What's new

History of the looting of the Indian army in the war of liberation , and reasons of helping us (Bangladesh)

.
Bs govt represent people?
What are you trying to say? Please be clear.
No India wanted to prevent rigging and wanted to throw Bangladesh govt , because it was politically stable.
Haha.
1) Was India the election commissioner of BD so as to allow or prevent rigging?
2) You are saying as though election rigging is a good thing.
3) Is it stable now? Do you want any help in rigging your next election? Please do let us know :)
 
.
What are you trying to say? Please be clear.
What’s not clear about this lmao
Just read up on adamjee jute mill, haque industries to name a few... all their machineries were taken to India. Heck, every single pk army rifle, bullets, mortars was taken back to India. Look it all up, no govt. needs to issue statements on this matter.
 
.
So you are saying no looting / rioting happened after Dec 16. No Biharis were killed?
Listen carefully. In 14 December India killed all our patriotic intellectuals.

Because in 14 December already fleeing Pakistan army can't kill these intellectuals.

Evidence is , now almost all intellectuals of Bangladesh are Indian stooge, and is is didn't kill them.

Later after 16 December Biharis were killed by Indian army and Indian army put blame on freedom fighters.

If freedom fighters wanted to kill Biharis, they would have done it before 16 December when Pakistan army almost lost the war , before your army come to take the cake.

Isn't this thread actually claiming so?

Still why asking such questions?
 
.
What’s not clear about this lmao
Just read up on adamjee jute mill, haque industries to name a few... all their machineries were taken to India. Heck, every single pk army rifle, bullets, mortars was taken back to India. Look it all up, no govt. needs to issue statements on this matter.
So was there no protest from your govt? If they did protest, what happened later? Want to genuinely know about this.
 
.
Did UN declare mukti bahini as a terrorist organization?
I doN't know. Is BLA a terrorist organisation as per most permanent security council members? Again, a little chat with Jadhav would help illuminate you on how your country actually functions.
 
.
I doN't know. Is BLA a terrorist organisation as per most permanent security council members? Again, a little chat with Jadhav would help illuminate you on how your country actually functions.
So if you don't know whether mukti bahini was declared a terrorist organization by UN, why are you claiming that india supported terrorism in 1971?
 
. .
So if you don't know whether mukti bahini was declared a terrorist organization by UN, why are you claiming that india supported terrorism in 1971?
Since when did the UN decide who is or isn't a terrorist organisation?

Delhi instructed MB in "irregular" warfare to terrorise the families of officers in East Pakistan. This isn't something to be ashamed of. You should be proud. It worked and delivered freedom to your allies. Jadhav was simply trying to do the same in Balochistan - didn't work this time. Fool me once etc etc.
 
.
I would like to know more about what you are mentioning about weapons and war machinery being captured and taken to India. Can you please give sources. And what happened to them. Were they returned to Pakistan or Bangladesh or put up in Indian museum, or actually used in Indian army etc?

See below:
Colonel Piyush Ghosh has his response to the question.


What exactly do you mean by fraternizing here. What exactly happened. Can you please elaborate on that?

As I explained in my previous post West Pakistani civilians were actually anxious to become POWs By the Rules of War only armed forces personnel in uniform are entitled to POW status , NOT civilians or enemy combatants. Enemy civilians are supposed to obey the occupation and not resist , ( else they are treated as an enemy combatant not entitled to Geneva convention rules), Enemy civilians are to be afforded normal facilities such as the right to purchase food, and nominal "law and order" status. It is not the responsibility of the occupation force to rescue, and repatriate enemy civilians. Also an occupation force only deals with a provisional nominated representative of the defeated enemy population. So as for example in post-world war two Germany a Soviet Military Sector commander usually of Major General rank would deal with a nominated. "Mayor" of a devastated city who in turn would announce the rules to the enemy population ( curfew, search and arrest etc. ).
The Indian Army personnel ( particularly the junior officers and jawans ) began directly talking in Hindi to West Pakistani civilians holed up in their homes, offering to take them to safety; warning them that they couldn't hold the law and order forever. Even though the West Pakistani civilians were initially lodged in hotels, university hostels or police lock ups they were not technically prisoners of war and would have to be handed over to the BD authorities. "Deals" were made at the individual level sometimes on "compensation" ( a Pfaff electric sewing machine ! ) , so it was safer and a privilege to become a POW and ultimately be packed of to India and then home. There is video footage on Youtube of these families boarding UN sponsored Swissair flights out of Kolkata, When the IA trucks rolled out of Dhaka they loaded with a lot more than troops going home.

During World War 2 families of German personnel ( like Lufthansa Airlines office staff ) stranded in France or Poland after these were liberated, were not afforded these privileges. Some were shot by vengeance seeking partisans. All the West Pakistani employees of Pakistan International Airlines, and their families based in Dhaka, eventually made it back to Pakistan.
This happened because of "fraternization with the enemy ". The Indian authorities initially tried to stop it but linguistic affinity does seem to affect behavior, and the Indian commanders deliberately violated the "no fraternization " rule.
If a model of an occupation force has to be seen it is the US army in Iraq, whose prime concern was crushing the resistance.
 
Last edited:
.
Since when did the UN decide who is or isn't a terrorist organisation?

Delhi instructed MB in "irregular" warfare to terrorise the families of officers in East Pakistan. This isn't something to be ashamed of. You should be proud. It worked and delivered freedom to your allies. Jadhav was simply trying to do the same in Balochistan - didn't work this time. Fool me once etc etc.
Ok. So please tell me who decided that mukti bahini was a terrorist organization since UN is clearly not the right party to decide this?
 
.
now almost all intellectuals of Bangladesh are Indian stooge
Are you saying that anyone who had an intellect (brainy people) in Bangladesh supported India? I wonder why.

In 14 December India killed all our patriotic intellectuals.
So you are saying that India killed the intellectuals, who were Indian stooge ?

What have you eaten for dinner? Are you making sense?

Later after 16 December Biharis were killed by Indian army and Indian army put blame on freedom fighters.

If freedom fighters wanted to kill Biharis, they would have done it before 16 December when Pakistan army almost lost the war , before your army come to take the cake.
So on one hand, Indian army was a professional army who safety escorted enemy combatants and civilians to safety (enemy is claiming, so must be true)
On the other hand, Indian army played the dirty game against friends and implicated them in mass murder of Biharis.

Again, what have you eaten for dinner? Are you typing in sleep?
 
. .
I doN't know. Is BLA a terrorist organisation as per most permanent security council members? Again, a little chat with Jadhav would help illuminate you on how your country actually functions.
We have a Jadhav fanboy here. hehe.
 
.
Ok. So please tell me who decided that mukti bahini was a terrorist organization since UN is clearly not the right party to decide this?
The folks who were terrorised by MB have provided ample testimony. That you choose to ignore it is irrelevant.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom