1971, a story of fear, loss and hope

[Spy Master]

Never again, will such a tragedy ever take place. Our nuclear weapons will (inshallah) ensure this.

can we pakistanis please stop these nuclear nuclear chanting! we are making fun of ourselves!

 

[Bilal9]

Well this topic keeps popping up almost indefinitely, so, some people from BD are here and let me ask you people a few questions:
Muslim league was established in that region but not Pakistan movement - why?
What were the priorities of your leaders before Indo-Pak partition?
Did east Pakistan want to be part of Pakistan at first place?
What do you guys think about Suhrawardy, Abul Hashim, Fazlul Qadir?
Were not you people up for separate country?
What was "United and Independent state of Bengal" proposal for?
Why you people choose to become part of Pakistan when you people were trying for alternatives until very end?
Were not there rebellion attempts started seeding immediately after 1947?

I'm not hate preacher but facts are facts:
Our priorities were never your priorities - our ideology was different from yours - I even don't know what was your logic behind 1947 separation from India but one thing I'm sure is that most of you people never wanted to be part of Pakistan at all. After partition, India was afraid of losing its west Bengal, so, it eliminated the threat but intoxicating you people. I know about army's operation, but tell me something else too:

What you people would do if a few people in one part of country wanted to separate from Bangladesh?
What your friend India would do or is doing?

I know Pakistan took in extra baggage at the time of partition and should have separated the region in coming years but by the time it offered autonomy it was too late because your so called leader was thinking for ruling whole Pakistan. If you were in our place, would you people have allowed someone to hijack the ideology by people who never given the preference to that ideology at all and colluded with enemy to sink that ideology?

Only thing I regret, Pakistan took too long to separate that region - maybe it was just trying to protect the people but they were not its people after all. Anyway, it was bound to happen and it was only way forward for your so called nation.

I know the hatred for Pakistan is what your nation is built upon but please don't pollute our youth with that - I would prefer ourselves to to be neutral.

I think you are indirectly trolling and your patronizing (feudal?) tone may be off-putting toward a lot of Bangladeshis here.

You say you're not a hate preacher but your language should be where you start seeking answers and remedying issues.

For starters - using words like 'Pakistan took in extra baggage at the time of partition' or 'Pakistan took too long to separate that region' is not representative of facts. Pakistan was a union and West Pakistan was not in a position to separate anything because majority income was coming from the East.

'Pakistan' was not supposed to be in a controlling situation when East Pakistan (agriculturally more productive at the time) was generating lion's share of GDP, yet were only allocated 30% of budget and 30% of foreign aid (see first video above).

There comes a point when immature, short-sighted and unequal behavior like this comes to a head, giving rise to questioning of status quo and talk of secessionism, and that is exactly what happened. Add Bhutto and Yahya's ham-fisted 'slash and burn' tactics, as I have mentioned above, then you have perfect conditions for secession being a success. Please blame your forefathers for this.

There were as usual more educated people and middle class intelligentsia in the East rather than the West. It is not true they wanted to separate from the get go, unlike what you are insinuating (people in the East were not 'gaddars' and did not premeditate secession). They expected maturity and equal representation with equal taxation which did not materialize in the union govt.

East Pakistanis expected to be Pakistanis on the basis of equal opportunity, equal distribution of wealth per capita in both wings, democracy, modernity and secularism - which simply did not happen. What did happen was spread and persistence of existing feudal power structure (from Punjab and Sindh) through the military. In military for example, Bengali popualtion was less than 10%, due to persistent West Pakistani nepotism and top-level leadership paranoia.

I believe Islamism (Islamic fervor) does not match culturally to the average Bangladeshi mindset while the opposite is rather true (and is a cultural construct and part of society) in Pakistan. Those two differing mindsets (and some say - refusal of West Pakistanis to accept East Pakistanis as equals in govt., in society and in academia) were unfortunate fissures that never got bridged, some would say more starkly toward the late sixties. Add to this the horrific formula of corruption and alleged nepotism in every societal sphere in the West, then you have toxicity that simply could not have been overcome in spite of best efforts on both sides.

There was also a section of Pakistanis (in spite of the West enjoying the lion's share of the wealth and development) who made a loud proclamation about making Urdu the common national language and imposing it on Bengalis, which did not go over well at all. Indians knew far better in their own country and left languages alone, making English the lingua franca.

The straw that broke the camel's back was when there was a devastating cyclone in the East in 1970 and Pakistani govt. did precious little to send aid to the afflicted. That hardened East Pakistani attitudes about secession even further and the Sheikh was able to garner massive support for his ideas.

So - yes, screw-ups of massive proportions.

On a cultural front, the the first initial of Bengal 'B' was not even a letter in constituting letters for the place names making up the word PAKISTAN. The names of the five northern regions of the British Raj was : Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh, and Baluchistan.

And when you finally state that Bangladeshis hate Pakistan, that is farthest from reality. It may be a political tool of convenience in current Bangladesh administration, but which does not reflect the view of the man/woman on the street. In spite of all that has happened some forty years ago, go watch a cricket game between India and Pakistan in a Bangladeshi stadium sometime and make your own conclusions on who the crowd is supporting.....

 

[countryman]

I think you are indirectly trolling and your patronizing (feudal?) tone may be off-putting toward a lot of Bangladeshis here.

You say you're not a hate preacher but your language should be where you start seeking answers and remedying issues.

Feudal-phobia is your problem - a century old problem in fact not mine. I don't blame you for how you perceive these question or my tone because these questions are exactly as rude as one would expect them to be - I only believe that bitter will only taste bitter whether it comes from me or you or from anyone. However, just because you people wouldn't like to discusses the 'root causes' I cannot jump to 'effects' - this is not how it works for me. For sometime I put myself into you people's shoe - tried to see the reality from your side and asked some questions and found all answers in history - all those question you don't want to answer.

PS: I've read the whole thing you wrote but choosing not to comment on anything you wrote because you didn't answer my single question and by precedence of event they occurred first.

 

[Reichsmarschall]

Behind the Myth of 3 million

 

[countryman]

Behind the Myth of 3 million

But, anyone who wouldn't believe this myth there is "Pakistani"
People dye in war - a few thousands of traitors might have been killed by army and several thousands innocents might have died as well (either in cross fire or by hands of their so-called heroes and Indian friends to fuel the civil war) but their level of propaganda is unmatched.

 

[bluesky]

Well this topic keeps popping up almost indefinitely, so, some people from BD are here and let me ask you people a few questions:
Muslim league was established in that region but not Pakistan movement - why?
What were the priorities of your leaders before Indo-Pak partition?
Did east Pakistan want to be part of Pakistan at first place?
What do you guys think about Suhrawardy, Abul Hashim, Fazlul Qadir?
Were not you people up for separate country?
What was "United and Independent state of Bengal" proposal for?
Why you people choose to become part of Pakistan when you people were trying for alternatives until very end?
Were not there rebellion attempts started seeding immediately after 1947?

I'm not hate preacher but facts are facts:
Our priorities were never your priorities - our ideology was different from yours - I even don't know what was your logic behind 1947 separation from India but one thing I'm sure is that most of you people never wanted to be part of Pakistan at all. After partition, India was afraid of losing its west Bengal, so, it eliminated the threat but intoxicating you people. I know about army's operation, but tell me something else too:

What you people would do if a few people in one part of country wanted to separate from Bangladesh?
What your friend India would do or is doing?

I know Pakistan took in extra baggage at the time of partition and should have separated the region in coming years but by the time it offered autonomy it was too late because your so called leader was thinking for ruling whole Pakistan. If you were in our place, would you people have allowed someone to hijack the ideology by people who never given the preference to that ideology at all and colluded with enemy to sink that ideology?

Only thing I regret, Pakistan took too long to separate that region - maybe it was just trying to protect the people but they were not its people after all. Anyway, it was bound to happen and it was only way forward for your so called nation.

I know the hatred for Pakistan is what your nation is built upon but please don't pollute Pakistani youth with that - I would prefer ourselves to to be neutral.

Stupid poster, read history and learn from history. Only then come back to speak about the pre-1947, post-1947 and 1971. You are not supposed to claim any authority over the issues, because you just do not have any sense of reality of those days.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

I think you are indirectly trolling and your patronizing (feudal?) tone may be off-putting toward a lot of Bangladeshis here.

You say you're not a hate preacher but your language should be where you start seeking answers and remedying issues.

For starters - using words like 'Pakistan took in extra baggage at the time of partition' or 'Pakistan took too long to separate that region' is not representative of facts. Pakistan was a union and West Pakistan was not in a position to separate anything because majority income was coming from the East.

'Pakistan' was not supposed to be in a controlling situation when East Pakistan (agriculturally more productive at the time) was generating lion's share of GDP, yet were only allocated 30% of budget and 30% of foreign aid (see first video above).

There comes a point when immature, short-sighted and unequal behavior like this comes to a head, giving rise to questioning of status quo and talk of secessionism, and that is exactly what happened. Add Bhutto and Yahya's ham-fisted 'slash and burn' tactics, as I have mentioned above, then you have perfect conditions for secession being a success. Please blame your forefathers for this.

There were as usual more educated people and middle class intelligentsia in the East rather than the West. It is not true they wanted to separate from the get go, unlike what you are insinuating (people in the East were not 'gaddars' and did not premeditate secession). They expected maturity and equal representation with equal taxation which did not materialize in the union govt.

East Pakistanis expected to be Pakistanis on the basis of equal opportunity, equal distribution of wealth per capita in both wings, democracy, modernity and secularism - which simply did not happen. What did happen was spread and persistence of existing feudal power structure (from Punjab and Sindh) through the military. In military for example, Bengali popualtion was less than 10%, due to persistent West Pakistani nepotism and top-level leadership paranoia.

I believe Islamism (Islamic fervor) does not match culturally to the average Bangladeshi mindset while the opposite is rather true (and is a cultural construct and part of society) in Pakistan. Those two differing mindsets (and some say - refusal of West Pakistanis to accept East Pakistanis as equals in govt., in society and in academia) were unfortunate fissures that never got bridged, some would say more starkly toward the late sixties. Add to this the horrific formula of corruption and alleged nepotism in every societal sphere in the West, then you have toxicity that simply could not have been overcome in spite of best efforts on both sides.

There was also a section of Pakistanis (in spite of the West enjoying the lion's share of the wealth and development) who made a loud proclamation about making Urdu the common national language and imposing it on Bengalis, which did not go over well at all. Indians knew far better in their own country and left languages alone, making English the lingua franca.

The straw that broke the camel's back was when there was a devastating cyclone in the East in 1970 and Pakistani govt. did precious little to send aid to the afflicted. That hardened East Pakistani attitudes about secession even further and the Sheikh was able to garner massive support for his ideas.

So - yes, screw-ups of massive proportions.

On a cultural front, the the first initial of Bengal 'B' was not even a letter in constituting letters for the place names making up the word PAKISTAN. The names of the five northern regions of the British Raj was : Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh, and Baluchistan.

And when you say finally say Bangladeshis hate Pakistan, that is farthest from reality. In spite pf all that has happened, go see a cricket game between India and Pakistan in a Bangladeshi stadium sometime and make your own conclusions on who the crowd is supporting.....

Some blame should also be given to the Bengali muslim leaders of pre-1947. They could not foresee what Mountbatten foreseen.Those muslim leaders like SH Suhrawardy, AK Fazlul Haque or Khawza Nazimuddin should have put much thought about the future of the state they are struggling to get.They could not foresee the simple fact that western Pakistan which is inheriting 36 percent of entire British Indian army and which had strong autocratic and feudal set-up will not behave democratically and will try to dominate by force and exploit the Eastern Pakistan.This simple fact was even clear to Maulana Abul Kalam Azad.But I can't remember any effort by the Bengal muslim league leaders to secure any arrangement from Jinnah in 1946-1947 which will protect the interest of East Pakistan in future state . Original Lahore resolution in 1940 envisioned 2 sovereign muslim states in the sub-continent which was amended to a single state in 1946. In that crucial period, Bengali leaders should have thought about the consequences and agitate for the separate muslim state in Bengal and Assam.But they blindly put faith on Jinnah who was not very fond of Bengali Muslim leaders.Jinnah maintained distance with the Bengali Muslim league leaders and tried to put them down.

Not founding Bangladesh in 1947 was the original sin whose atonement we partially did in 1971. In 1947, top muslim league leaders used Bengal as a bargaining chip to maximize their gain in the western Pakistan.There was a common consensus in Bengal that Radcliffe line will go through the Hoogly river and East Bengal will gain Calcutta and West Bengal will get Haora.But in final settlement muslim league leadership relinquish it's claim over Calcutta to gain Lahore.Same thing also happen with Tripura case.This princely state was eager to join East Pakistan and was ready discuss with Muslim league.But top muslim leaguer totally ignored the Tripura queen as they were busy in Kashmir and giving blank papers to the prices on western sides to persuade them to join West Pakistan.Current Rohingya problem also has it's origin in 1940s when Rohingyas wanted to join East Pakistan but they were rejected.This type of things happen because of shortsightedness of our leaders,Otherwise we would have Bangladesh in 1947 with a different border.

 

[HariSinghNalwa]

Well as our prime minister Indira Gandhi said with just one war we have defeated Pakistan's 2 nation theory which the Muslim league drilled in the minds of the people

 

[countryman]

Well as our prime minister Indira Gandhi said with just one war we have defeated Pakistan's 2 nation theory which the Muslim league drilled in the minds of the people

'Ghar ka bhadi lanka dhaye' - you got traitors and fools on your side and got pleasure you wanted. It is fact - majority in BD defied two nation theory - but there an ancient region called money - some people worship it. Sometimes murder walk free from court but it doesn't mean the murder never happened. Two nation theory was fact and India should be thankful because the communal violence might have divided India much more if partition hadn't happened earlier and it would not have been limited to Hindus and Muslims. Anyway, disregarding us - I'm more than happy and thankful my investors moved Pakistan leaving their everything behind for Pakistan, let's wait for a couple of decades to be exactly sure about whether two nation theory have any reality on part of your minorities.

PS: Any historical legend quoting my message above and asking me study history should enlighten us by answering the questions instead of 'Traditional Bhashan'.

 

[Valar.]

For Muslims, first morning ritual is Namaz.
For Hindus, it's Pooja.
For Bangladeshis, it's 71 Rona Dhona.

Make it a sticky thread and feel free to do your morning ritual here for eternity.

 

[countryman]

For Bangladeshis, it's 71 Rona Dhona.

Make it a sticky thread and feel free to do your morning ritual here for eternity.

 

[Hamza913]

If you need nuclear weapons to keep your country together, then I feel sorry for the people of your country.

Nuclear weapons are required to keep idiots from invading.

What tragedy you are talking about? Tragedy was for the people of east Pakistan who were brutalized by the PA bullets we paid to buy. Nuclear weapon will remain an old and unusable thing during any future war. You guys are so happy to talk about this weapon, when all other countries of the world are trying to get rid of it. Get rid of your Taleban mentality.

Nuclear weapons act as a detterent to keep crazy Hindustan at bay. It's called survival mentality, not Taliban mentality.

 

[American Pakistani]

Some blame should also be given to the Bengali muslim leaders of pre-1947. They could not foresee what Mountbatten foreseen.Those muslim leaders like SH Suhrawardy, AK Fazlul Haque or Khawza Nazimuddin should have put much thought about the future of the state they are struggling to get.They could not foresee the simple fact that western Pakistan which is inheriting 36 percent of the man and equipment of entire British Indian army and which had strong autocratic and feudal set-up will not behave democratically and will try to dominate and exploit the Eastern Pakistan.This simple fact was even clear to Maulana Abul Kalam Azad.But I can't remember any effort by the Bengal muslim league leaders to secure any arrangement from Jinnah which will protect the interest of East Pakistan in future state in 1946-1947. Original Lahore resolution in 1940 envisioned 2 sovereign muslim states in the sub-continent which was amended to a single state in 1946.In that crucial period, Bengali leaders should have thought about the consequences and agitate for the separate muslim state in Bengal and Assam.But they blindly put faith on Jinnah who was not very fond of Bengali Muslim leaders.Jinnah maintained distance with the Bengali Muslim league leaders and tried to put down them.

Not founding Bangladesh in 1947 was the original sin whose atonement we partially did in 1971.In 1947, top muslim league leaders used Bengal as a bargaining chip to maximize their gain in the western Pakistan.There was a common consensus in Bengal that Radcliffe line will go through the Hoogly river and East Bengal will gain Calcutta and West Bengal will get Haora.But in final settlement muslim league leadership relinquish it's claim over Calcutta to gain Lahore.Same thing also happen with Tripure case.This princely state was eager to join East Pakistan and was ready discuss with Muslim league.But top muslim leaguer totally ignored the Tripura queen as they were busy in Kashmir and giving blank papers to the prices on western sides to persuade them to join West Pakistan.Current Rohingya problem also has it's origin in 1940s when Rohingyas wanted to join East Pakistan but they were rejected.This type of things happen because of shortsightedness of our leaders,Otherwise we should have Bangladesh in 1947 with a different border.

Pakistani leaders never forced Bangladesh to join Pakistan. Pakistani leaders wanted actually 3 Muslim states one Pakistan, Bangistan and Osmanistan(Hyderabad Deccan). It was your Bangladeshi leaders who forced Bangladesh into Pakistan. There was no Bangladesh or Osmanistan in the name of Pakistan itself, it was Punjab, Afghania (kpk, fata, waziristan), Kashmir, Sind, BalochisTAN. The reason that happened was because Bangladeshis knew that Jinnah was fighting hard for these lands but if instead of one big country, they ask for 3 countries then it was most likely the smaller 2 won' get any freedom at all and Bangladesh would' have to live with India. And Bangladeshi leaders were correct in this assessment, because that's what happened with Osmanistan or Hyderabad Deccan. Your leaders forced Jinnah to include Bangladesh in Pakistan.

And what nonsense are you talking about Tripura? British were not distributing lands like channa, Tripura was a Hindu majority state, what claim could Pakistan have? As for Rohingyas land, that was historic land of Myanmaar. How would you feel if Myanmar’s Buddhists people settle in Chittagong and after 50 years claim the land and try to merge with Myanmaar? You are just posting hateful propaganda taught by your schools, culture, media and politicians.

 

[MultaniGuy]

Whatever, good riddance to Bangladesh.

Too much poverty and backwardness would have come into our country.

Well as our prime minister Indira Gandhi said with just one war we have defeated Pakistan's 2 nation theory which the Muslim league drilled in the minds of the people

lol how did you defeat two nation theory? Did Bangladesh reunite with India? No it did not. So two nation theory is still valid. Two nation theory just took a different form.

 

[Mage]

Too much poverty and backwardness

Yep. Bangladesh got rid of that. It was good. Damn even today it feels good. 16th December is really a glorious day.

lol how did you defeat two nation theory? Did Bangladesh reunite with India? No it did not. So two nation theory is still valid. Two nation theory just took a different form.

If anything the theory went back to its root of 1940.