but East India company and the British Raj were bascially the same thing. They were looting us dry for the interest of the British.
East India Company and British Raj are two different things. But you re right, in that they exploited India for their own needs.
Netaji was a spark for those who had been on the receiving end of the British violence. The ones who weren't happy with the non violence BS.
He was not exactly a spark. There were many others who indulged in armed rebellion.
Oh I see Netaji harbored delusions of grandeur, then wtf were Nehru and Gandhi thinking of when they marched along? You ally with whoever is going to help your objectives, good or bad. This was the greatest opportunity to apply pressure to the British.
The British were already under lot of pressure with the protests by the Congress leadership and the IML. Netaji's little INA stunt was simply a sidenote.
Bose was capable ot uniting ppl of different religions. Just listen to INA vets you clueless f-k.
So were others, and on a much larger scale than what Netaji achieved. As for using choice words, listen kiddo. Hume bhi maa-bhen ki gaaliyan aati hein. I too can call into question you immediate parentage, let alone your ancestry. So lets refrain from such and stick to gentlemanly discussion.
Its funny how you have not questioned anything about Nehru and his family dynasty and how they manipulated our history.
I question Nehru and Gandhi in the same breath as I question your interpretation of Netaji's contributions. Hell, Kashmir and division of India are solely their blunders and for their own political motives. But that is not the topic under discussion here. Your claims that Netaji was the most important person responsible for kicking the British out, is wrong. And that is what I am trying to say here.
You need violence to get freedom.
Yeah? So how did that work our for the Chechens, the Tamil Elam, the two most formidable violent movements! How about the Kashmiris, The Nagas, the Assamese, the ETA in Spain, the IRA in British Ireland, the Palestinians, etc?
Violence doesnt pay.
The story of our movement needs to be told properly not this BS driven by the Congress party which has chosen to pick points that their party look good.
I do agree. But the entire story should be told as it is, not embellishing little parts entirely out of context.
Tell us why the path of non violence never got us Independence, for the centuries prior to WW2?
FYI, most of all previous attempts to drive out the British were violent. Did they work? And what centuries? British ruled parts of India for all of 150 years. The non-violent movements started in the last 20-30 years.
Congress has deliberatedly broken our psyche.
You dont like the Congress. Neither do I. But that doesnt negate the contributions that their leaders made during the freedom struggle. Patel and Azad were from the congress, werent they? PVNR, one of the best PM India ever had was from the congress, no?
Listen your posts are not accurate. All you do is bash Netaji which is ridiculous,
Given the context, my posts are correct. I am not bashing Netaji, I am poking holes into the OP's version of aggrandizing of Netaji's contributions. Do you comprehend that?
British were bound to leave India? LMAO. The British were trying to hold onto everything if they could. Look at Hong Kong.
British left China and FYI, they negotiated a 99 year lease for the HK land. China agreed. HK was peacefully handed over in 1997, if you recollect.
So yeah, maintaining India as a colony was not feasible to the British and they were bound to leave. One of the causes was the demand for representation in the UK parliament for Indians, since Indians out numbered the British citizens and wanted a say in the affairs of the state.
Oh we were already governing ourselves? Then why kick out the British, if we were running the government?
Check out the laws passed by UK govt and establishment of Indian parliamentary system over the years. If you read that, you would know.
Its starting to make sense why real capable leaders who had shown ingenuity and aptitude were sidelined like Sardar Patel, Netaji, etc.
Patel was made the Home Minister...the most important post in India after the PM's post. How was he sidelined? Did he march the Police force into Hyderabad? Did the British stop him?
Listen dude, I understand this nationalist ferver. But that doesnt mean we should blindly be patriotic. Indian freedom movement was a very huge event, a process which took place over a period of decades. Many important personalities contributed in their own ways at particular times for this to succeed. Keep that in mind. Dont lost sight of the big picture by concentrating on smaller things and ignoring others.
@gubbi It's difficult to decide from where to start considering the kind of half-truths, quarter-truths, and blatant lies you have posted here. But I thought it would be good to start with that little "Divide and rule" tactics you played here, just like the British, with your "Little Bong nationalism" statement.
What blatant lies or half truths have I peddled? Taking things out of context and saying that they rea the most important event which influenced India's independence is like saying one single mutation causes all the cancers in humans. Totally wrong.
And what divide and rule? I was pointing the pride in regional nationalism that certain members display, by emphasizing importance of people from their regions over others. Its out there, every Indian does it. I just pointed it out.
And given the topic under discussion, I repeat my point that Netaji was not solely responsible for kicking the British out. It was long drawn out process, with contributions of many over the period, all of which are equally important. Dont take things out of context.
But the first name is Bengali!
Euphoria? 
