India persuading Karzai govt for US attack in tribal areas

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Instead of thinking about "girding up loins" and so on, think about the situation that existed post 911. America had the support of the world to go at any nation they wanted to. They believed that Afghanistan would be a pushover (and Iraq), and no doubts they believed Pakistan would be a pushover too. It made no difference to America whether they bombed Pakistan or not at the time, but they could have done it. And the threat was made as per Musharraf's book. The situation has changed now. America doesn't have the support, resources, or the need to attack a compliant Pakistan. Had Pakistan sided with the Taliban though post 911, the Americans would have flattened the country from the air at least. To do so now, in the current situation would not help them in Afghanistan one bit.

You are missing the woods for the trees.

America could go anywhere.

But you have to understand geopolitics and geostrategy to understand why they went were they went.

And I have spoken about it at length and so I would not like to hear myself again!

 

[roadrunner]

I was only focussing on your misconceived concept of blaming Indians as "butt licker" who allowed the Europeans in.

And you claim to be our In House historian!

Since you feel that Pakistanis were always a different lot by genes and everything else under the sun, so, with the same baseline, I indicated to you that Moguls ( who obviously as per your theory and not mine, would be classified you as 'non Indian') are the ones who gave the firman and by treachery in the Battle of Polashi, allowed the British to entrench themselves in India.

Thanks for the info . The Mughals were a spent force. These firmans were useless and the Mir appears to have been the traitor. Interesting stuff. It does seem as though Eastern and Southern India were easy pickings for colonialists.

 

[Flintlock]

Thanks for the info . The Mughals were a spent force. These firmans were useless and the Mir appears to have been the traitor. Interesting stuff. It does seem as though Eastern and Southern India were easy pickings for colonialists.

South India was never "easy pickings". The colonial settlements never extended beyond tiny pockets there for a long time.

At most they could play politics to increase their influence over the local kings.

However, eastern India was easy pickings, thanks to the commendable work done earlier by the Mughals, of ensuring that no force rises from that part to threaten their rule for a thousand years.

Western India again was no pushover, thanks to the Marathas and their navy.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

To put the facts right, East was not really easy picking initially.

It was Mir Jaffar who renegaded and sold Siraj ud Doulah and brought in the English in the form of Robert Clive.

That opened the floodgates.

As to why the Moghuls were defeated all over India has been well covered by a post by Mastan Khan.

 

[KENT]

India's trade route with Iran is only through the sea. There is no land route.

On land, you are shut off by Pakistan and China.

Serious Comprehension Problem, Ever heard of Chabber port? or what I mentioned in the post?

 

[Flintlock]

To put the facts right, East was not really easy picking initially.

It was Mir Jaffar who renegaded and sold Siraj ud Doulah and brought in the English in the form of Robert Clive.

That opened the floodgates.

As to why the Moghuls were defeated all over India has been well covered by a post by Mastan Khan.

Thats what I'm talking about. Those areas were under Islamic rule.

Naturally, with a famine-stricken, demoralized population, whose ruler doesn't give a damn about his people, you can't expect much resistance.

As expected, the treacherous Nawab Siraj-ud-Daula coudln't stand up to the British.

Here is what Muslim historians of the period had to say about him:

Two Muslim historians of the period wrote of him, and both made specific mention of his exceptional cruelty and arrogance.

Ghulam Husain Salim wrote[1]:

"Owing to Siraj ud Dowla’s harshness of temper and indulgence, fear and terror had settled on the hearts of everyone to such an extent that no one among his generals of the army or the noblemen of the city was free from anxiety. Amongst his officers, whoever went to wait on Siraj ud Dowla despaired of life and honour, and whoever returned without being disgraced and ill-treated offered thanks to God. Siraj ud Dowla treated all the noblemen and generals of Mahabat Jang [Ali Vardi Khan] with ridicule and drollery, and bestowed on each some contemptuous nickname that ill-suited any of them. And whatever harsh expressions and abusive epithet came to his lips, Siraj ud Dowla uttered them unhesitatingly in the face of everyone, and no one had the boldness to breath freely in his presence."'

Ghulam Husain Tabatabai had this[2] to say about him:

"Making no distinction between vice and virtue, he carried defilement wherever he went, and, like a man alienated in his mind, he made the house of men and women of distinction the scenes of his depravity, without minding either rank or station. In a little time he became detested as Pharaoh, and people on meeting him by chance used to say, ‘God save us from him!'"

If Siraj-ud-Daula treated his own generals and noblemen with such callousness, imagine the state of the common man!!

And that traitor Mir Jaffar was an Arab!! What did he care about the people of Bengal? It is no surprise that he betrayed his king and kingdom.

 

[roadrunner]

Thats what I'm talking about. Those areas were under Islamic rule.

You're getting carried away now. The strongest resistance the British encountered in South India was against Tipu Sultan, incidentally an Islamic ruler. The extreme northwest of India and the whole of Pakistan was not conquered till much later, and the west of Pakistan never really conquered at all. Though Bengal was the first military defeat for the Indians, there had been a firm foothold established in India before this. This was only possible through collusion and acceptance by the locals.

 

[dabong1]

Let me tell you what situation I'm talking about. Imagine 1945 Berlin. 4 armies about to overrun the last few units of the German army. If they had nukes, would they have fired them? After the war all German commanders were either executed or imprisoned. That's what's gonna happen to Pakistani army officers, so they really won't give a crap.

This has nothing to do with being a global power, this is like a cornered man about to die who wants to kill as many of his enemies before he himself dies.

excellent anology

 

[Flintlock]

You're getting carried away now. The strongest resistance the British encountered in South India was against Tipu Sultan, incidentally an Islamic ruler. The extreme northwest of India and the whole of Pakistan was not conquered till much later, and the west of Pakistan never really conquered at all. Though Bengal was the first military defeat for the Indians, there had been a firm foothold established in India before this. This was only possible through collusion and acceptance by the locals.

Yeah, and I've discussed before how years of foreign rule had made it inevitable that the locals would not oppose yet another foreign force in the region.

Tippu Sultan fought not for his people, but for his own selfish interests. His reign is marked by a schizophrenic double policy of "carrot and stick" to keep his hindu subjects in control.
He always made sure that his peers saw him as a defender of the faith, but perhaps he was more pragmatic while dealing with the locals.

On the whole, not too different from any other Islamic ruler in India. Perhaps one of the better ones, but that not saying much.

 

[Flintlock]

You're getting carried away now. The strongest resistance the British encountered in South India was against Tipu Sultan, incidentally an Islamic ruler. The extreme northwest of India and the whole of Pakistan was not conquered till much later, and the west of Pakistan never really conquered at all. Though Bengal was the first military defeat for the Indians, there had been a firm foothold established in India before this. This was only possible through collusion and acceptance by the locals.

Look, lets get this clear. Most Islamic rulers were compelled to appear as a "defender of Islam" and all that.
Obviously, they had to be more pragmatic while ruling their territories, or they would be risking revolution.
Nevertheless, they did their level best to subjugate the locals and bring in as much Islamization as possible.

Now, obviously, even in the past, each ruler propogated his own faith....however the manner in which this was done by the Islamic rulers was markedly different from the earlier hindu/buddhist ones.

Here's a paragraph from kautilya's Arthashastra:

A conquering king should reassure a defeated people that not much, except their rulers, will change. The king who has triumphed "should adopt a similar character, dress, language and behavior (as the subjects). And he should show the same devotion in festivals in honour of deities of the country, festive gatherings and sportive amusements." 154 He should keep his promises, especially to those who helped him win, he should honor the local "deities," and he should make grants of land and money to men distinguished in wisdom and piety. 155 And the conquering king should show his goodwill toward the defeated by instituting "a righteous custom, not initiated before."

Indigenous kings followed very strict chivarly codes and battle laws, which the foreigners did not. Thus, they caused great harm to society.

 

[Flintlock]

I have been rather harsh towards the Islamic rulers

Let me just say, to balance things out, that the caste system played an equally important, if not greater role, in ensuring that Hindu society remained ignorant and weak.

Infact its the rigid caste system itself that brought innovation and science to a grinding halt in ancient India, thus turning it into an inward-looking, ignorant society that was unable to defend itself when the time came.

This is what Naipaul thought about the effect of the caste system:

Caste he finds still dominates life in India, serving to imprison "a man in his function," rendering "millions faceless." A businessman's function is to make money by whatever means he can; he does not have a duty though to produce good quality items. It is not an issue of dishonesty or of short-sightedness, as service is not an Indian concept. He described groups of sweepers who cleaned a set of stairs; after they worked with twig brooms, rags, and buckets of dirty water, the stairs and wall are not only not cleaner but dirtier than ever. However they fulfilled their function, which was to sweep, or rather to be sweepers. Actual cleanliness was not the issue. Indians have been known to be picnicking on the banks of a river while someone drowned, not lifting a finger to help. He writes that the Indians do not lack courage or an admiration for it, but rather see courage and the choice to risk one's life to save another the function only of soldiers. Attempts to save government jobs for untouchables is not lauded, as this merely in many Indian's eyes simply puts responsibility into the hands of those unqualified - by their caste - to perform that function. Those who buck the caste system, or are outside of it, such those Indians who were born overseas, are not accepted by the system and often frustrated.

It just goes to show what happens if any damaging dogma takes hold of a society.

But I think reformers like Ambedkar, Vivekananda, Rammohun Roy and others effectively ended the debate regarding the caste system, and today everyone accepts that it was a theory that was very damaging for hindu society.

 

[Flintlock]

jeez...another thread has been hijacked....I think we'll just end the side-issues here and move on to the main topic...I'll just transfer the last comment to a new thread.

 

[Black Stone]

Serious Comprehension Problem, Ever heard of Chabber port? or what I mentioned in the post?

Please tell me how the goods from the chabahar port gets to India?

Are they going to be magically teleported into India?

 

[KENT]

Please tell me how the goods from the chabahar port gets to India?

Are they going to be magically teleported into India?

Oh I forget as to whom I dare to asked the question? as he is from Super duper America.

In your life Ever heard of Arabian Sea?

 

[Spring Onion]

Serious Comprehension Problem, Ever heard of Chabber port? or what I mentioned in the post?

Not so quick dear.

Though India had been promoting the cosntruction of Chahbahar coupled with Iran to even block Gwadar. But Gwardar still has an edge over Cahbahar in terms of routes and seasonal working.

It has been said that even though the road connecting Chabahar with Afghanistan will provide access to India via land for its imports and exports to and from Central Asia But still India will needs shorter transit route to quickly ship its trade goods to Afghanistan and Central Asia.