• Saturday, July 4, 2020

India Pakistan Partition BBC Special Presentation

Discussion in 'Members Club' started by divya, Nov 7, 2011.

  1. divya

    divya BANNED

    Messages:
    2,110
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,780 / -0







    ---------- Post added at 09:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 PM ----------






     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2013
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  2. tony singh

    tony singh BANNED

    Messages:
    431
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2011
    Ratings:
    +0 / 172 / -0
    I seen these ones before i can't watch it again its too much for me to handle.
     
  3. divya

    divya BANNED

    Messages:
    2,110
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,780 / -0
    just sometime everyone was living peacefully in lahore and suddenly everything falls apart .... bloody politicians and bloody british
     
  4. tony singh

    tony singh BANNED

    Messages:
    431
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2011
    Ratings:
    +0 / 172 / -0

    Gotta blame Indian leaders too like Nehru they let it happen
     
  5. divya

    divya BANNED

    Messages:
    2,110
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,780 / -0

    it was more to do with congress than jinnah who caused the partition. the chacha nehru had been the figure which has caused enough harm to india.
     
  6. Don Jaguar

    Don Jaguar SENIOR MEMBER

    Messages:
    3,769
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,773 / -0
    Its still cool here in lahore. :cool:

    Actually british are not responsible for partition but thanks to politicians like Jinnah. :pakistan:
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 8
  7. Rafi

    Rafi ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    10,453
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Ratings:
    +15 / 15,900 / -4
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    Nehru and the Congress were totally responsible - they were power hungry and willing to sacrifice millions.
     
  8. Abu Zolfiqar

    Abu Zolfiqar Rest in Peace

    Messages:
    22,557
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Ratings:
    +22 / 24,103 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    it was bound to happen sooner or later; the societies, their ethos and moral/cultural construct was quite different between both nations

    though it could have been administered with much less violence...unfortunately the hatred was deep rooted on both sides.

    if there was any indication at the time of how contentious the issue of Kashmir would be, it's a shame that Nehru's wish for plebicite was not realized much sooner (decades ago)
     
  9. divya

    divya BANNED

    Messages:
    2,110
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,780 / -0

    Abu if it was so diffrent then people would have not been living in peace for centuries it were the politics of british which played the role. if the british would have controlled the kolkatta rights in the start itself there would have been no issues. it was only very late when Jinnah actually came up with the creation of Pakistan. Initially he himself did not wanted the partition.
     
  10. Abu Zolfiqar

    Abu Zolfiqar Rest in Peace

    Messages:
    22,557
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Ratings:
    +22 / 24,103 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    not really....Congress (obviously) was against partition. But Jinnah was very assiduous with his demand. It wasn't a demand due to hatred, it was a demand that was right and it was a demand long made by the people on the ground --those who today are Pakistani nationals
     
  11. Mech

    Mech BANNED

    Messages:
    3,161
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2011
    Ratings:
    +0 / 3,477 / -6
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    Slovenia
    I don't care if my countrymen disagree with me. But, I wish the partition never happened. It will always be a horrible blotch in our otherwise glorious freedom struggle. I blame the congress and the British. Jinnah had no option.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  12. Abu Zolfiqar

    Abu Zolfiqar Rest in Peace

    Messages:
    22,557
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Ratings:
    +22 / 24,103 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    Pakistan
    but looking to today, does it really matter?

    peaceful co-existence for centuries --well that's debatable. Except when the Mughals were in power there was a good semblance of inter-faith harmony and social progress.


    initially, he just asked for autonomy but even that innocent demand was not heeded to
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 2
  13. divya

    divya BANNED

    Messages:
    2,110
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,780 / -0

    not really... it was the faulty politics of congress which led to the demand. Jinnah was not at all interested in partition initially. After the name Pakistan showed up in 30s it was still just a name before 1945. till then also Jinnah just wanted muslims to have extra rights in the provinces where they were in majority but again i say that was impossible for the democratic society.

    if the congress would have thought of the solution then having absolute power and if the british would have cared about controlling the rights partition would have had never happened.

    Jinnah was just the medium of what was to be the done as a solution without the implementation of what i said above. it was not for Jinnah but it was the faulty lines of congress and the british which caused it

    If not that way both the communities would not be living in peace prior to that and post that(Ignore the riots in India which were quite small in comparison to what happened in 1947 and also for the reason same amount of people have been killed in pakistan in mob violence and terror strikes so lets not touch that part. Muslims in pakistan having been doing well and Indian muslims have been with peace for the majority of the part of past 65 years.)

    ---------- Post added at 10:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 PM ----------


    well i disagree with the concept of autonomy here. things would have been far worse if there was autonomy would have divided the society much more. for a democratic society to flourish all should be equal by constitution.

    But then again if the partition would have not happened who knows hindus and muslims would be like 60% and 40%.... so would have not been a much of a deal if it was on the grounds of discrimination.
     
  14. Bang Galore

    Bang Galore ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    10,685
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2010
    Ratings:
    +17 / 22,649 / -5
    Country:
    India
    Location:
    India
    That's a good joke!

    History is obviously not your strong point.

    While Partition was based on a principle that many of us will always disagree with, I have grown to believe that it was probably best in the end; there was no possible way partition could have been avoided & had it not been carried out when the British were still around, the carnage that would have occurred would have made even the horrible events of the partition seem like a party.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 6
  15. divya

    divya BANNED

    Messages:
    2,110
    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Ratings:
    +0 / 2,780 / -0

    Had it not been faulty politics of congress which suck till today and are reason for the majority of problems in the political system, the partition would have never happened.


    May the Nehru Family rot in hell.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 3