributed to them.


----------



## Goodperson

MBI Munshi said:


> Who could be more neutral than Bangladesh?



Just Google"Bangladesh Genocide" or "Rape of Bangladesh" you will get plenty of neutral sources.


----------



## Vinod2070

Also search for "hand in the cookie jar". You get at least one neutral source.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Goodperson said:


> Just Google"Bangladesh Genocide" or "Rape of Bangladesh" you will get plenty of neutral sources.



We argued, without a rebuttal so far, at the beginning of this thread that the numbers on both those issues bandied about on 'neutral websites' are wrong, and statistically implausible.

India's covert support for violent groups in Bangaldesh was proved in another thread, through the words of Sam Manekshaw to Indira Gandhi no less.


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Vinod2070 said:


> Also search for "hand in the cookie jar". You get at least one neutral source.



Your obsession with banging elephants and horses now has you obsessing with cookie jars. You are getting weirder by the day. Just keep your hands to yourself.  

Why doesn't anyone read Asoka Rainia's book? That is an Indian source with all information on RAW activities in South Asia.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

On the issue of RAW activities in Bangladesh and East Pakistan, a cursory search turned this up:


> *Creation of Bangladesh:* The Bangladesh operation, beginning with sowing seeds of dissension, leading to the Agartala Conspiracy, creation of Mukti Bahini and under its cover sneaking into East Pakistan for guerrilla operations to blow up bridges and other installations damaged the morale of Pakistani troops and India won the war even before the battle began, thanks to RAW as its agents had infiltrated every nook and corner of erstwhile East Pakistan. The paragraph entitled: 'RAW takes shape', in the initial part of this article, amply demonstrates the causal chain of events.
> 
> 
> RAW AT WAR-II



Again, the activities of RAW in East Pakistan in terms of inflaming the situation were also referred to by Sam Manekshaw, so this is really a moot point to quibble over.

Thanks for mentioning that book Munshi Shaib, will check it out.


----------



## salman nedian

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> No, Pakistan won its independence from the British, as did India.
> 
> Bangladesh won its independence from Pakistan.



You are right that Pakistan and India gained independence from British but Bangladesh too got independence from British and due to political differences with West Pakistan they had decided to run their part themselves. I would not call it independence but separation from West Pakistans administration.


----------



## Flintlock

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> On the issue of RAW activities in Bangladesh and East Pakistan, a cursory search turned this up:



And the source is ??? 

Its a worthless para Agno. It has got no credibility.



> Again, the activities of RAW in East Pakistan in terms of inflaming the situation were also referred to by Sam Manekshaw, so this is really a moot point to quibble over.



Whatever Manekshaw did mention, I'm sure it wasn't remotely related to the article you just posted.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Flintlock said:


> And the source is ???
> 
> Its a worthless para Agno. It has got no credibility.
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever Manekshaw did mention, I'm sure it wasn't remotely related to the article you just posted.



Manekshaw confirmed the use of proxies by India to sow dissension and instigate an uprising to IG as early as the beginning of 1971 This point was the focus of my debate with Salim and Vish on another East Pakistan thread, and it clearly establishes Indian complicity. Not to mention the dozens of Pakistani sources, and sources like the one above that also argue the same.

But regardless of whether you agree with the 'juicy details' in that quote above, the involvement of the GoI in fomenting violence in EP and inflaming the situation is a moot point.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

PS: It seems the source for that quote, and this one from Global security are Asok Rainia's book:


> The involvement of RAW in East Pakistan is said to date from the
> 1960s, when RAW promoted dissatisfaction against Pakistan in East
> Pakistan, including funding Mujibur Rahmanh&#8217;s general election in 1970
> and providing training and arming the Mukti Bahini.
> Indian intelligence agencies, were involved in East Pakistan now,
> Bangladesh, beginning, in the early 1960&#8217;s.
> 
> Its operatives were in touch with Sheikh Mujib for quite some time.
> Sheikh Mujib went to Agartala in 1965.The famous Agartala case was
> unearthed in 1967.In fact, the main purpose of raising R.A.W. in 1968
> was to organize covert operations in Bangladesh.
> 
> As early as 1968, R.A.W. was given a green light to begin mobilizing
> all its resources for the impending surgical intervention in erstwhile
> East Pakistan.When in July 1971 General Manekshaw told Prime Minister
> Indira Gandhi that the army would not be ready until December to
> intervene in Bangladesh, she quickly turned to R.A.W. for help.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

PS: It seems the source for that quote, and this one from Global security are Asok Rainia's book:


> The involvement of RAW in East Pakistan is said to date from the
> 1960s, when RAW promoted dissatisfaction against Pakistan in East
> Pakistan, including funding Mujibur Rahmanhs general election in 1970
> and providing training and arming the Mukti Bahini.
> Indian intelligence agencies, were involved in East Pakistan now,
> Bangladesh, beginning, in the early 1960s.
> 
> Its operatives were in touch with Sheikh Mujib for quite some time.
> Sheikh Mujib went to Agartala in 1965.The famous Agartala case was
> unearthed in 1967.In fact, the main purpose of raising R.A.W. in 1968
> was to organize covert operations in Bangladesh.
> 
> As early as 1968, R.A.W. was given a green light to begin mobilizing
> all its resources for the impending surgical intervention in erstwhile
> East Pakistan.When in July 1971 General Manekshaw told Prime Minister
> Indira Gandhi that the army would not be ready until December to
> intervene in Bangladesh, she quickly turned to R.A.W. for help.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

And a more detailed excerpt from Rainia's book, and a pretty sanitized and pro-Indian one at that:


> The Bangla Desh Operation possibly began a year before the actual operation was underway. Even when the world did get a whiff of it in the shape of the Mukti Bahani, many remained unaware of RAW&#8217;s involvement. By then Phase I of the operation was already completed. Phase II saw the Indian Armed Forces poised for the liberation of Bangla Desh. RAW, along with the Mukti Bahani, when they developed into a formidable force, provided information to the Indian forces.
> 
> Information collected by an IB foreign desk operative in London from a Pakistani diplomat indicated that the West Pakistanis were contemplating action against Bengali Muslims in Pakistan. By 1968 Indian operatives had already been in contact with the &#8216;&#8216;pro-Mujib&#8217;&#8217; faction. A meeting convened in Agartala during 1962-63, between the IB foreign desk operatives and the Mujib faction indicated to &#8216;&#8216;Colonel&#8217;&#8217; Menon (which in fact was Sankaran Nair&#8217;s non de guerre that the &#8216;group&#8217; was eager to escalate their movement. &#8216;&#8216;Colonel Menon&#8217;&#8217; had warned them that in his opinion it was far too early for them to take any positive action. As Colonel Menon right put it&#8230;.&#8216;&#8216;they jumped the gun.&#8217;&#8217; But this was a total disaster.
> 
> A few months later, on January 6, 1968, the Pakistan government announced that 28 persons would be prosecuted for conspiring to bring about the secession of East Pakistan, with India&#8217;s help. Mujib was implicated 12 years later as an accused. By now the IB foreign desk (PAK) had moved to the new set-up at RAW. RAW cells were set up all along the border.
> 
> RAW sources in Karachi had indicated a movement of troops from Karachi harbour for Dacca. On March 3, a message sent out from Dacca to Calcutta by a RAW operative indicated that a major crackdown was imminent. As the report found its way to New Delhi, an urgent message was flashed &#8212; &#8216;&#8216;&#8230;advise Menon&#8230;&#8217; to bring in &#8230; our friends.&#8217; Towards the end of April the genocide continued and drove 9.8 million into exile to India. The March 1969 RAW report had already spelt out the possibility of Pakistan resorting to a war with India&#8230; By the end of May, another RAW assessment sent to the Prime Minister spelt out the need of a &#8216;&#8216;surgical intervention&#8217;&#8217;. RAW received the green signal and began mobilising its resources. The Mukti Fauj was known as the Mukti Bahani two months after its formation on the night of March 25, 1971.
> 
> General SHFJ Manekshaw, Chief of Army Staff, realised that the major question of India&#8217;s defence policy could not be dealt with in purely military terms. As Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, he pressed for political involvement of the Government. For the first time a political representative in the person of DP Dhar, designated as Chairman of the Planning Committee of the Ministry of External Affairs, was inducted into the war council. On the civil side, a secretariat committee was set up to take executive decisions, dealing with preparations for war and their execution. The committee consisted of the Secretaries of Defence, Home, Finance and Foreign Affairs, with Kao as Member Secretary.
> 
> With the go-ahead signal, RAW&#8217;s underground network in East Pakistan came alive. Every six weeks 2,000 guerrillas were being trained by RAW, capable of taking on the enemy in hit and run encounters.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## BanglaBhoot

The Asoka Raina book is a wonderful source of information and I relied on it for my book The India Doctrine. There is a lot more out there but much is written in Bangla.


----------



## donrahul

*With the go-ahead signal, RAW&#8217;s underground network in East Pakistan came alive. Every six weeks 2,000 guerrillas were being trained by RAW, capable of taking on the enemy in hit and run encounters. *

So can I say that there was dissent? and there was a reason for dissent? That mobilized so much of the local population to revolt against the central Government?


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> *With the go-ahead signal, RAWs underground network in East Pakistan came alive. Every six weeks 2,000 guerrillas were being trained by RAW, capable of taking on the enemy in hit and run encounters. *
> 
> So can I say that there was dissent? and there was a reason for dissent? That mobilized so much of the local population to revolt against the central Government?



Is this a justification for interfering in a countrys matter and establishing a network in an area which is not disputed?????????????


----------



## donrahul

salman nedian said:


> Is this a justification for interfering in a countrys matter and establishing a network in an area which is not disputed?????????????



Yes.. If the establishment is going to reduce the immediate danger with a country which had already tried to wage war twice in 1965 and 1948.. Destabilizing and splitting would have been necessary. I am giving a strategic perspective here. You always look for weak points of the enemy and not the disputed areas to weaken him..


----------



## salman nedian

donrahul said:


> Yes.. If the establishment is going to reduce the immediate danger with a country which had already tried to wage war twice in 1965 and 1948.. Destabilizing and splitting would have been necessary. I am giving a strategic perspective here. You always look for weak points of the enemy and not the disputed areas to weaken him..



Good! Now you have a point.

So Indians should not scream if we gain advantage of freedom movements all over India and thats fair enough, lets make this region the worst place to live and its all is in accordance with the Indian policy.


----------



## donrahul

salman nedian said:


> Good! Now you have a point.
> 
> So Indians should not scream if we gain advantage of freedom movements all over India and thats fair enough, lets make this region the worst place to live and its all is in accordance with the Indian policy.



Lets not make it look like, you learnt all these subterfuge and cloak-and-dagger stuff only after 1971.. Its not like we are US and Canada. We are not buddies.. We both are enemies to each other.(Nothing personal.. from a strategic perspective..) and ISI has not been quiet either..

Infact many people would rate ISI as more successful than RAW.. and BTW we cant discuss morality here.. Both u and me.. Coz we both are not


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

donrahul said:


> Lets not make it look like, you learnt all these subterfuge and cloak-and-dagger stuff only after 1971.. Its not like we are US and Canada. We are not buddies.. We both are enemies to each other.(Nothing personal.. from a strategic perspective..) and ISI has not been quiet either..
> 
> Infact many people would rate ISI as more successful than RAW.. and BTW we cant discuss morality here.. Both u and me.. Coz we both are not



Do remind your fellow Indians of that whenever they start ranting about the ISI after a bombing in India.

I am looking forward to your posts based on 'realism' educating them.


----------



## donrahul

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Do remind your fellow Indians of that whenever they start ranting about the ISI after a bombing in India.
> 
> I am looking forward to your posts based on 'realism' educating them.



It aint that easy buddy.. We all need someone to blame. When things go wrong, people look around them, They blame the boss, the servant, the wife, the kids, the cat, the dog, or the Doctor, The government etc... Everyone except them.. Human tendency.. 

When you are looking at a bigger perspective like a country,you will see that they dont want to blame the police for their inefficient policing or blame The Government employees who give out ration card, voter id card for a bribe of Rs.1000 or blame the ministers who cant control the corruption in their departments or the Head of the state for his ball-less acts, which are more centered around their party remaining in power than take a unpopular but effective scheme to uplift the nation.. 

On the other hand, dont we see every Bombing in Pakistan or Afghanistan results in People blaming RAW, MOssad and CIA with our local PDF Barrister providing his insightful thinkings of what he thinks about RAW? 

PS: Sorry for the delayed response.. Was @ home for Diwali


----------



## vish

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Do remind your fellow Indians of that whenever they start ranting about the ISI after a bombing in India.




Sorry to intrude... but how are urban and suicide bombings or Kashmir-revenge attacks in urban areas similar to 1971?


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

vish said:


> Sorry to intrude... but how are urban and suicide bombings or Kashmir-revenge attacks in urban areas similar to 1971?



You misunderstood the context of exchange with Donrahul. His response to me above should clarify what we were talking about.

By the way, inciting violence, massacres and atrocities, as India did in EP, is just as bad as what you describe. 

Innocents do not have to be killed by a suicide bomb alone for the acts to be considered 'terrorism'. What India did in 1971 was state sponsored terrorism by today's yardstick.


----------



## third eye

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> You misunderstood the context of exchange with Donrahul. His response to me above should clarify what we were talking about.
> 
> By the way, inciting violence, massacres and atrocities, as India did in EP, is just as bad as what you describe.
> 
> Innocents do not have to be killed by a suicide bomb alone for the acts to be considered 'terrorism'. What India did in 1971 was state sponsored terrorism by today's yardstick.



What would you call Op Grandslam ?


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

third eye said:


> What would you call Op Grandslam ?



An attempt to settle a territorial dispute, whose means of diplomatic resolution India unilaterally walked away from (by rejecting the UNSC resolutions it agreed to, as well as violating the Instrument of Accession condition of plebiscite) by getting the local population,* in disputed territory*, to rise up against the 'occupiers'.


----------



## third eye

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> An attempt to settle a territorial dispute, whose means of diplomatic resolution India unilaterally walked away from (by rejecting the UNSC resolutions it agreed to, as well as violating the Instrument of Accession condition of plebiscite) by getting the local population,* in disputed territory*, to rise up against the 'occupiers'.



How convenient !!

Well. one man's food is another man's poison.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

third eye said:


> How convenient !!
> 
> Well. one man's food is another man's poison.



Absolutely nothing of the sort.

Op. Grandslam is only comparable to EP in that covert intervention was used. However, the motives, methods, objectives and background dynamics were completely different. You are trying to compare apples and oranges here.


----------



## Always Neutral

salman nedian said:


> Is this a justification for interfering in a countrys matter and establishing a network in an area which is not disputed?????????????



Afghanistan ring a bell ? All countries interfere in each others affairs both India and Pakistan have dirty hands so stop the blame game.

Regards


----------



## Always Neutral

If Pakistan and AM and others are convinced then why does not Pakistan alongwith MBI Munshi ask for an UN Inquiry and get the truth out. India cannot interfere and they will be exposed once and for all.

Regards


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Always Neutral said:


> If Pakistan and AM and others are convinced then why does not Pakistan alongwith MBI Munshi ask for an UN Inquiry and get the truth out. India cannot interfere and they will be exposed once and for all.
> 
> Regards



No need scratching open old wounds. What is more important is that the two nations move forward in a spirit of reconciliation, friendship and cooperation. 

Atrocities were committed, though the scale is disputed, and it would seem callous to those who suffered for Pakistan to officially argue over how many. At some future date perhaps, when the wounds are not so fresh.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Always Neutral said:


> Afghanistan ring a bell ? All countries interfere in each others affairs both India and Pakistan have dirty hands so stop the blame game.
> 
> Regards



A quick correction on that point. Afghanistan was the first to start that as well, first with its refusal to accept Pakistan, and its subsequent support for some Baluch militant leaders, and then the failed attempt to start a seperatist movement in the NWFP. Our involvement did not arise until there was a direct threat posed to us by the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan, and the post Soviet civil war and chaos.


----------



## Always Neutral

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> A quick correction on that point. Afghanistan was the first to start that as well, first with its refusal to accept Pakistan, and its subsequent support for some Baluch militant leaders, and then the failed attempt to start a seperatist movement in the NWFP. Our involvement did not arise until there was a direct threat posed to us by the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan, and the post Soviet civil war and chaos.



Come on AM, I was not born yesterday. Your hands ( I mean Pakistan) are as tainted in Afghanistan as India's is in Bangladesh. You were among the three countries to recognise the Taliban lead Afghanistan. Most of your leaders justified it as the right policy for strategic depth.

Regards


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Always Neutral said:


> Come on AM, I was not born yesterday. Your hands ( I mean Pakistan) are as tainted in Afghanistan as India's is in Bangladesh. You were among the three countries to recognise the Taliban lead Afghanistan. Most of your leaders justified it as the right policy for strategic depth.
> 
> Regards



Incorrect comparison - India chose to destabilize the situation and intervene with the intent of dismemebering Pakistan. Pakistan did not intervene in Afghanistan until it was pushed to do so by first the Soviet invasion and then the civil war. 

The idea of strategic depth arose out of the Afghan chaos and the jockeying for power between the various Afghan factions, the chaos in Afghanistan was not caused by the concept of strategic depth. On the other hand Indian intervention in EP was specifically with the intent to create chaos and dismember Pakistan. There is a world of difference here.


----------



## Always Neutral

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Incorrect comparison - India chose to destabilize the situation and intervene with the intent of dismemebering Pakistan. Pakistan did not intervene in Afghanistan until it was pushed to do so by first the Soviet invasion and then the civil war.
> 
> The idea of strategic depth arose out of the Afghan chaos and the jockeying for power between the various Afghan factions, the chaos in Afghanistan was not caused by the concept of strategic depth. On the other hand Indian intervention in EP was specifically with the intent to create chaos and dismember Pakistan. There is a world of difference here.




Ha ha you can put a spin on anything. There is no difference between the Bangladesh and the Afghanistan circumstances. Both went like this.

1. Despotic regimes.
2. Genocides.
3. Refugees
4. Hostile Neighbors.
5. Foreign money.
6. Invasions by self righteous Neighbors thru proxies

Regards


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Always Neutral said:


> Ha ha you can put a spin on anything. There is no difference between the Bangladesh and the Afghanistan circumstances. Both went like this.
> 
> 1. Despotic regimes.
> 2. Genocides.
> 3. Refugees
> 4. Hostile Neighbors.
> 5. Foreign money.
> 6. Invasions by self righteous Neighbors thru proxies
> 
> Regards



You can take similar incidents that occurred in both nations (no genocide in EP or Afghanistan as far as I know), and then make any list you want- it does not make the events analogous.

The background and dynamics of the Afghan conflict and the EP destabilization were completely different, and I outlined them in my post above. Feel free to argue where I was incorrect, or where I 'spun' it.

*India chose to destabilize the situation and intervene with the intent of dismemebering Pakistan. Pakistan did not intervene in Afghanistan until it was pushed to do so by first the Soviet invasion and then the civil war.

The idea of strategic depth arose out of the Afghan chaos and the jockeying for power between the various Afghan factions, the chaos in Afghanistan was not caused by the concept of strategic depth. On the other hand Indian intervention in EP was specifically with the intent to create chaos and dismember Pakistan. There is a world of difference here.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BanglaBhoot

Yes the Indians have done the same with our CHT by arming the insurgents there to dismember a part of BD giving them direct control and access to Chittagong Port.


----------



## Vinod2070

AM, you are doing an admirable job of defending the indefensible.

Kashmir, Bangladesh (East Pakistan) and Afghanistan all represent Pakistan overreaching itself because of it's self image that is much bigger than the reality. All of them resulted in colossal sufferings for the people involved and massive loss of life and as was inevitable all of them resulted in failures.

No amount of "lipapoti" (whitewashing) will take away from the basic facts of the case. These were big bets taken by the ruthless Pakistani rulers of the time and they failed in all the bets.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> AM, you are doing an admirable job of defending the indefensible.
> 
> Kashmir, Bangladesh (East Pakistan) and Afghanistan all represent Pakistan overreaching itself because of it's self image that is much bigger than the reality. All of them resulted in colossal sufferings for the people involved and massive loss of life and as was inevitable all of them resulted in failures.
> 
> No amount of "lipapoti" (whitewashing) will take away from the basic facts of the case. These were big bets taken by the ruthless Pakistani rulers of the time and they failed in all the bets.



I extend the offer to you as I did to AN, I made my arguments above, you can try and logically and rationally refute them, instead of these platitudes, rhetoric and flawed opinions, which is all that your post here is.

My job is made easier precisely because of posts like these by the way, since most of you choose to ignore the central argument and go off on banal tangents.

I notice that RR's original post that formed the substance of this thread also remains unanswered.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> I extend the offer to you as I did to AN, I made my arguments above, you can try and logically and rationally refute them, instead of these platitudes, rhetoric and flawed opinions, which is all that your post here is.
> 
> My job is made easier precisely because of posts like these by the way, since most of you choose to ignore the central argument and go off on banal tangents.


 
Do point me to your post containing the arguments and I will try my hand. 

Well, the feelings of banal tangents is reciprocated. Some of the most heinous crimes of recent history are being sought to be buried under banal arguments in some of the comments here.



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> I notice that RR's original post that formed the substance of this thread also remains unanswered.



I can see that post as nothing but hogwash that is so typical of him. He is _mathematically_ disproving the genocide! There are millions of people who saw that happen and are even now alive!

There were 10 million refugees in India alone. What were they doing if not escaping a terrible suppression and massacre?

These things can't be disproved with unsubstantiated data and figures and sleight of hand. They need to be proved and disproved on the ground with scholarly research. I am yet to see that and no amount of jugglery on some threads can change the reality of what happened in 1971. I shared some excerpts from your own commission's report earlier.

Repeating some of that here:

Here are some quotes from the Hamoodur Rahman Comission.



> *"How many Hindus have you killed?"*
> 
> *It was a process euphemistically called "being sent to Bangladesh". The killing and torture of respectable citizens of East Pakistan incensed an already hostile people. A host of army officers who were ordered to -- and carried out -- these atrocities, provided details to the commission.* "Brigadier Arbab told me to destroy all houses in Joydepur. To a great extent I executed this order," said Lt-Colonel Aziz Ahmad Khan, then commanding officer (CO) of 8 Baluch in his deposition. "*General Niazi asked as to how many Hindus we had killed. In May, there was an order in writing to kill Hindus. "According to Brigadier Iqbalur Rehman Shariff, GSO Division-I, Lt-General Gul Hasan (later army chief) while visiting troops in East Pakistan used to routinely ask, "How many Bengalis have you shot?"*
> 
> The report said a high-powered inquiry was needed to inquire into "persistent allegations of atrocities said to have been committed by the Pakistan Army in East Pakistan during its operations from March to December 1971". It further said that those responsible must be tried; they had "brought a bad name for the Pakistan Army and alienated the sympathies of the local population by their wanton cruelty and immorality against our own people".



India Today Magazine

These are stark facts. One can't shy away from them by nitpicking about the improbability of some numbers or some mathematical manipulations.


----------



## Patriot

so the army had 267 days...lets say there were abt 100,000 of the army positioned in East pakistan...shall we...yes?okay...

to kill 1500,000 ppl, every army person had to kill at least 15 ppl on average...makes me wonder...the indian army with total control over kashmir in last 50 years with 5-6 lakh army of hers hasnt been able to kill more than 100,000 kashmiries and our army killed 1500,000 ppl in less than 10 months...that too without using any nerve gas......surely they cudnt have used normal bullets...yes/no?...think abt it...
where did they bury those bodies...?have the indians/bangalians located any huge piles of bodies buried/burnt? surely a huge pile of 1500,000 bodies canot be just wiped under the carpet...10,000,000 regugees...hmm...so this means 10,000,000 refugees crossed the birders in 267 days...and that too successfully...does this really sound possible...i mean comon...indian borders wree not open for them or were they? lets suppose they crossed the borders to india...do they still live there...u have surely heard of afghani refugees in pakistan...ever heard of bangali refugees in india? or did they come back after the war?
do you really think that an army of 100,000 can push 10,000,000 ppl across the birder...i mean comon...
combined...a loss of 1500,000 + 10,000,000 means that a huge and noticable drop in the bangali population...hmm....that too just with an army of 100,000...i m wondering what is india doing in kashmir with an army over 500,000 for past 50 years...and remember also...there were soldiers there...not mercenaries...they were sent as an army not on a death mission...
according to the stats, the army cudnt have had time to **** even but wud have been busy all the time in either killing, raping or bullying ppl out of bangla...


----------



## Vinod2070

> the indian army with total control over kashmir in last 50 years with 5-6 lakh army of hers *hasnt been able to kill more than 100,000 kashmiries* and our army killed 1500,000 ppl in less than 10 months



That is the difference. Indian army is not there to kill the Kashmiris but to protect them from terrorists and mercenaries. That's why the difference.

Even the Hurriyat leadership is protected by the same Indian army otherwise they would not live for a day.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod:

I imagine your last post was directed at my exchange with AN, in which case that is the post you need to reply to, if I must really point it out, considering you initiated the exchange. 

If you think RR's numbers are skulduggery, then prove it - continued banal rhetoric like 'millions viewed this or that' is merely equivalent to spurious anecdotal accounts. People will flee whenever there is war or strife - note the 400,000 from Bajaur alone. That does not mean the holocaust was being replicated. The verifiable numbers do not bear out the genocide claim, or the absurd high end figures bandied about.

The article you posted does not make clear what is quoted from the HR commission and what is opinion. Please clarify with a link to the relevant sections of the unadulterated HR report - and on that count, eat crow as well, since the commission you are quoting placed the civilian casualties at 26,000.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> That is the difference. Indian army is not there to kill the Kashmiris but to protect them from terrorists and mercenaries. That's why the difference.
> 
> Even the Hurriyat leadership is protected by the same Indian army otherwise they would not live for a day.



Indeed, that is why the GoI has refused to implement the plebiscite per the Instrument of Accession and the UNSC resolutions that she herself initiated and agreed to.

The IA is in occupied territory to suppress by any means possible the freedom sentiment and movement, with accompanying atrocities and human rights violations and all.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> If you think RR's numbers are skulduggery, then prove it - continued banal rhetoric like 'millions viewed this or that' is merely equivalent to spurious anecdotal accounts. People will flee whenever there is war or strife - note the 400,000 from Bajaur alone. That does not mean the holocaust was being replicated. The verifiable numbers do not bear out the genocide claim, or the absurd high end figures bandied about.



I think we have a fundamental difference on who needs to prove what.

AFAIK, the figure (whatever it is, there are accounts up to 5 million on a high end and 300,000 on the low end) is what is the generally accepted international figure. This is what you can read in several reputed international publications including the Guinness book. I see no reason to accept that the atrocities were at a much lower scale unless I see that coming from a reputed international source and more importantly Bangladesh as a nation accepts that.

Its RR who has tried to deviate from what are the generally accepted facts. The contents of the post are in no way any proof of anything. The burden of proof is on him and those who support him to convince the Bangladesh nation and the world that they constitute facts. I see no reason to need to prove anything.

As I mentioned, I don't see that post as anything more than mathematical sleight of hand.



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The article you posted does not make clear what is quoted from the HR commission and what is opinion. Please clarify with a link to the relevant sections of the unadulterated HR report - and on that count, eat crow as well, since the commission you are quoting placed the civilian casualties at 26,000.



The reference to the commission's report here and the link that I provided was obviously only to point out that it was a deliberate policy of the West Pakistan establishment to suppress the Bengalis as a race. That the people involved, far from being punished, went on to reach the highest posts including the army chief despite admitting to what they did.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Indeed, that is why the GoI has refused to implement the plebiscite per the Instrument of Accession and the UNSC resolutions that she herself initiated and agreed to.
> 
> The IA is in occupied territory to suppress by any means possible the freedom sentiment and movement, with accompanying atrocities and human rights violations and all.



Well atrocities and human rights violations are mainly from the mercenaries and the terrorists who came from across the border. That includes the ethnic cleansing that has taken place from the valley.

In any difficult CI situation, some human rights violations at the hands of the security forces are inevitable. That is not the policy of the Indian army and the guilty are brought to the book.

Can you say the same of the mercenaries and the terrorists!


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> I think we have a fundamental difference on who needs to prove what.
> 
> AFAIK, the figure (whatever it is, there are accounts up to 5 million on a high end and 300,000 on the low end) is what is the generally accepted international figure. This is what you can read in several reputed international publications including the Guinness book. I see no reason to accept that the atrocities were at a much lower scale unless I see that coming from a reputed international source and more importantly Bangladesh as a nation accepts that.
> 
> Its RR who has tried to deviate from what are the generally accepted facts. The contents of the post are in no way any proof of anything. The burden of proof is on him and those who support him to convince the Bangladesh nation and the world that they constitute facts. I see no reason to need to prove anything.
> 
> As I mentioned, I don't see that post as anything more than mathematical sleight of hand.


If it is a mathematical sleight of hand then you should be able to illustrate with verifiable numbers why it is so. The point of this thread was to come up with an empirical argument based on verifiable numbers since the claims on how many died vary from 26,000 to 3 million - both cannot be true, and RR's argument is valid until you can empirically show that it is not.



> The reference to the commission's report here and the link that I provided was obviously only to point out that it was a deliberate policy of the West Pakistan establishment to suppress the Bengalis as a race. That the people involved, far from being punished, went on to reach the highest posts including the army chief despite admitting to what they did.


The only thing the link points out is a biased opinion using selective quotes, which you tried to cleverly pass off as the "Hamood ur-Rehman Commission report".

No one is denying atrocities took place, including by Indian backed and trained groups, the scale is being questioned.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> Well atrocities and human rights violations are mainly from the mercenaries and the terrorists who came from across the border. That includes the ethnic cleansing that has taken place from the valley.
> 
> In any difficult CI situation, some human rights violations at the hands of the security forces are inevitable. That is not the policy of the Indian army and the guilty are brought to the book.
> 
> Can you say the same of the mercenaries and the terrorists!



The first and foremost violation of human rights was the illegal occupation and annexation of a people and their land, everything else is secondary, and a consequence of that occupation through force. Therefore India bears all responsibility for the atrocities committed by her forces and the militants.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Copying another post from earlier, that supports the view that the numbers of the dead have been exaggerated - so note that it is not just RR arguing that now:

*Vinod:*

""The historian branch of the State Department held a two-day conference on June 28 and 29 on US policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972, inviting scholars from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to express their views on the declassified documents.

During the seminar, Bangladeshi scholars acknowledged that their official figure of more than 3 million killed during and after the military action was not authentic.

They said that the original figure was close to 300,000, which was wrongly translated from Bengali into English as three million.

Shamsher M. Chowdhury, the Bangladesh ambassador in Washington who was commissioned in the Pakistan Army in 1969 but had joined his country&#8217;s war of liberation in 1971, acknowledged that Bangladesh alone cannot correct this mistake. Instead, he suggested that Pakistan and Bangladesh form a joint commission to investigate the 1971 disaster and prepare a report.

Almost all scholars agreed that the real figure was somewhere between 26,000, as reported by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, and not three million, the official figure put forward by Bangladesh and India.

Prof Sarmila Bose, an Indian academic, told the seminar that allegations of Pakistani army personnel raping Bengali women were grossly exaggerated.

Based on her extensive interviews with eyewitnesses, the study also determines the pattern of conflict as three-layered: West Pakistan versus East Pakistan, East Pakistanis (pro-Independence) versus East Pakistanis (pro-Union) and the fateful war between India and Pakistan.

Prof Bose noted that no neutral study of the conflict has been done and reports that are passed on as part of history are narratives that strengthen one point of view by rubbishing the other. The Bangladeshi narratives, for instance, focus on the rape issue and use that not only to demonize the Pakistan army but also exploit it as a symbol of why it was important to break away from (West) Pakistan.""
Sheikh Mujib wanted a confederation: US papers -DAWN - National; July 7, 2005

Note that while the link is a Pakistani newspaper, the original source of the information are declassified State Dept. documents.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> If it is a mathematical sleight of hand then you should be able to illustrate with verifiable numbers why it is so. The point of this thread was to come up with an empirical argument based on verifiable numbers since the claims on how many died vary from 26,000 to 3 million - both cannot be true, and RR's argument is valid until you can empirically show that it is not.



Well, I disagree with this interpretation. The sources used and the methodology are both far from impeccable. And again, this forum is hardly the right place to publish original "research" like this. Such things need to be validated by peers before they can be accepted.

I would any day trust the Guinness book and other reputed publications and also the government of Bangladesh (in this case) than such nuggets of wisdom on a forum. I would assume they would apply a lot more rigor before they publish their stuff than seems to be the case here.



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The only thing the link points out is a biased opinion using selective quotes, which you tried to *cleverly pass off as the "Hamood ur-Rehman Commission report"*.
> 
> No one is denying atrocities took place, including by Indian backed and trained groups, the scale is being questioned.



Well, my bad. It was actually a news report based on the Hamidoor commission report and I don't think even you can deny the relevant portions of the link that I pasted. It all came from the Commission's report.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The first and foremost violation of human rights was the illegal occupation and annexation of a people and their land, everything else is secondary, and a consequence of that occupation through force. Therefore India bears all responsibility for the atrocities committed by her forces and the militants.



I have to disagree completely with each word here.

Kashmir became a part of India through the IOA. That is a legal document. All the rest is a consequence of Pakistan laying claim to that land just because it had a Muslim majority and never coming to terms with the reality even at a humongous cost to the people of Kashmir and even Pakistan.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> Well, I disagree with this interpretation. The sources used and the methodology are both far from impeccable. And again, this forum is hardly the right place to publish original "research" like this. Such things need to be validated by peers before they can be accepted.
> 
> I would any day trust the Guinness book and other reputed publications and also the government of Bangladesh (in this case) than such nuggets of wisdom on a forum. I would assume they would apply a lot more rigor before they publish their stuff than seems to be the case here.


What 'rigor' did they use? What was the methodology? Why did they select 300,000 or 3 million instead of 26,000? 

And why, as indicated by the link related to the declassified State Department documents, are even Bangladeshi officials, journalists and some historians recognizing that the death toll claims may be inflated?


> Well, my bad. It was actually a news report based on the Hamidoor commission report and I don't think even you can deny the relevant portions of the link that I pasted. It all came from the Commission's report.


Again, that atrocities were committed by both sides, including Indian backed and trained groups, is not being denied.

I must point out that as indicated by Stephen Cohen and the book by Rainia, RAW had started covert activities to destabilize EP at least as early as 1968.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> I have to disagree completely with each word here.
> 
> Kashmir became a part of India through the IOA. That is a legal document. All the rest is a consequence of Pakistan laying claim to that land just because it had a Muslim majority and never coming to terms with the reality even at a humongous cost to the people of Kashmir and even Pakistan.



The 'legal document' was conditional to a plebiscite, and the subsequent resort to the UN by India, the UNSC resolutions, and India's acceptance of them indicate that the accession was never complete, and therefore Indian control is illegal.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> What 'rigor' did they use? What was the methodology? Why did they select 300,000 or 3 million instead of 26,000?
> 
> And why, as indicated by the link related to the declassified State Department documents, are even Bangladeshi officials, journalists and some historians recognizing that the death toll claims may be inflated?



Well, I guess that is a questions for the publications concerned. I trust them that they would have applied their normal high standards of rigor. 

I guess we have to have trust in some things based on the track record.

As I said, I am not hung up about any number at all. If it is generally accepted that the scale was much lower, it would be a good thing for all concerned.



AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Again, that atrocities were committed by both sides, including Indian backed and trained groups, is not being denied.
> 
> I must point out that as indicated by Stephen Cohen and the book by Rainia, RAW had started covert activities to destabilize EP at least as early as 1968.



Possible. I have not read much about this but it could well be true.

You do expect the Government troops to behave differently from a lawless Gorilla force though.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The 'legal document' was conditional to a plebiscite, and the subsequent resort to the UN by India, the UNSC resolutions, and India's acceptance of them indicate that the accession was never complete, and therefore Indian control is illegal.



While I am not too familiar with the legalities, I am given to understand that the IOA was exactly the same for Kashmir as for all other states. There was no additional commitments mentioned as part of the IOA itself.

Any extra commitments if made would be unilateral and later on may be found to be impractical in light of the subsequent ground realities including the aggression by Pakistan and occupation of 1/3 of the state and ceding a part to China. The later attempts by Pakistan to use force would obviously negate any pretense to it altogether.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> Well, I guess that is a questions for the publications concerned. I trust them that they would have applied their normal high standards of rigor.
> 
> I guess we have to have trust in some things based on the track record.
> 
> As I said, I am not hung up about any number at all. If it is generally accepted that the scale was much lower, it would be a good thing for all concerned.


Are the sources not in the public domain? And if they are, the methodology should be available to critique and analyze. That is what this thread is for. 



> Possible. I have not read much about this but it could well be true.
> 
> You do expect the Government troops to behave differently from a lawless Gorilla force though.


The situation in EP was different, that can be seen from how the insurgency in Baluchistan has been approached. Considering that I believe the evidence indicates the death toll to be closer to the 26,000 number, IMO the government troops did not go on any mass pogrom or massacre rampage.

Nonetheless, there was a breakdown in discipline, but again, once must consider the situation the troops found themselves in, cut off from West Pakistan, their supplies, and surrounded by a hostile external enemy and hostile groups within who also committed atrocities.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> While I am not too familiar with the legalities, I am given to understand that the IOA was exactly the same for Kashmir as for all other states. There was no additional commitments mentioned as part of the IOA itself.
> 
> Any extra commitments if made would be unilateral and later on may be found to be impractical in light of the subsequent ground realities including the aggression by Pakistan and occupation of 1/3 of the state and ceding a part to China. The later attempts by Pakistan to use force would obviously negate any pretense to it altogether.



The commitment to a plebiscite was before the IoA was signed and accepted, and per Owen Benet Jones, a part of the partition process in the case of any disputed accession. 

Mountbatten in fact insisted that the plebiscite condition be included before he accepted the accession on behalf of India.

The accession cannot be legal until the plebiscite is carried out. The subsequent agreement to the UNSC resolutions also commits India to the principle of a referendum that allows the people of Kashmir to decide their destiny.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Are the sources not in the public domain? And if they are, the methodology should be available to critique and analyze. That is what this thread is for.
> 
> The situation in EP was different, that can be seen from how the insurgency in Baluchistan has been approached. Considering that I believe the evidence indicates the death toll to be closer to the 26,000 number, IMO the government troops did not go on any mass pogrom or massacre rampage.
> 
> Nonetheless, there was a breakdown in discipline, but again, once must consider the situation the troops found themselves in, cut off from West Pakistan, their supplies, and surrounded by a hostile external enemy and hostile groups within who also committed atrocities.



Nothing new for me to add to what I have already said.

I will just believe the number that is is commonly accepted by the neutral respected publications and it does not match the number that you give here.

I assume the real number would be somewhere near the Geometric mean or the Arithmetic or Harmonic mean of the numbers that you are giving and the number that Mujib gave. 

May be a mean of all those means.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> The commitment to a plebiscite was before the IoA was signed and accepted, and per Owen Benet Jones, a part of the partition process in the case of any disputed accession.
> 
> Mountbatten in fact insisted that the plebiscite condition be included before he accepted the accession on behalf of India.
> 
> The accession cannot be legal until the plebiscite is carried out. The subsequent agreement to the UNSC resolutions also commits India to the principle of a referendum that allows the people of Kashmir to decide their destiny.



AM, we both know that both parties did not play totally fair at that time.

Pakistan tried to get Kashmir, Hyderabad and Junagarh besides some small Hindu Rajasthan kingdoms.

India too did the same. It was hardly based on any universal rules and themes of brotherhood and fair play, just some realpolitik.

Its hardly India's fault that we prevailed. Crying foul over split milk now is not very productive.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> AM, we both know that both parties did not play totally fair at that time.
> 
> Pakistan tried to get Kashmir, Hyderabad and Junagarh besides some small Hindu Rajasthan kingdoms.
> 
> India too did the same. It was hardly based on any universal rules and themes of brotherhood and fair play, just some realpolitik.
> 
> Its hardly India's fault that we prevailed. Crying foul over split milk now is not very productive.



No spilt milk at all - The rules of the partition applied, and they were violated in almost every instance in favor of India. India prevailed by illegal means in all of the princely states that may have been contested, that is the central point here - 'illegal occupation', which you disputed and which I have validated.

Now, as is usual, once having been shown how your argument is wrong, you are off on another tangent of 'everyone was doing XYZ'. Your point was that the IoA validated India's accession, I showed you why it did not.


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Vinod2070 said:


> Nothing new for me to add to what I have already said.
> 
> I will just believe the number that is is commonly accepted by the neutral respected publications and it does not match the number that you give here.
> 
> I assume the real number would be somewhere near the Geometric mean or the Arithmetic or Harmonic mean of the numbers that you are giving and the number that Mujib gave.
> 
> May be a mean of all those means.



But if Mujib was cmpletely wrong, as a few of the articles have stated, that '300,000' qwas incorrectly translated to '3 million' then the mean does not work, since the high end humbers are completely flawed.

Again, if the work on the high end numbers was empirical and based on sound methodology, it should not be hard to post that here.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> No spilt milk at all - The rules of the partition applied, and they were violated in almost every instance in favor of India. India prevailed by illegal means in all of the princely states that may have been contested, that is the central point here - 'illegal occupation', which you disputed and which I have validated.
> 
> Now, as is usual, once having been shown how your argument is wrong, you are off on another tangent of 'everyone was doing XYZ'. Your point was that the IoA validated India's accession, I showed you why it did not.



So please do explain why Pakistan tried to lay its hands on Hyderabad and Jungarh? Under which terms and rules of partition?

These states were overwhelmingly Hindu. Their populace never wanted to be a part of Pakistan.

If Pakistan was right in trying to get them, India was right in not letting Kashmir go too. It was as much legal or illegal as what you tried in the other instances.

I disagree with your "as is usual" and find it a bit presumptuous and arrogant.

I always said that I am not too familiar with the legality and just mentioned what little I know of it.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> But *if Mujib was cmpletely wrong*, as a few of the articles have stated, that '300,000' qwas incorrectly translated to '3 million' then the mean does not work, *since the high end humbers are completely flawed*.
> 
> Again, if the work on the high end numbers was empirical and based on sound methodology, it should not be hard to post that here.



If _he was completely wrong and the numbers completely flawed_, it should not be difficult for Pakistanis and Bangladeshis to correct that and get it accepted internationally and by the reputed publications.

That will resolve the issue once and for all.


----------



## Vinod2070

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Copying another post from earlier, that supports the view that the numbers of the dead have been exaggerated - so note that it is not just RR arguing that now:
> 
> *Vinod:*
> 
> ""The historian branch of the State Department held a two-day conference on June 28 and 29 on US policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972, inviting scholars from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to express their views on the declassified documents.
> 
> During the seminar, Bangladeshi scholars acknowledged that their official figure of more than 3 million killed during and after the military action was not authentic.
> 
> They said that the original figure was close to 300,000, which was wrongly translated from Bengali into English as three million.
> 
> Shamsher M. Chowdhury, the Bangladesh ambassador in Washington who was commissioned in the Pakistan Army in 1969 but had joined his countrys war of liberation in 1971, acknowledged that Bangladesh alone cannot correct this mistake. Instead, he suggested that Pakistan and Bangladesh form a joint commission to investigate the 1971 disaster and prepare a report.
> 
> Almost all scholars agreed that the real figure was somewhere between 26,000, as reported by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, and not three million, the official figure put forward by Bangladesh and India.
> 
> Prof Sarmila Bose, an Indian academic, told the seminar that allegations of Pakistani army personnel raping Bengali women were grossly exaggerated.
> 
> Based on her extensive interviews with eyewitnesses, the study also determines the pattern of conflict as three-layered: West Pakistan versus East Pakistan, East Pakistanis (pro-Independence) versus East Pakistanis (pro-Union) and the fateful war between India and Pakistan.
> 
> Prof Bose noted that no neutral study of the conflict has been done and reports that are passed on as part of history are narratives that strengthen one point of view by rubbishing the other. The Bangladeshi narratives, for instance, focus on the rape issue and use that not only to demonize the Pakistan army but also exploit it as a symbol of why it was important to break away from (West) Pakistan.""
> Sheikh Mujib wanted a confederation: US papers -DAWN - National; July 7, 2005
> 
> Note that while the link is a Pakistani newspaper, the original source of the information are declassified State Dept. documents.



Missed this post earlier.

Yes this is the kind of data that is much more trustworthy than RR's post.

I have seen this earlier too and it would be a good start if taken to the logical conclusion.

Wonder why that is not being done on an urgent basis by Pakistan and even Bangladesh.

Sarmila Bose' study, for whatever it was worth, was not a scientific and exhaustive study AFAIK. Some of her other opinions too were a bit controversial. So I am not sure how much credence to give her.


----------



## Flintlock

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> I don't believe anyone has said that the lower numbers of deaths are acceptable, that is just you constructing a strawman argument.
> 
> It is a similar exercise, unfortunately, to Vinod's attempts at stifling constructive discourse over what actually happened, and how all parties shared blame to a different extent, by resorting to comments like 'justifying/excusing atrocities'.
> 
> What is also being argued is that the PA was not deployed in EP *with the specific intent of massacring and raping the local population, but rather the atrocities that were committed were a result of events and the situation spiraling out of control*, in which the Indians played a huge hand.



Whatever the reasons are for the events spiralling out of control, there can be no justification for killing hundreds of thousands of people. Blaming India indirectly for the genocide is not only dishonest, its also illogical. 

Also, killings on such a large scale can never be unintended. The Pakistani Army was specifically instructed to snuff out the movement by killing as many supporters of the movement as possible:
_
&#8220;&#8230;&#8230; we were told to kill the hindus and Kafirs (non-believer in God). One day in June, we cordoned a village and were ordered to kill the Kafirs in that area. We found all the village women reciting from the Holy Quran, and the men holding special congregational prayers seeking God&#8217;s mercy. But they were unlucky. Our commanding officer ordered us not to waste any time.&#8221;

Confession of a Pakistani Soldier_

_
There is no doubt whatsoever about the targets of the genocide. They were: (1) The Bengali militarymen of the East Bengal Regiment, the East Pakistan Rifles, police and para-military Ansars and Mujahids. (2) The Hindus &#8212; &#8220;We are only killing the men; the women and children go free. We are soldiers not cowards to kill them &#8230;&#8221; I was to hear in Comilla [site of a major military base] [Comments R.J. Rummel: "One would think that murdering an unarmed man was a heroic act" (Death By Government, p. 323)] (3) The Awami Leaguers &#8212; all office bearers and volunteers down to the lowest link in the chain of command. (4) The students &#8212; college and university boys and some of the more militant girls. (5) Bengali intellectuals such as professors and teachers whenever damned by the army as &#8220;militant.&#8221; (Anthony Mascarenhas, The Rape of Bangla Desh [Delhi: Vikas Publications, 1972(?)], pp. 116-17.)_


_
London, 6/13/71). The Sunday Times&#8230;..&#8221;The Government&#8217;s policy for East Bengal was spelled out to me in the Eastern Command headquarters at Dacca. It has three elements:

1. The Bengalis have proved themselves unreliable and must be ruled by West Pakistanis;
2. The Bengalis will have to be re-educated along proper Islamic lines. The - Islamization of the masses - this is the official jargon - is intended to eliminate secessionist tendencies and provide a strong religious bond with West Pakistan;
3. When the Hindus have been eliminated by death and fight, their property will be used as a golden carrot to win over the under privileged Muslim middle-class. This will provide the base for erecting administrative and political structures in the future.&#8221;
__


The genocide and gendercidal atrocities were also perpetrated by lower-ranking officers and ordinary soldiers. These &#8220;willing executioners&#8221; were fuelled by an abiding anti-Bengali racism, especially against the Hindu minority. *&#8220;Bengalis were often compared with monkeys and chickens. Said Pakistan General Niazi, &#8216;It was a low lying land of low lying people.&#8217; The Hindus among the Bengalis were as Jews to the Nazis: scum and vermin that [should] best be exterminated.* As to the Moslem Bengalis, they were to live only on the sufferance of the soldiers: any infraction, any suspicion cast on them, any need for reprisal, could mean their death. And the soldiers were free to kill at will. The journalist Dan Coggin quoted one Punjabi captain as telling him, &#8216;We can kill anyone for anything. We are accountable to no one.&#8217; This is the arrogance of Power.&#8221; (Rummel, Death By Government, p. 335.)_
_

&#8220;For month after month in all the regions of East Pakistan the massacres went on,&#8221; writes Robert Payne. *&#8220;They were not the small casual killings of young officers who wanted to demonstrate their efficiency, but organized massacres conducted by sophisticated staff officers, who knew exactly what they were doing.* Muslim soldiers, sent out to kill Muslim peasants, went about their work mechanically and efficiently, until killing defenseless people became a habit like smoking cigarettes or drinking wine. &#8230; Not since Hitler invaded Russia had there been so vast a massacre.&#8221; (Payne, Massacre, p. 29.)

*There is no doubt that the mass killing in Bangladesh was among the most carefully and centrally planned of modern genocides. A cabal of five Pakistani generals orchestrated the events: President Yahya Khan, General Tikka Khan, chief of staff General Pirzada, security chief General Umar Khan, and intelligence chief General Akbar Khan. *The U.S. government, long supportive of military rule in Pakistan, supplied some $3.8 million in military equipment to the dictatorship after the onset of the genocide, &#8220;and after a government spokesman told Congress that all shipments to Yahya Khan&#8217;s regime had ceased.&#8221; (Payne, Massacre, p. 102.)_

http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/


----------



## salman nedian

Flintlock said:


> Whatever the reasons are for the events spiralling out of control, there can be no justification for killing hundreds of thousands of people. Blaming India indirectly for the genocide is not only dishonest, its also illogical.
> 
> Also, killings on such a large scale can never be unintended. The Pakistani Army was specifically instructed to snuff out the movement by killing as many supporters of the movement as possible:




Do you think that we were mad to kill our own countrymen in huge numbers? One of the six points of Mujib was to deploy a militia in East Pakistan because there were not sufficient numbers of Pakistani troops in EP, this shows that we never intended to commit such act. Killings were the result of Indian involvement and support of Mukti Bahini who started killing people with the Indian support and only after that Pakistan army took sufficient measures to control the situation.

Killings are not justifiable so what is the justification for killings of Kashmiris by Indian army??????


----------



## Flintlock

salman nedian said:


> Do you think that we were mad to kill our own countrymen in huge numbers?



No, infact it was a very sane decision (albeit criminal one) to kill as many people as possible who were likely to oppose Pakistani rule. It was taken at the topmost levels of the Pakistan Army and was carried out with full backing of the state. 



> One of the six points of Mujib was to deploy a militia in East Pakistan because there were not sufficient numbers of Pakistani troops in EP, this shows that we never intended to commit such act. Killings were the result of Indian involvement and support of Mukti Bahini who started killing people with the Indian support and only after that Pakistan army took sufficient measures to control the situation.



No, what shows the intent of Pakistan is my previous post. Kindly refute the allegations made there rather than ignoring them and responding with counter-allegations.



> Killings are not justifiable so what is the justification for killings of Kashmiris by Indian army??????



That isn't up for discussion in this thread, so you can take it somewhere else.


----------



## salman nedian

Flintlock said:


> No, infact it was a very sane decision (albeit criminal one) to kill as many people as possible who were likely to oppose Pakistani rule. It was taken at the topmost levels of the Pakistan Army and was carried out with full backing of the state.



A country has full right to take measures to protect its integrity and Indian involvement in EP is not an allegation in fact it is the part of history which cannot be denied. When Indians can take action in Punjab at golden Temple and Kashmir than we also have the right to protect our country from foreign trained people and its fair enough.


----------



## Flintlock

salman nedian said:


> A country has full right to take measures to protect its integrity and Indian involvement in EP is not an allegation in fact it is the part of history which cannot be denied. When Indians can take action in Punjab at golden Temple and Kashmir than we also have the right to protect our country from foreign trained people and it&#8217;s fair enough.



Sure, except that in this case the massacred people were not combatants, but ordinary civilians.

Not only that, the West Pakistanis were racist against Bengalis, and considered them as inferior. The same attitude is seen towards the "kafir" hindus as well. 

This wasn't just about protecting the integrity of the nation, it was about the arrogance of the Pakistanis who considered Bengalis as slaves fit to be lorded over.


----------



## salman nedian

Flintlock said:


> Sure, except that in this case the massacred people were not combatants, but ordinary civilians.
> 
> Not only that, the West Pakistanis were racist against Bengalis, and considered them as inferior. The same attitude is seen towards the "kafir" hindus as well.
> 
> This wasn't just about protecting the integrity of the nation, it was about the arrogance of the Pakistanis who considered Bengalis as slaves fit to be lorded over.



Bengalis are our brothers; even today we share the same history so specific acts cannot be generalized. South and North Indians too have problems of racism among themselves.

You cannot deny the criminal acts of Mukti Bahinis( I m not talking about all Bengalis and most of them were loyal to Pakistan) and to control them Pakistan Army took action although some atrocities by army cannot be ruled out but the case was not as u are presenting.

India too killed civilians in Punjab and Kashmir.


----------



## Flintlock

salman nedian said:


> Bengalis are our brothers; even today we share the same history so specific acts cannot be generalized. South and North Indians too have problems of racism among themselves.



This is not some specific act, its one of the biggest genocides of the 20th century.

Its even in the Guinness book of World Records.



> You cannot deny the criminal acts of Mukti Bahinis( I m not talking about all Bengalis and most of them were loyal to Pakistan) and to control them Pakistan Army took action although some atrocities by army cannot be ruled out but the case was not as u are presenting.



I am not going to comment on the Mukti Bahini here.

Dude, this was highly organized genocide. It has been recognized as such by all the experts in the field. 



> India too killed civilians in Punjab and Kashmir.



Again off-topic, but nothing has ever happened in India which can come even close to East Pakistan in terms of scale.


----------



## salman nedian

Flintlock said:


> This is not some specific act, its one of the biggest genocides of the 20th century.
> 
> Its even in the Guinness book of World Records..



I think it&#8217;s a matter of Pakistan and Bangladesh and none of us can claim that the numbers of killed men is correct so we cannot make assumptions.





Flintlock said:


> Dude, this was highly organized genocide. It has been recognized as such by all the experts in the field.



Yes! Indians recognize this and they are experts in this field.


----------



## Flintlock

^None of the paragraphs are posted are from Indians. They are all non-Indian authors. 

So please either refute those authors, or refrain from posting.

No need to repeat your assertions like a tape-recorder. It doesn't make them true.


----------



## salman nedian

Flintlock said:


> ^None of the paragraphs are posted are from Indians. They are all non-Indian authors.
> 
> So please either refute those authors, or refrain from posting.
> 
> No need to repeat your assertions like a tape-recorder. It doesn't make them true.



If Pakistan had to kill them in mass numbers we could have done this right from 1947. the killings were the result of bad situation in EP and Mukti Bahini had more contribution in starting the killings and they were backed by Indians.


----------



## Flintlock

salman nedian said:


> If Pakistan had to kill them in mass numbers we could have done this right from 1947. the killings were the result of bad situation in EP and Mukti Bahini had more contribution in starting the killings and they were backed by Indians.



Mass murders are always the result of a "bad situation". It doesn't matter who was responsible for the bad situation. What matters is how Pakistani Army reacted to it - by conducting organized mass killings. 

A for Mukti Bahini and others, please do tell me what mass killings they perpetrated.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## salman nedian

Flintlock said:


> Mass murders are always the result of a "bad situation". It doesn't matter who was responsible for the bad situation. What matters is how Pakistani Army reacted to it - by conducting organized mass killings.
> 
> A for Mukti Bahini and others, please do tell me what mass killings they perpetrated.



The attacks were started on Pakistan Army and patriotic Bengalis by Mukti Bahini and we had to react. The situation was getting out of control which resulted in Operation Searchlight. Pakistan Army was not in large numbers so they could not commit such mass killings.


----------



## Flintlock

salman nedian said:


> The attacks were started on Pakistan Army and patriotic Bengalis by Mukti Bahini and we had to react. The situation was getting out of control which resulted in Operation Searchlight. Pakistan Army was not in large numbers so they could not commit such mass killings.



and your sources are?


----------



## salman nedian

Flintlock said:


> and your sources are?








according to wikipedia:

'On February 28, 1971, Yahya Khan, the President of Pakistan, postponed the national assembly meeting scheduled for March. The Awami League, in response to the postponement, launched a program of non cooperation (largely outlined in the March 7th Awami League rally) which was so successful that the *authority of the Pakistan government became limited to the cantonments and government institutions in East Pakistan.[13] Clashes between civilians and the Pakistani Army, and between Bengali and Bihari communities erupted and became commonplace'.*


----------



## salman nedian

Let me clear it to Bangladeshi brothers that this video represents part of Indian backed Mukti Bahinis and not all the Bangladeshis are responsible for it as they could not do any thing in such situation and were silent spectators of such situation and still majority of them were loyal to Pakistan.

Still we see that Bangladeshi brothers have a soft corner for Pakistan b/c they have seen the real face of India. There is a lesson to be learnt from 1971 which is we should not invite enemy into our house what ever differences we may have. We can&#8217;t forget 1971 hence we don&#8217;t have good relation with India and India wants BD to remain grateful like slaves and become its satellite state.

We the Muslims of sub-continent should now leave behind our differences and should unite.


----------



## M_Saint

salman nedian said:


> Let me clear it to Bangladeshi brothers that this video represents part of Indian backed Mukti Bahinis and not all the Bangladeshis are responsible for it as they could not do any thing in such situation and were silent spectators of such situation and still majority of them were loyal to Pakistan.
> 
> Still we see that Bangladeshi brothers have a soft corner for Pakistan b/c they have seen the real face of India. There is a lesson to be learnt from 1971 which is we should not invite enemy into our house what ever differences we may have. We cant forget 1971 hence we dont have good relation with India and India wants BD to remain grateful like slaves and become its satellite state.
> 
> We the Muslims of sub-continent should now leave behind our differences and should unite.



We, the people of BD-PAK should take the above post as a valuable sermon in re-establishing our relationships. The break up of Pakistan firstly occurred before it even came to post-47s being and splintering of the rest was conceived in 'Discovery of India' when Nehru claimed that Indian neighbors couldn't last as sovereign countries and subsequently he called it as INDs hinter lands. Since disintegration of E PAK was Indian rulers mind, they didn't attack it during 65s war as well. But 6 point was created as a substitute of it.


----------



## gromell

salman nedian said:


> Let me clear it to Bangladeshi brothers that this video represents part of Indian backed Mukti Bahinis and not all the Bangladeshis are responsible for it as they could not do any thing in such situation and were silent spectators of such situation and still majority of them were loyal to Pakistan.
> 
> Still we see that Bangladeshi brothers have a soft corner for Pakistan b/c they have seen the real face of India. There is a lesson to be learnt from 1971 which is we should not invite enemy into our house what ever differences we may have. We can&#8217;t forget 1971 hence we don&#8217;t have good relation with India and India wants BD to remain grateful like slaves and become its satellite state.
> 
> We the Muslims of sub-continent should now leave behind our differences and should unite.



if you really had to post the video, I suggest you should have watched and listened to it clearly. It clearly said revenge of bengalis. 9 months, most Biharis collaborated with Pakistan army in killing and raping Bengali muslims. So of course there was a reaction to it. And why don't you post the other clips on youtube that has the same reporter and presenter presenting?! I am talking about the reports on what happened during the war?! Ashamed to accept the truth? let me tell you it's never a shame for any Muslim to accept the truth, unless you did it yourself. i find all the posts in this thread that "try" to "disprove" the reality, preposterous and utterly disgusting. No one speaking in this thread has ever talked to a single victim or even tried to talk to one and now they are claiming the false over truth, which is a direct violation of the Islamic orders Allah Subhanawata'ala gives in the Quran, about strict prohibition of preaching something without absolutely knowing it is false and assuming things with vague idea about it.


----------



## gromell

salman nedian said:


> Let me clear it to Bangladeshi brothers that this video represents part of Indian backed Mukti Bahinis and not all the Bangladeshis are responsible for it as they could not do any thing in such situation and were silent spectators of such situation and still majority of them were loyal to Pakistan.
> 
> Still we see that Bangladeshi brothers have a soft corner for Pakistan b/c they have seen the real face of India. There is a lesson to be learnt from 1971 which is we should not invite enemy into our house what ever differences we may have. We can&#8217;t forget 1971 hence we don&#8217;t have good relation with India and India wants BD to remain grateful like slaves and become its satellite state.
> 
> We the Muslims of sub-continent should now leave behind our differences and should unite.



oh man, do you actually know what status Mukti bahini holds among the Bangladeshi public?! ....except the very few Jamaat e Islami followers who wanted to lick the foot of Pakistan and prolly revered Pakistanis in a way that could be frowned upon in Islamic culture 

So I do not understand the reason why you use "Indian backed" Mukti Bahini every time as if it was not backed by Bangladeshis!

One Muslim can only unite with the other when the "Muslim", who did unislamic things and mistreated his Muslim brothers and raped his Muslim sisters, realizes his grave mistakes, which shall inshAllah not go unpunished in the day of judgment and is ready to apologize for them instead of diverting the responsibility of the unspeakable crime.


----------



## salman nedian

gromell said:


> if you really had to post the video, I suggest you should have watched and listened to it clearly. It clearly said revenge of bengalis. 9 months, most Biharis collaborated with Pakistan army in killing and raping Bengali muslims. So of course there was a reaction to it. And why don't you post the other clips on youtube that has the same reporter and presenter presenting?! I am talking about the reports on what happened during the war?! Ashamed to accept the truth? let me tell you it's never a shame for any Muslim to accept the truth, unless you did it yourself. i find all the posts in this thread that "try" to "disprove" the reality, preposterous and utterly disgusting. No one speaking in this thread has ever talked to a single victim or even tried to talk to one and now they are claiming the false over truth, which is a direct violation of the Islamic orders Allah Subhanawata'ala gives in the Quran, about strict prohibition of preaching something without absolutely knowing it is false and assuming things with vague idea about it.



Ok let&#8217;s accept your argument that we were killing our own people like animals without any reason and than as a reaction Mukti Bahini killed west Pakistanis because we were killing &#8216;Your People&#8217; so don&#8217;t you think that those people who were killed by Mukti Bahini were your own people? If yes than you should have only attacked Pakistan army?


----------



## gromell

salman nedian said:


> Ok let&#8217;s accept your argument that we were killing our own people like animals without any reason and than as a reaction Mukti Bahini killed west Pakistanis because we were killing &#8216;Your People&#8217; so don&#8217;t you think that those people who were killed by Mukti Bahini were your own people? If yes than you should have only attacked Pakistan army?



True, I agree. Those were our own people, just like we were your own people, *only before 71*! You see That clip was filmed after December the 16th, 1971. All Pakistani army personnel were under the protection of Indian Army. Indian Army was protecting them. From whom?! Their own people lol. My uncles were there to witness this. It was called Race course field (Now Suhrawardy Udyan). All people could do is throwing shoes at the Pakistani POWs cause Indian soldiers were standing in between. The Biharis were mostly among the civilians and thus easy to catch but it was not possible for Bengalis to kill Pakistani army personnel. and lots of Biharis were involved in looting, raping and killing. Most of the time the muslim raped women were kidnapped by Biharis from their home and delivered to Pakistani military camps. Unfortunately, it's not a myth bro. I know this sounds very cruel as I am saying it but at least Bengalis did not do what your clip shows when we were Pakistani(we had become a citizens of a new country by then) but Pakistani army's crimes were against "Pakistanis".


----------



## aussie_1973

gromell said:


> if you really had to post the video, I suggest you should have watched and listened to it clearly. It clearly said revenge of bengalis. 9 months, most Biharis collaborated with Pakistan army in killing and raping Bengali muslims. So of course there was a reaction to it. And why don't you post the other clips on youtube that has the same reporter and presenter presenting?! I am talking about the reports on what happened during the war?! Ashamed to accept the truth? let me tell you it's never a shame for any Muslim to accept the truth, unless you did it yourself. i find all the posts in this thread that "try" to "disprove" the reality, preposterous and utterly disgusting. No one speaking in this thread has ever talked to a single victim or even tried to talk to one and now they are claiming the false over truth, which is a direct violation of the Islamic orders Allah Subhanawata'ala gives in the Quran, about strict prohibition of preaching something without absolutely knowing it is false and assuming things with vague idea about it.



You must be ashamed of yourself by spreading the fire of hate. People from Pakistan have told you no of times that if anybody has committed any wrong doing with Bengalis during 1971, as a nation we dont have any soft corner for them.
In one of your previous posts in another thread you rejected the truth that wives and children of West Pakistani Officers from former East Bengali Riffles were killed by their fellow Bengalis. 
I have personally met many officers and JCOS who lost their families in East Pakistan and if you like I can tell you the dates and places where these incidents took place.
Have you ever talked about all the innocent people from West Pakistan who lost their lives in any passionate way?


----------



## sergente rehan

What's all this meanless over reaction?

We are all Muslims, we all must stand together or we will face further serious problems in upcoming time.

When will you people learn the lesson??

I know that in the past we have hurt each other maybe because of some Anti-Islamic powers and also for our own faults and i'm truly sorry for all my Muslim brothers & sisters who have suffered but now we have to close the past and change our attitudes. Lets look together for a better future......We need Unity and Faith.

Muslim world & Islam Zindabad!!!


----------



## gromell

aussie_1973 said:


> You must be ashamed of yourself by spreading the fire of hate. People from Pakistan have told you no of times that if anybody has committed any wrong doing with Bengalis during 1971, as a nation we don&#8217;t have any soft corner for them.
> In one of your previous posts in another thread you rejected the truth that wives and children of West Pakistani Officers from former East Bengali Riffles were killed by their fellow Bengalis.
> I have personally met many officers and JCO&#8217;S who lost their families in East Pakistan and if you like I can tell you the dates and places where these incidents took place.
> Have you ever talked about all the innocent people from West Pakistan who lost their lives in any passionate way?



incidentally, I have indeed met and talked to a woman whose husband was in Pakistan army in 1971 and was killed in action in Bangladesh and the first thing she asked "Do you really dislike us like you did in 1971?" 

Well, tell me the date and incidents. Also back it by neutral civilian witness's account. Don't quote someone from the army. you see you can't but quote from there. West Pakistanis were living in West Pakistan dear! It was west pakistani army that was in Bangladesh killing and raping muslims. How would you know about it? Does it really serve your purpose and honour by blindly defending your army's work in 1971? A well equiped army was fighting against civilians and you are trying to compare their respective casualties here. wow! Go by the correct history. If you can't then use some logic at least.

Spreading any "fire of hate" was and is never my intention. I go by the truth. I speak the truth. I make it my responsibility to let others know the truth. I got this advice from Muhammad(peace be upon him).


----------



## gromell

_This article was published in Times magazine, US on October 25, 1971. USA was supporting Pakistan shamelessly and it is very difficult to find US media blaming USA's allies in a war. So the article below reduces the facts regarding the atrocities in 1971. Nonetheless, even that "reduced amount of truth" is horrifying!_

East Pakistan: Even the Skies Weep - TIME


*East Pakistan: Even the Skies Weep​*Monday, Oct. 25, 1971

IN New Delhi last week, one member of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's Cabinet was heard to remark: "War is inevitable." In Islamabad, President Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan spent the better part of a 40-minute television speech railing against the Indians, whom he accused of "whipping up a war frenzy." Along their borders, east and west, both India and Pakistan massed troops. Both defended the action as precautionary, but there was a real danger that a minor border incident could suddenly engulf the subcontinent in all-out war.


Several factors are at work to reduce the likelihood of such an explosion. The Indian-Soviet friendship treaty, signed early in August, deters India from waging war without consulting the Soviets. At the same time, rising discontent and political and economic pressures within West Pakistan have also placed restraints on Strongman Yahya Khan and his military regime. Nonetheless, war remains a distinct possibility. As Mrs. Gandhi said last week at a public meeting in South India: "We must be prepared for any eventuality." 

Intolerable Strain. The current dispute has grown out of the Pakistani army's harsh repression of a Bengali movement demanding greater autonomy for the much-exploited eastern sector of the divided nation. The resulting flood of impoverished East Pakistani refugees has placed an intolerable strain on India's already overburdened economy. New Delhi has insisted from the first that the refugees, who now number well over 9,000,000 by official estimates, must be allowed to return safely to their homes in East Pakistan. 

Before that is possible, however, a political solution must be found that would end the Pakistani army's reign of terror, wanton destruction and pogroms aimed particularly at the 10 million members of the Hindu minority in predominantly Moslem East Pakistan (pop. 78 million at the start of the civil war). 


Once, Sheik Mujibur ("Mujib") Rahman, leader of the Awami League, the East's majority party, might have held the key to that solution. As the overwhelming winner of the country's first national elections last December Mujib stood to become Prime Minister of Pakistan; now he is on trial for his life before a secret military tribunal in the West on charges of treason. 

Though Islamabad has ordered the military command to ease off on its repressive tactics, refugees are still trekking into India at the rate of about 30,000 a day, telling of villages burned, residents shot, and prominent figures carried off and never heard from again. One of the more horrible revelations concerns 563 young Bengali women, some only 18, who have been held captive inside Dacca's dingy military cantonment since the first days of the fighting. Seized from Dacca University and private homes and forced into military brothels, the girls are all three to five months pregnant. The army is reported to have enlisted Bengali gynecologists to abort girls held at military installations. But for those at the Dacca cantonment it is too late for abortion. The military has begun freeing the girls a few at a time, still carrying the babies of Pakistani soldiers. 

A Million Dead. No one knows how many have died in the seven-month-old civil war. But in Karachi, a source with close connections to Yahya's military regime concedes: "The generals say the figure is at least 1,000,000." Punitive raids by the Pakistani army against villages near sites sabotaged by the Mukti Bahini, the Bengali liberation army, are an everyday occurrence. 

The fighting is expected to increase sharply in the next few weeks, with the end of the monsoon rains. Both the Pakistani army, most of whose 80,000 troops are bunkered down along the Indian border, and the Mukti Bahini, with as many as 60,000 guerrilla fighters, have said that they will soon open major new military offensives. 

Plentiful Arms. On a recent trip deep into Mukti Bahini territory, TIME Correspondent Dan Coggin found an almost surreal scene. He cabled: 

"Leaving the road behind, I entered a strange world where water is seasonal king and the only transport is a large, cane-covered canoe known as the country boat. For seven hours we plied deeper into Gopalganj subdivision in southern Faridpur district. The two wiry oarsmen found their way by taking note of such landmarks as a forlornly decaying maharajah's palace and giant butterfly nets hovering like outsized flamingos on stilt legs at water's edge. 

"As darkness approached, we were able to visit two neighboring villages, with about 25 guerrillas living among the local folk in each. The guerrillas were mostly men in their 20s, some ex-college students, others former soldiers, militiamen and police. Their arms were various but plentiful, and they had ammunition, mines and grenades. 

"A Mukti Bahini captain told me that the Bengali rebels are following the three-stage guerrilla warfare strategy of the Viet Cong, and are now in the first phase of organization and staging hit-and-run attacks. So far the guerrillas in the captain's area of operations have lost about 50 men, and larger army attacks are expected. But the Mukti Bahini plan to mount ambushes and avoid meeting army firepower headon. 

"On my way back to Dacca next day, I came upon a convoy trucker who had been waiting for five days for his turn to board a ferry and cross the miles-wide junction of the great Ganges and Brahmaputra rivers. As we huddled under the tailgate to keep dry, a shopkeeper joined us. Gazing at the puddle forming beneath us, he said: 'Even the skies are weeping for this land.' " 

Always Hungry. As conditions within East Pakistan have worsened, so have those of the refugees in India. The stench from poor sanitation facilities hangs heavy in the air. Rajinder Kumar, 32, formerly a clerk in Dacca, says he is "always hungry" on his daily grain ration of 300 grams (about 1&#189; cups). His three children each get half that much. "They cry for more," he says, "but there isn't any more." 

Malnutrition has reached desperate proportions among the children. Dr. John Seamon, a British doctor with the Save the Children Fund who has traveled extensively among the 1,000 or so scattered refugee camps estimates that 150,000 children between the ages of one and eight have died, and that 500,000 more are suffering from serious malnutrition and related diseases. 

It is now officially estimated that refugees will swell to 12 million by the end of the year. The cost to the Indian government for the fiscal year ending next March 31 may run as high as $830 million. The U.S. so far has supplied $83.2 million for the refugees, and $137 million in "humanitarian" relief inside East Pakistan. Two weeks ago, the Nixon Administration asked Congress to grant an additional $250 million. 

Senator Edward Kennedy charges that the U.S. is sending another sort of aid to the subcontinent as well. In spite of a State Department freeze on new military aid shipments to Pakistan, says Kennedy, the Pentagon has signed new defense contracts totaling nearly $10 million with the Pakistan government within the past five months. Kennedy's investigation also revealed that U.S. firms have received State Department licenses to ship to Pakistan arms and ammunition purchased from the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe. 

Catalyst for Violence. Observers doubt that the situation would ease even if Yahya were to release Mujib and lift a ban on the Awami League. Where the Bengalis once were merely demanding greater autonomy, they now seem determined to fight for outright independence. 

In his speech last week, Yahya also announced that the National Assembly would be convened in December, immediately following by-elections in the East to fill the Assembly seats vacated by disqualified Awami Leaguers. With the main party banned from participation, however, the election is likely to provoke more violence. Already the Mukti Bahini have vowed to treat candidates as dalals ("collaborators"). 

Nonetheless, Yahya may find himself compelled to put his government at least partly in civilian hands. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, leader of West Pakistan's majority Pakistan People's Party and Yahya's most probable choice for Prime Minister, has become more and more outspoken about "the rule of the generals." Recently he said: "The long night of terror must end. The people of Pakistan must take their destiny in their own hands." Formerly that sort of talk would have landed him in jail. Now even Yahya seems to have recognized that unless the military allows some sort of civilian rule it may face trouble in the West as well as in the ravaged East.


----------



## gromell

Proving some genocide claims....

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB79/BEBB8.pdf

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB79/BEBB1.pdf


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

Gromell,

If you go through the thread, several arguments, including declassified State Department documents, have been used to argue that a genocide did not occur and the figures are horribly inflated.

I would be interested in seeing your rebuttals to the points raised already.


----------



## Omar1984

gromell said:


> _This article was published in Times magazine, US on October 25, 1971. USA was supporting Pakistan shamelessly and it is very difficult to find US media blaming USA's allies in a war. So the article below reduces the facts regarding the atrocities in 1971. Nonetheless, even that "reduced amount of truth" is horrifying!_



Nixon apparently disliked Indira personally, referring to her as a "witch" and "clever fox" in his private communication with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (now released by the State Department).
Indira Gandhi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A "witch" and "clever fox" were the perfect words to decribe her and Sikhs of India also realized that about her in 1984.


----------



## gromell

triple post...oops!


----------



## gromell

double post.....


----------



## gromell

Omar1984 said:


> Nixon apparently disliked Indira personally, referring to her as a "witch" and "clever fox" in his private communication with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (now released by the State Department).
> Indira Gandhi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> A "witch" and "clever fox" were the perfect words to decribe her and Sikhs of India also realized that about her in 1984.



You made me laugh. A devil like Nixon called Indira witch and fox and you took them as holy words. Well Nixon's successors called Islam as terrorism. They see the true religion as threat. do you also take that as granted?


----------



## gromell

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Gromell,
> 
> If you go through the thread, several arguments, including declassified State Department documents, have been used to argue that a genocide did not occur and the figures are horribly inflated.
> 
> I would be interested in seeing your rebuttals to the points raised already.



Read what i posted. They are authentic US documents signed by actual US diplomats who were on the spot in 1971. They clearly called it "Genocide" and "Selective Genocide". Read them.


----------



## gromell

One of the most brilliant interviews given by one of the smartest state leaders of the 20th century AD.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gromell

Some of the brilliant Dhaka University professors killed and dumped. What kind of people can do that?!:S


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

gromell said:


> Read what i posted. They are authentic US documents signed by actual US diplomats who were on the spot in 1971. They clearly called it "Genocide" and "Selective Genocide". Read them.



Post the relevant excerpts please, and what evidence was used to substantiate their conclusions. Mujib himself offered figures on the numbers of dead that varied wildly.

IIRC, there was an article posted here related to declassified State Department documents related to 1971 that in fact indicated the death toll was no where close to that claimed by revisionist Indian and Bangladeshi historians.

Atrocities were indeed committed, by both sides, and they are to be regretted, but beyond hyperbole and extreme extrapolation from a few gory events I have yet to come across any conclusive unbiased evidence indicating either genocide or the claimed numbers killed.


----------



## gromell

"Beware! Whoever is cruel and hard on a non-Muslim minority, or curtails their rights, or burdens them with more than they can bear, or takes anything from them against their free will; I (Prophet Muhammad) will complain against that person on the Day of Judgment." (Abu Dawud)

now watch this. watch how Pakistani army treated the minorities and muslims.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gromell

AgNoStIc MuSliM said:


> Post the relevant excerpts please, and what evidence was used to substantiate their conclusions. Mujib himself offered figures on the numbers of dead that varied wildly.
> 
> IIRC, there was an article posted here related to declassified State Department documents related to 1971 that in fact indicated the death toll was no where close to that claimed by revisionist Indian and Bangladeshi historians.
> 
> Atrocities were indeed committed, by both sides, and they are to be regretted, but beyond hyperbole and extreme extrapolation from a few gory events I have yet to come across any conclusive unbiased evidence indicating either genocide or the claimed numbers killed.



Which one of my comments did you find irrelevant?!! Please specify.

If it was not 3 million it was 2 million...one and half million. does a million muslims killed in 9 months sounds nothing to you?:S Sheikh Mujib's version did not vary. It was not possible to count all the dead so quickly, specially for a govt of a country that was rebuilding from scratch. Sheikh Mujib, when knew the exact figure finally, informed us. There was no reason to exaggerate. I did not claim any biased news source to show you evidence. I posted the link where you can see the scanned image of the US government file that US state department declassified few years ago. Read it yourself. It's a click away.

Atrocities were committed by both sides?!! I never heard Bengali freedom fighters went to West Pakistan and massacred muslims and christian minorities there! Did they?! How could one compare the scale of atrocities while Mukti bahini was defending its people that Pakistan army was fighting against?!


----------



## AgNoStiC MuSliM

^^^ Again, I am not interested in hyperbole and odd incidents fro here and there.

I have heard enough first hand accounts from people who were in East Pakistan about the atrocities of the rebels, as well as second hand accounts from their loved ones, passed down to them from those who suffered. War is ugly, civil wars especially, and neither side was innocent in the blood bath.

Let me know when you actually come up with some evidence showing anywhere close to the numbers claimed by the revisionist Indian and Bangladeshi historians.



> The historian branch of the State Department held a two-day conference on June 28 and 29 on US policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972, inviting scholars from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to express their views on the declassified documents.
> 
> During the seminar, Bangladeshi scholars acknowledged that their official figure of more than 3 million killed during and after the military action was not authentic.
> 
> They said that the original figure was close to 300,000, which was wrongly translated from Bengali into English as three million.
> 
> Shamsher M. Chowdhury, the Bangladesh ambassador in Washington who was commissioned in the Pakistan Army in 1969 but had joined his country&#8217;s war of liberation in 1971, acknowledged that Bangladesh alone cannot correct this mistake. Instead, he suggested that Pakistan and Bangladesh form a joint commission to investigate the 1971 disaster and prepare a report.
> 
> Almost all scholars agreed that the real figure was somewhere between 26,000, as reported by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, and not three million, the official figure put forward by Bangladesh and India.
> 
> Prof Sarmila Bose, an Indian academic, told the seminar that allegations of Pakistani army personnel raping Bengali women were grossly exaggerated.
> 
> Based on her extensive interviews with eyewitnesses, the study also determines the pattern of conflict as three-layered: West Pakistan versus East Pakistan, East Pakistanis (pro-Independence) versus East Pakistanis (pro-Union) and the fateful war between India and Pakistan.
> 
> Prof Bose noted that no neutral study of the conflict has been done and reports that are passed on as part of history are narratives that strengthen one point of view by rubbishing the other. The Bangladeshi narratives, for instance, focus on the rape issue and use that not only to demonize the Pakistan army but also exploit it as a symbol of why it was important to break away from (West) Pakistan.""
> Sheikh Mujib wanted a confederation: US papers -DAWN - National; July 7, 2005


----------



## gromell

quoting one indian professor and nameless bangladeshi academics on a meeting held by Americans, who were the allies of Pakistan in 1971, all these printed in a pakistani newspaper and trying to disprove the truth based on them is wonderful. you surely don't like odd incidents!!! How did you show any evidence there?! Who is samsher mobin chowdhury?! He is a noone in Bangladesh! There is neither any official paper of witness account from 1971 that you stated there nor you could come up with any logical sense of the equation. You heard west pakistani accounts? you tried to hear Bangladeshi ones?! 


"And We have set a barrier before them and a barrier behind them and covered them from above, therefore they see nothing." (Surah Ya-sin ayat 9)


----------



## gromell

> This isn't a multimedia section - where is your evidence establishing genocide and the numbers claimed killed?



it was here. the evidence were there in the clips. i dont know why you deleted them. does anyone in this forum have the right to delete relevant and important posts like that in this forum?!


----------



## gromell

ok here is a first hand account of a neutral journalist who informs us, by meeting eye witness and victims, minimum 100,000 were killed in a single medium sized district in Bangladesh. there are 64 districts in Bangladesh. In some of them there were more killed. But lets say you take the median value of 100,000 and multiply it with 64, we get more than twice the number of the deads than what is claimed(3,000,000)


----------



## gromell

1984 World Almanac: up to 1,000,000 civilians were killed. 
Hartman: 1,000,000 Bengalis 
B&J: 1,000,000 Bengalis 
Kuper cites a study by Chaudhuri which counted 1,247,000 dead, and mentions the possibility that it may be as many as 3,000,000. 
MEDIAN: 1,000,000-1,250,000 
Porter: 1M-2M 
Rummel: 1,500,000. 
Eckhardt: 1,000,000 civ. + 500,000 mil. = 1,500,000 (Bangladesh) 
Harff & Gurr: 1,250,000 to 3,000,000 
The official estimate in Bangladesh is 3 million dead. [AP 30 Dec. 2000; Agence France Presse 3 Oct. 2000; 
Rounaq Johan: 3,000,000 (in Century of Genocide: Eyewitness Accounts and Critical Views, Samuel Totten, ed., (1997)) 
Compton's Encyclopedia, "Genocide": 3,000,000 
Encyclopedia Americana (2003), "Bangladesh": 3,000,000


----------



## eastwatch

Nobody denies, even without seeing a few photographs so ardently sent in this thread, that there were heavy killings, specially of Hindus, by the Pakistan army as well as the local Razakars. But, when this figure is made 3,000,000, it becomes a lie. Because, in that case the killing rate becomes a staggering 11,000 or more per day. This is an impossible figure. 

Hitler killed 4 million Jews in 5 yrs time with the help of millions of Nazis. The Jews were transported by trains to their detention camps in Poland and other parts of europe, where they died of starvation and in gas chambers. Someone please do the arithmatic to find out the rate of killing per day and compare this figure with the east Pakistan figure. Even Vietnam, after a total of 30 years of fighting against France and then USA, claimed a million plus killed, which they have raised to about 2 million after doing scientific survey for many years. Think of all those napalm bombs with fire radius of 200metres, how these have burnt the villages and killed the people living there. 

Any war has its price. We paid the price and we are independent of Pakistan. but, still our politicians want to use our sentiment to score an election win and to keep the BD population at bay so that no normal relationship with Pakistan is built. This is a mean politics.

Instead, BD govt should have made an elaborate survey of the deads immediately after the war. Even today, it is possible to do the job. After the war, Mujib govt called on the people to claim compensation for the deaths of their near relatives. When only 92,000 claims came, the govt just closed the file. There were no more words of compensation from the govt. You have to note that in the 92,000 claims, there were many persons whose names were used for more than one time. It was like when a father claimed his son dead, the uncle also came forward to claim for the same person.

I believe history of any big incident like our Liberation War must be duly researched before publishing it. BD govt can easily do the job of counting the war deaths by asking and then cross-checking a living person's statement. Govt must tabulate the names in every village and mahalla out of respect for those Shaheeds. Otherwise, the confusion will keep on going.

By the way, in any war it is assumed 3 injuries for 1 death. If the 3 million theory is correct, then there should be 8 to 9 million crippled. You do not find such things in BD. While you are in a visit to Vietnam, you will still find many crippled and injured people in that country. I believe there were killings in BD, but not at the tune of what the BD people have been made to believe. 

A sports stadium can hold 30,000 or more people. To kill 3 million people, you have to kill people hundred times bigger than that. Can someone tell me how it is possible! BD young people should not believe in such lies that make us cowards in the eyes of the world. Everything should be seen in its true perspective.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## The Malik

Great post Eastwatch!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Patriot

eastwatch said:


> Nobody denies, even without seeing a few photographs so ardently sent in this thread, that there were heavy killings, specially of Hindus, by the Pakistan army as well as the local Razakars. But, when this figure is made 3,000,000, it becomes a lie. Because, in that case the killing rate becomes a staggering 11,000 or more per day. This is an impossible figure.
> 
> Hitler killed 4 million Jews in 5 yrs time with the help of millions of Nazis. The Jews were transported by trains to their detention camps in Poland and other parts of europe, where they died of starvation and in gas chambers. Someone please do the arithmatic to find out the rate of killing per day and compare this figure with the east Pakistan figure. Even Vietnam, after a total of 30 years of fighting against France and then USA, claimed a million plus killed, which they have raised to about 2 million after doing scientific survey for many years. Think of all those napalm bombs with fire radius of 200metres, how these have burnt the villages and killed the people living there.
> 
> Any war has its price. We paid the price and we are independent of Pakistan. but, still our politicians want to use our sentiment to score an election win and to keep the BD population at bay so that no normal relationship with Pakistan is built. This is a mean politics.
> 
> Instead, BD govt should have made an elaborate survey of the deads immediately after the war. Even today, it is possible to do the job. After the war, Mujib govt called on the people to claim compensation for the deaths of their near relatives. When only 92,000 claims came, the govt just closed the file. There were no more words of compensation from the govt. You have to note that in the 92,000 claims, there were many persons whose name was used for more than one time. It was like when a father claimed his son dead, the uncle also claimed for the same person.
> 
> I believe history of an incident must be duly researched before publishing it. BD govt can easily do the job of counting its liberation war deaths by asking and then cross-checking a person's statement. Otherwise, the confusion will keep on going.
> 
> By the way, in any war it is assumed 3 injuries for 1 death. If the 3 million theory is correct, then there should be 8 to 9 million crippled. You do not find such things in BD. While you are in a visit to Vietnam, you will find many crippled and injured people in that country. I believe there were killings in BD, but not at the tune of what the BD people have been made to believe.
> 
> A sports stadium can hold 30,000 or more people. To kill 3 million people, you have to kill people hundred times bigger than that. Can someone tell me how it is possible! BD young people should not believe in such lies that make us cowards in the eyes of the world. Everything should be seen in its true perspective.


Thank you for the neutral opinion.According to Hamood-ur-Rehman commission 55,000 people were killed which includes West Pakistanis, East Pakistanis and Biharis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eastwatch

I am posting herewith some materials of the Vietnam's war against both France and USA, which I have found by Internet surfing. The war started in around 1945 and ended in 1975. Check the figures of their deaths in those two long wars and compare these figures with the figure claimed by the illiterate politicians and their followers in Bangladesh. 

BD people must stop unnecessarily crying like babies. BD people are fond of referring to some foreign newspaper reports. But, newspapers are always there to publish sensational things, but one should understand they are not Historians, and they publish a thing without making an attempt to do any research on it. 

I call on the govt of BD to to accumulate all the data of war deaths for the sake of history.
==========================================

Learn About the Vietnam War

Between 1945 and 1954, the Vietnamese waged an anti-colonial war against France and received $2.6 billion in financial support from the United States. The French defeat at the Dien Bien Phu was followed by a peace conference in Geneva, in which Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam received their independence and Vietnam was temporarily divided between an anti-Communist South and a Communist North. In 1956, South Vietnam, with American backing, refused to hold the unification elections. By 1958, Communist-led guerrillas known as the Viet Cong had begun to battle the South Vietnamese government.

To support the Souths government, the United States sent in 2,000 military advisors, a number that grew to 16,300 in 1963. The military condition deteriorated, and by 1963 South Vietnam had lost the fertile Mekong Delta to the Vietcong. In 1965, Johnson escalated the war, commencing air strikes on North Vietnam and committing ground forces, which numbered 536,000 in 1968.

The 1968 Tet Offensive by the North Vietnamese turned many Americans against the war. The next president, Richard Nixon, advocated Vietnamization, withdrawing American troops and giving South Vietnam greater responsibility for fighting the war. His attempt to slow the flow of North Vietnamese soldiers and supplies into South Vietnam by sending American forces to destroy Communist supply bases in Cambodia in 1970 in violation of Cambodian neutrality provoked antiwar protests on the nations college campuses. 

From 1968 to 1973 efforts were made to end the conflict through diplomacy. In January 1973, an agreement reached and U.S. forces were withdrawn from Vietnam and U.S. prisoners of war were released. In April 1975, South Vietnam surrendered to the North and Vietnam was reunited.

CONSEQUENCES:

1. The Vietnam War cost the United States 58,000 lives and 350,000 casualties. It also resulted in between one and two million Vietnamese deaths.

2. Congress enacted the War Powers Act in 1973, requiring the president to receive explicit Congressional approval before committing American forces overseas.

It was the longest war in American history and the most unpopular American war of the twentieth century. It resulted in nearly 60,000 American deaths and an estimated 2 million Vietnamese deaths. 

Even today, many Americans still ask whether the American effort in Vietnam was a sin, a blunder, a necessary war, or a noble cause, or an idealistic, if failed, effort to protect the South Vietnamese from totalitarian government.


----------



## eastwatch

hoodhood1 said:


> Yes! It was all Indian Propaganda to gain sympathy for Bangladesh in the world and dominate them. But now the people of Bangladesh are finding for themselves the True Facts and have started to hate the Indians for the hovac they created pretending to be Pakistani Army.


Sorry, your statement is also not true. Because no Indian army entered BD before the war of December. Whatever evil was done, it was done by the Pakistan army and its local supporters we call rezakars. Indian army was not responsible for all those crimes against humanity, at least not in BD. 

Pakistan intelligence agency had never captured any IA Jawans in BD. Even during war the Indians were not very relaxed, they were always worried about their lives. It was not easy for them to feel safe entering a Muslim lion DERA, they could not trust even the Bangalis.

Only when Indira Gandhi was quite sure of the Bangalis that they would support the IA, only then she decided for an attack. Before the Pakistan-India war, it is the ill-equipped Mukti Fouj that fought the Pak army with quite a success.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------

