Indian non-Intervention a myth or reality?

[banvanaxl]

the then-President, General Yahya Khan, opted for a military solution: The West Pakistani military launched a systematic campaign of indiscriminate slaughter of the Bengalis on 25 March 1971.6 This was the start of the Bengali genocide, which also simultaneously triggered the Bengali secessionist movement or the Bangladesh Liberation War. The genocide is estimated to have killed between 300,000 to 3,000,000 Bengalis.

Enough said ...

 

[Omega007]

Any government on Earth that claims that they have a "moral high ground" over everyone else, is full of shit.

Maldives??

 

[Samrat420]

Its quite funny how easily people keep throwing words like “Nazi Regime", “Hitler" and “Fascist" etc.. I'm sure you wouldn't have been so casual in the use of such terms if you had the “good fortune" of living in the original Nazi Regime.. Enuff said..

Matter of fact, the Nazi regime in BD is in power because of indian intervention.

 

[T-Rex]

Its quite funny how easily people keep throwing words like “Nazi Regime", “Hitler" and “Fascist" etc.. I'm sure you wouldn't have been so casual in the use of such terms if you had the “good fortune" of living in the original Nazi Regime.. Enuff said..

You didn't say anything about the indian intervention in BD. That's the topic not how I view the regime.

 

[Vapnope]

Enough said ...

And Indian involvement was the reason genocide to that extent happened, no?
Same is the case with LTTE, they trained, funded and harbored them so hundreds of innocents lives of Sri Lankan were lost.

 

[knight11]

The influx of Bengali war refugees from East Pakistan placed a burden on India’s economy – which was, at the time, dysfunctional and weak. Because of this, the then-Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi, was prompted to intervene in the war to return the refugees back to their motherland.

India was not equipped to accommodate ten million refugees. At the same time, both Gandhi and the Parliament had fears over the refugees’ permanent settlement in India. Such an outcome would cripple and exhaust India’s economic aid capacities, and its public infrastructure would be overburdened and fail.

Nice read.

 

[banvanaxl]

And Indian involvement was the reason genocide to that extent happened, no?
Same is the case with LTTE, they trained, funded and harbored them so hundreds of innocents lives of Sri Lankan were lost.

Yaraa .. Yeh kaisi logic hai .. ?

This is like saying that an Indian Army general tomorrow comes out with a plan to indiscriminately slaughter every Sunni Kashmiri to the last woman and child within 14 days (mass scale time bound genocide of over 30,00,000 souls), because Pakistan trained, funded and harbored, Hafiz Saaed and JUD at large.


Does that make any moral, logical or ethical sense?

 

[Vapnope]

his is like saying that an Indian Army general tomorrow comes out with a plan decimate every Sunni Kashmiri to the last woman and child within 14 days (mass scale time bound genocide or over 30,00,000 souls), because Pakistan trained, funded and harboured, Hafiz Saaed and JUD at large.

With all due respect, Change kashmiris to Sikh and think about 1984. You will have my point. There is no moral backing of what Pak army did in Bangladesh.

Nice read.

You do know that the training of Mukti bahini started way before refugees influx into India. I don't see why some people are not willing to accept that they conspire to break a country, history says it, your own generals proudly say it but you are not ready to accept it, why?

 

[dray]

India never interfere unless provoked...

 

[Samrat420]

You didn't say anything about the indian intervention in BD. That's the topic not how I view the regime.

Whether India intervenes in BD internal politics or not, is a completely different question. What I objected to was the utter lack of seriousness shown in your last post in which you straightaway compared current Bangladesh govt to a Nazi Regime. If your personal views on the regime were not the topic of this thread, then you shouldn't have put such an immature statement.. No?

 

[T-Rex]

Whether India intervenes in BD internal politics or not, is a completely different question

That's the topic but we can see that you don't like to address that 'different question' and then whine about other countries interfering in BD's internal affair.

 

[Samrat420]

Well If you're so hell-bent on getting my opinion on Indian interference in Bangladesh, then here it is...

I believe that India does possess a considerable “influence" in BD internal politics and India does indeed support one of the main political parties ( BAL ) over the other ( BNP-Jamaat nexus ). Being the guardians of Indian sovereignty and security, the GoI has the mandate to make sure Indian immediate neighborhood remains free of such elements which can adversely affect Indian internal stability. During the previous BNP- Jamaat regime, Khaleda Zia tried to play a dangerous game by harboring and supporting Anti-India militant groups from the Noth-east ( Yes ULFA I'm looking at you ). Furthermore, Mrs Zia consciously chose to jump into the India-China shadow cold war. India has no love for BNP, and so we provide whatever support we can to make sure that BNP doesn't get a chance to fan secessionist movements in India again. Period.
I hope I gave the answer you were looking for.

 

[T-Rex]

Well If you're so hell-bent on getting my opinion on Indian interference in Bangladesh, then here it is...

I believe that India does possess a considerable “influence" in BD internal politics and India does indeed support one of the main political parties ( BAL ) over the other ( BNP-Jamaat nexus ). Being the guardians of Indian sovereignty and security, the GoI has the mandate to make sure Indian immediate neighborhood remains free of such elements which can adversely affect Indian internal stability. During the previous BNP- Jamaat regime, Khaleda Zia tried to play a dangerous game by harboring and supporting Anti-India militant groups from the Noth-east ( Yes ULFA I'm looking at you ). Furthermore, Mrs Zia consciously chose to jump into the India-China shadow cold war. India has no love for BNP, and so we provide whatever support we can to make sure that BNP doesn't get a chance to fan secessionist movements in India again. Period.
I hope I gave the answer you were looking for.

Was it the beginning of indian intervention in BD or was it always there? Why would Khaleda try to do that if she didn't feel like returning a favour? After all, india has always been behind the Shanti Bahini terrorists. Anyway, whatever the reasons the fact is, india regularly interferes in BD affairs but when Turkey recalls her ambassador as a protest against not so secret indian agenda in BD indians start screaming foul.

 

[Samrat420]

Was it the beginning of indian intervention in BD or was it always there? Why would Khaleda try to do that if she didn't feel like returning a favour? After all, india has always been behind the Shanti Bahini terrorists. Anyway, whatever the reasons the fact is, india regularly interferes in BD affairs but when Turkey recalls her ambassador as a protest against not so secret indian agenda in BD indians start screaming foul.

Oh She wasn't the first to start the game.. Not at all.. Her bereaved husband had been playing the same game. India had great relations with Sheikh Mujib and Bangladesh at that time. And General Zia comes along and murders him and his whole family, and this was done on 15th August, when India was celebrating her Independence day. Haseena Wajid survived because she was in Germany with her sister. Anyways, General Zia didn't stop at that. He then started harboring Mizo and Naga insurgents and gave Pakistani ISI a free run in Bangladesh.

You can't expect India to take all this on her face and not hit back. And India did finally hit back. Mujib's daughter is in power now. And she is full of spite and yearning for vengeance. Karma is cruel indeed.. Isn't it..?

P.S. What's your fascination with bold letters??

 

[T-72M1]

What's your fascination with bold letters??

I've asked before, got an angry bold response.

I think its safe to assume that he's always shouting and making an angry point.