How India betrayed Pakistan

[InPhilTraitor]

The Pakistanis committed genocide and mass slaughter of Bengalis, just like a typical Wahhabi-Pakistani pseudo-Arab mass murderer.

just feeding the trolls............................

 

[Je suis de retour]

1) All the points in the article are correct to the point. Partition should have been realized after completion of the preparatory works. At the time of partition, India was having one of the best civilian bureaucrats trained by the British, and Pakistan had none.

It takes many thousands of civil servants and many months/yrs to organize a new country. While India was bestowed with everything including an unitary/intact land mass, Pakistan was devoid of everything, and was divided into two by a vast Indian territory.

2) Calcutta was built on the sweat of the people of east Bengal. It should have joined east Pakistan. Or, at least, it should have been bifurcated into two, just like Berlin.

3) Britishers were not committed towards partition. Had they committed to the Pakistan cause, then east Pakistan would have comprised also of west Bengal and the seven states in your NE. West Pakistan would also have been joined by east Punjab and entire Jammu Kashmir & Junagadh. Moreover, Hydrabad would have also joined Pakistan. So, there would have been 3 regions of Pakistan: east, west and south.

Reply is point by point
1 Pakistan didnt had civil servants because of Muslims own mistakes, i might sound cruel, but reality is muslim community was mostly illiterate one , there was big big difference of literacy ratio between muslims and other religions, so it was reflected in number of civil servants in Pakistan.
2 Kolkata is because of trade started via sea by east india company and its exaggeration to say its because of east pakistan.
Remember Kolkata had big communities of Hindus (60&#37, Muslims and christians, so its solution to its existence would have only been possible in secular india, not Islamic pakistan.
3 Britishers were deadly committed to partition so fast and speedy that the work for partition line was completed in just one week, moreover remember that in partition britishers couldnt have favored pakistan because majority of thrust for independence was from todays india only.

 

[back me up]

India is eternal enemy of Pakistan from day 1 for the obvious reasons.

1. Hindu coloring of freedom movement by Nehru and Gandhi
2. India annexed the Pakistani share of treasury and ammunitions
3. India annexed the legally acceded state of Junagarh to enforce a plesbestite.
4. But it has enforced policy of duplicity when it comes to Kashmir. In a nutsell whatever floats the boat in India favour is accecptable.
5. India interfered in east-Pakistan by terrorist infiltration.
6. Indias nuclear blast were primarily show of muscle to Pakistan.
7. India has always done its best to taint Pakistan on international fronts / forums.

woooo thankfully everything single stuff on this article i already knew by reading a school book of my relative.

This is one good thing our government has done never let out next generation forget about what India did and is doing with us.

its unfortunate that this is exactly what pakistanis are TAUGHT at school level.

The subtle Subversion: A report on Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan

 

[Anonymous_Clown]

its unfortunate that this is exactly what pakistanis are TAUGHT at school level.

The subtle Subversion: A report on Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan

And there's more. They are taught terminology like bania, Brahmin, etc. in school itself. And the picture of a devious, sly, cunning and weak Hindu is imprinted in their minds from a young age. We all remember the famous cocksure staement: "One Pakistani equals Ten Indians".

When these kids grow up, they see that the world seems to be favouring India's stance in most matters, contrary to what they had been taught by their teachers and society since childhood! They then rationalize this discrepancy by lapping up conspiracy theories propounded by people like Zaid Hameed.

And the saga continues....

 

[eastwatch]

This proves your level of sanity. The state of Hyderabad had 85% Hindus and appx. 14% muslims. Hyderabad would never become part of Pakistan.

If I accept your logic, then under what logic India is holding Kashmir? It is more than 90% Muslim. I am not doubting your sanity, though!

 

[justanobserver]

If I accept your logic, then under what logic India is holding Kashmir? It is more than 90% Muslim. I am not doubting your sanity, though!

His time scale was 1947 and his logic was the flawed Two nation Theory, which was prevalent that time.

 

[Illusive]

Is it a necessity that where muslim majority lives it should be deemed as a separate state, I think thats unnecessary, i guess muslims think as individuals less and more as a community, whereas others have more individuality.

 

[eastwatch]

Is it a necessity that where muslim majority lives it should be deemed as a separate state, I think thats unnecessary, i guess muslims think as individuals less and more as a community, whereas others have more individuality.

Please check the historical background for demanding a separate country for the muslims of Hindustan. I will not elaborate here, but note that All-India Muslim League was formed in Dhaka in 1911 in the palace of Nawab Salimullah.

You have to find out the reasons why Bangali muslims had lost faith on their fellow Bangali Hindus gradually since the Battle of Plassey in 1757. It was the muslims of Bengal who first thought of a separate entity for themselves for their own emancipation.

 

[somebozo]

Please check the historical background for demanding a separate country for the muslims of Hindustan. I will not elaborate here, but note that All-India Muslim League was formed in Dhaka in 1911 in the palace of Nawab Salimullah.

You have to find out the reasons why Bangali muslims had lost faith on their fellow Bangali Hindus gradually since the Battle of Plassey in 1757. It was the muslims of Bengal who first thought of a separate entity for themselves for their own emancipation.

And one forgets Abkbar botched attempt to unify india under deen-e-ilahi. The division was already prevalent in Indian society. Even after fall of Dhaka, Bangladesh did not join indian union or turned into a hindu country. It remain memeber of OIC and recognises itself as a Muslim country. Now dont come in with an argument of Sharia vs secular. The is no such law making requirements or restriction. A country to identify itself as muslim only needs a muslim majority and freedom to practice Islam.

The concept of Sharia enforcement as unquestioned constitution comes from wahabi idealogy!

 

[Illusive]

Please check the historical background for demanding a separate country for the muslims of Hindustan. I will not elaborate here, but note that All-India Muslim League was formed in Dhaka in 1911 in the palace of Nawab Salimullah.

You have to find out the reasons why Bangali muslims had lost faith on their fellow Bangali Hindus gradually since the Battle of Plassey in 1757. It was the muslims of Bengal who first thought of a separate entity for themselves for their own emancipation.

Although Jinnah succeeded in having a separate muslim state, but when he tried to implement urdu as the national language, the then east begal(bangladesh) refuted since they wanted bengali. Now since the partition was on religious base and urdu is islamic language then why didn't you implement it, isn't it unislamic. Also Jinnah wanted a secular state which was totally opposite idea on what basis partition was done.

So does it implies that muslims can't stand to be lead by other community, since a secular state would mean that everyone is equal, but since there is muslim majority so there's no chance of other community leading the country in politics. So the idea is just about who is leading who.

 

[Spring Onion]

I'm assuming this is referring to the IA's training of irregulars in Bengal? I would love some more information on this guerilla conflict if anyone can help.

PM me your email i will send you research paper. It will clear many things including our mistakes and Indian terrorism too.

BTW Indian army out of guilt has destroyed the record of all such Terror camps inside India which India establish to train terrorists for terrorism in 71

 

[Ras]

1)

3) Britishers were not committed towards partition. Had they committed to the Pakistan cause, then east Pakistan would have comprised also of west Bengal and the seven states in your NE. West Pakistan would also have been joined by east Punjab and entire Jammu Kashmir & Junagadh. Moreover, Hydrabad would have also joined Pakistan. So, there would have been 3 regions of Pakistan: east, west and south.

Hyderabad,Junagadh and all the NE states have non muslim majorities..how could they join Pakistan?

However West Bengal,East Punjab and Kashmir should have been a part of Pakistan.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Although Jinnah succeeded in having a separate muslim state, but when he tried to implement urdu as the national language, the then east begal(bangladesh) refuted since they wanted bengali. Now since the partition was on religious base and urdu is islamic language then why didn't you implement it, isn't it unislamic. Also Jinnah wanted a secular state which was totally opposite idea on what basis partition was done.

So does it implies that muslims can't stand to be lead by other community, since a secular state would mean that everyone is equal, but since there is muslim majority so there's no chance of other community leading the country in politics. So the idea is just about who is leading who.

Please check the historical background for demanding a separate country for the muslims of Hindustan. I will not elaborate here, but note that All-India Muslim League was formed in Dhaka in 1911 in the palace of Nawab Salimullah.

You have to find out the reasons why Bangali muslims had lost faith on their fellow Bangali Hindus gradually since the Battle of Plassey in 1757. It was the muslims of Bengal who first thought of a separate entity for themselves for their own emancipation.

@Illusive

Responding to your post requires addressing three issues:

1. The reasons why Bangali Muslims lost faith in their fellow Bangalis, the Hindus, since the Battle of Plassey in 1757;
2. The nature of Urdu vs. Bangla controversy after the formation of Pakistan, and the beginning of Bangla disillusionment with Pakistan, also your description of the language controversy;
3. Jinnah's concept of Pakistan as a modern, secular state for Muslims.

This is still without addressing your issue, can a Muslim community never be led by another community.

I hope you will agree that each of the three-and-a-half topics demands separate treatment, and will proceed on that understanding.

With regards,

 

[humanfirst]

Pakistan attacked india in 1965 when there india was weak due to sino indian war.How noble act!And cry about india training mukti bahini..!The refugee situation was situated by pakistan and india cashed on it,training refugees to go back to their land and fight.Should we have allowed million more refugees and do nothing to the nation who stabbed us when we were weak and recovering from a war?Pakistan started outright war by bombing indian bases but ended up in shameful defeat,with 90000 cowards chosing to surrender rather than fight.Didn't pakistan support and train khalistani separatists?Didn't pakistan do the same thing in kashmir,which resulted in making half a million kashmiri pandits refugees.Didn't pakistani army attack india in kargil,while shamefully denying the presence of army,when peace process where going on?India is not angel either.But it is disgusting when someone try to portray one party as 100%moral and other as embodiment of evil.
@somebozo
Pakistan still owes rs300cr to india,you guys can keep that without any shame.Just dont accuse india of stealing pakistans money while truth is otherway round.

 

[justanobserver]

You have to find out the reasons why Bangali muslims had lost faith on their fellow Bangali Hindus gradually since the Battle of Plassey in 1757.

Could you please elaborate on that?

I just saw the Wikipedia article on The Battle of Plassey, it didn't even mention the word Hindu or Muslim !