Hyderabad Deccan's Nizam's contribution to Pakistan

[Bhairava]

Wonder for all his misdemeanors pointed out by some Indian members.. this man and his family were able to maintain peace in a state where the majority (92%) were non-Muslims... and of the remaining 8% of which compromised the poor, the weak , women and children.. only a few were able to keep complete control without any major revolt or uprising.

apparently even Gandhiji tried to stir up people in Hyderabad.. for three months. and returned with nothing.
Makes you wonder if the Nizam was as "bad" as you folks seems to want to show him to be.

You are wrong sir.

Ask the people of Deccan and thy will tell you about the Nizam and his reign of terror and his usage of Razakars.

It is to the credit of both Hindu and Muslims (Telugu) who fought against the tyranny of this cruel man.

And peace was maintained because the population was united in NOT uniting under him. No one supported him for conflicts to take place.

And funny you mentioned Gandhiji - he is perhaps unfortunate to be blamed by the likes of you for failing to instigate communal trouble and by Extreme right wingers for appeasing the Muslims to ridiculous lenghts during partition.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Wonder for all his misdemeanors pointed out by some Indian members.. this man and his family were able to maintain peace in a state where the majority (92%) were non-Muslims... and of the remaining 8% of which compromised the poor, the weak , women and children.. only a few were able to keep complete control without any major revolt or uprising.

apparently even Gandhiji tried to stir up people in Hyderabad.. for three months. and returned with nothing.
Makes you wonder if the Nizam was as "bad" as you folks seems to want to show him to be.

Learn some more...

 

[Subramanian]

Dont forget this though:

Dude,

How would possibly defend Junagarh and Hyderabad,even if those people voted for you which they wouldn't have anyways.

 

[Subramanian]

yup... alot of stolen stuff is found from inside Mandirs

Humein churaane ki ke zaroorat hain bhaijaan?Hum toh araby desert ke nahin hain.We are from paradise and people only come to our country to steal,pillage,rape and sometimes even settle down and steal land.

 

[Subramanian]

Your Proof That He stole that money from Public? Accusations without proof eh?

Of course it is public money.He was a minority nizam in a province full of hindu people whom he was illtreating all the time.

 

[Subramanian]

Wonder for all his misdemeanors pointed out by some Indian members.. this man and his family were able to maintain peace in a state where the majority (92%) were non-Muslims... and of the remaining 8% of which compromised the poor, the weak , women and children.. only a few were able to keep complete control without any major revolt or uprising.

apparently even Gandhiji tried to stir up people in Hyderabad.. for three months. and returned with nothing.
Makes you wonder if the Nizam was as "bad" as you folks seems to want to show him to be.

The Nizam was quite bad.He supported the british style over-taxation and used his power and money to ill treat the hindus who couldn't even cultivate their land due to excessive debt and lack of support.

 

[SQ8]

Learn some more...

Ive got nothing, and then again.. perhaps the history has been distorted as well.
After all, here is a man who chose Pakistan over India, why should he not be defiled and derided through all official and unofficial means.

 

[SQ8]

The Nizam was quite bad.He supported the british style over-taxation and used his power and money to ill treat the hindus who couldn't even cultivate their land due to excessive debt and lack of support.

Says history books sanctioned by the GoI??
Say's people who wished to accede to India?

 

[SQ8]

You are wrong sir.

Ask the people of Deccan and thy will tell you about the Nizam and his reign of terror and his usage of Razakars.

It is to the credit of both Hindu and Muslims (Telugu) who fought against the tyranny of this cruel man.

And peace was maintained because the population was united in NOT uniting under him. No one supported him for conflicts to take place.

And funny you mentioned Gandhiji - he is perhaps unfortunate to be blamed by the likes of you for failing to instigate communal trouble and by Extreme right wingers for appeasing the Muslims to ridiculous lenghts during partition.

I did ask somebody from Deccan.. that is his testimony I give.
His testimony also included names of Hindu conspirators who did their best to move heaven and earth to have the Nizam removed, his wealth distributed amongst them etc.
I then verified that with a relative of mine from Hyd, a graduate of Osmania.
So to me it seems the GoI went all out to defile and defame the Nizam the best they could. Or rather defile and defame anything pro Pakistan the best they could.

 

[Vibs]

The Nizam was quite bad.He supported the british style over-taxation and used his power and money to ill treat the hindus who couldn't even cultivate their land due to excessive debt and lack of support.

Ive got nothing, and then again.. perhaps the history has been distorted as well.
After all, here is a man who chose Pakistan over India, why should he not be defiled and derided through all official and unofficial means.

Both of you are right in your own way. At that point in time, the Nizam was said to be the richest man in the world. He acceded to neither India, nor Pakistan but wanted his own sovereign nation. He did however support Pakistan financially. His Razakar mercenaries were notorious in and around his kingdom. Since he was situated in the heart of India with a fully functional armed forces, there were concerns in India about him siding with Pakistan in the event of a war. On hearing these rumors he actually came forward and said there is no reason why he wouldn't do so. That was reason enough for India to view him as a threat and take military action.

 

[A for Anarchy]

I did ask somebody from Deccan.. that is his testimony I give.
His testimony also included names of Hindu conspirators who did their best to move heaven and earth to have the Nizam removed, his wealth distributed amongst them etc.
I then verified that with a relative of mine from Hyd, a graduate of Osmania.
So to me it seems the GoI went all out to defile and defame the Nizam the best they could. Or rather defile and defame anything pro Pakistan the best they could.

The Nizam was not "evil" in any modern sense of the world , however:
1. The Nizam did not have an army.
2. The land he occupied was landlocked.
3. Hindus outnumbered Muslims 8:1
4. He was too rich for his own good
5. Civil riots were waiting to happen at that point of time - when the entire Hindu-Muslim hatred had gone up to the boil - The Nizam hardly would have had any control on the state, if that had ever happened with his pathetic militia.
6. The various claimants to the Nizam's wealth did him no good - He had at least 40 legitimate children (with probably 100s more in thousands of harems) - no good to his reputation as well as no good to the claimants of his enormous wealth for redistribution purposes.

 

[DarK-LorD]

Good,the Indian Army has smashed him.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

The Nizam was not "evil" in any modern sense of the world , however:
1. The Nizam did not have an army.

The Nizam in fact did have an Army (just as many other large kingdoms had). That Army even had a Cavalry, largely horse-borne but it had armored cars as well. The Army was armed with the ubiquitous .303 Lee Enfield rifles, Bren Guns and Lewis guns and Vickers Machine guns on the armored cars. There was even an artillery with some assorted guns and mortars. A large part of this force was absorbed in to the Indian Army. While the last Nizam had some delusions/impressions about his political and military capabilities; he had become a largely ineffectual ruler. His noblemen and courtiers wielded nearly as much power (if not more) than he did. The money that was sought to be moved out was done mainly by somebody else. Even the Razakars were controlled by somebody else,not him. He certainly was no old-time Gaddhafi.

 

[somebozo]

well there some ethical logic i want to question here.
The wealth of Hydrabad treasury belonged to the state of Hydrabad and its people.
The nizam first responsibilty were his subject, lest not export the whole wealth overseas

No wonder people were not opposed to the idea of state annexation by India.

Most of these nawabs were for serving their own desires..they ruled by dividing the populance over pettty issues.

And those stirring up the hindu muslim controversies of Hydrabad should have a balance view of history.

Nizam-ul-Mulk's greatest achievement was the foundation of the Hyderabad Dominion. He attained his object by waging a struggle against the Marhattas and by the policy of non-involvement in the rivalry for power between the British and the French. His policy has been justified by later events as Hyderabad state survived right through the period of British rule upto the time of Indian independence.

The hindus might not be pro-nizam but were not against him either. And many Muslim of hydrabad fled to pakistan while many hindus fled to other indian states, UK and America.

Mir Osman Ali Khan, the seventh and the last Nizam of Hyderabad ruled for 37 years (1911 - 1948). His Dominion was lager than England and Scotland put together, with an area of 86,000 Sq. miles.
The seventh Nizam led a very simple life, yet he was one of the richest men in the world. He donated generously to every cause in India as well as abroad irrespective of caste and religion. If it was the Muslim theological school at Deoband which received financial help, it was also the privilege of the Benaras Hindu University. His list of donations included Rabindranth Tagore’s Shantiniketan and several other institutions including hospitals, schools, for famine relief, etc. The golden temple in Amritsar also enjoyed an annual donation.

Although the Muslims represented less then 15% of the population, they filled almost all government posts including those in army and the police. In population, revenue and importance, it was the premier State in the country. Hyderabad had its own coinage, paper currency and stamps.

 

[A for Anarchy]

The Nizam in fact did have an Army (just as many other large kingdoms had). That Army even had a Cavalry, largely horse-borne but it had armored cars as well. The Army was armed with the ubiquitous .303 Lee Enfield rifles, Bren Guns and Lewis guns and Vickers Machine guns on the armored cars. There was even an artillery with some assorted guns and mortars. A large part of this force was absorbed in to the Indian Army. While the last Nizam had some delusions/impressions about his political and military capabilities; he had become a largely ineffectual ruler. His noblemen and courtiers wielded nearly as much power (if not more) than he did. The money that was sought to be moved out was done mainly by somebody else. Even the Razakars were controlled by somebody else,not him. He certainly was no old-time Gaddhafi.

I was talking about the last Nizam. His army was not more than 16,000 men and most where the Razakars. And a large part was absorbed.