India's unfair tirade against Bangladesh puzzles Indians too

[kris]

1. Why is it technically not possible? When muslims are hostile and continue their jihadi ways without trying to change, why should any tolerance be shown?
2. Entire Bangladesh is Islamic. There is no difference between Pakistani Islam and Bangladeshi Islam. One party is not how things work. Give me evidence to say that most Bangladeshis are not jihadis.
3. The target is that without jihadi threat of Bangladesh lingering over the head, I am much safer

1. Same way even USA is struggling with Mexicans. It's not easy unless you have solid documents supporting your claim.

2.may be. But give me an evidence that there are many jihadists in Bangladesh.

3. Again some vague imaginary target. It doesn't work that way

You can go to Bangladesh if you want. India can do a population exchange where the hindus of Bangladesh are given refuge in India while expelling muslims into Bangladesh.
India is not a market where anyone can come and go.
You exist according to principles, not like animals. Let me put it straight.

You have no business to tell me what I have to do.
Second exchange happens only when both parties negotiate. Not onesided

But as on now atleast there is jonothi India can do about Bangladeshi influx

 

[Jackdaws]

Banglas are our friends. They get crazy during Cricket matches but otherwise the Banglas I have met in India and abroad are broadminded, friendly and hardworking. Demonizing them is a way to get votes. Sometimes it is North Indians who are demonized. Earlier it was South Indians. Banglas are an easy group to target because there are no legal repurcussions.

 

[Aryan0395]

We should jointly build a wall in our border to stop further infiltration. Someone should propose this to our prime ministers.

that would be a bad ideal. India and bangladesh relations should remain open. Lets not go down the road of Ina-Pak border relations. However illegal immigration needs to be checked from both countries. it presents security risk and also stresses the resources of each country and we are both already short on them.
Whats required is a cool meeting to sort out the issue like how the enclave issue was resolved.

 

[Black_cats]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1052154688261353472

Wow caught 31 Bangladeshis while they were returning to Bangladesh?

But from where you are going to manufacture rest of the 20 million?

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

Lol, nobody is going to beg anybody. It's an opportunity that everybody will be waiting for to grab on. Invading Bangladesh means you have to deal with a 6 million-strong armed force that would prompt you to transfer troops from your western and northern borders. Meanwhile, a free flow of arms would be going on between Bangladesh and Northeast. Your Northeast and Eastern India would already be pissed off at your central govt. as their economies decline considering how dependent they are on Bangladesh. While, China and Pakistan just preparing to finish off the regional menace. All these things will eventually lead to the inevitable balkanization of India.

So, according to you everyone will be pissed off and supporting BD? Pakistan and BD are well known threats to India. India can easily crush both these menace. Also, NE does not support BD in any way. Economies have no say in war against BD. Just for money, people don't switch sides. Also, good luck fighting with your soldiers against Indian industrial weapons

1. Same way even USA is struggling with Mexicans. It's not easy unless you have solid documents supporting your claim.

2.may be. But give me an evidence that there are many jihadists in Bangladesh.

3. Again some vague imaginary target. It doesn't work that way

USA struggling with Mexicans is an exaggeration. Mexicans are not Jihadis. So, USA sees no reason to be overly harsh on them. Mexicans are also decent people who don't indulge in fighting against USA citizens on ethnic grounds.

Islam itself is jihadi in nature. So, every muslim is Jihadi. Do you need evidence that BD has lot of muslims?

Don't say anything. You don't decide what works and what does not.

You have no business to tell me what I have to do.
Second exchange happens only when both parties negotiate. Not onesided

But as on now atleast there is jonothi India can do about Bangladeshi influx

Did Pakistan be created in 1947 on negotiation? Were Hindus and Sikhs driven out based on negotiation? Who told you that force can't be used one sided? BD can be invaded. India is doing nothing as long as BD promises good behaviour. Sheikh Hasina is behaving well and hence India is doing nothing. Hasina has also reduced influx by orering the border police and army to not allow it. Hence India is being mild.

There is no question of negotiating with unreasonable people. If BD becomes too dangerous to handle, why should India stop from using force?

Wow caught 31 Bangladeshis while they were returning to Bangladesh?

But from where you are going to manufacture rest of the 20 million?

The correct figure is 5-7 million. 20 million includes many Hindus who were driven from Bangladesh by jihadis and hence don't count. NRC of Assam itself revealed many. NRC of Bengal will reveal even more

 

[Black_cats]

So, according to you everyone will be pissed off and supporting BD? Pakistan and BD are well known threats to India. India can easily crush both these menace. Also, NE does not support BD in any way. Economies have no say in war against BD. Just for money, people don't switch sides. Also, good luck fighting with your soldiers against Indian industrial weapons


USA struggling with Mexicans is an exaggeration. Mexicans are not Jihadis. So, USA sees no reason to be overly harsh on them. Mexicans are also decent people who don't indulge in fighting against USA citizens on ethnic grounds.

Islam itself is jihadi in nature. So, every muslim is Jihadi. Do you need evidence that BD has lot of muslims?

Don't say anything. You don't decide what works and what does not.



Did Pakistan be created in 1947 on negotiation? Were Hindus and Sikhs driven out based on negotiation? Who told you that force can't be used one sided? BD can be invaded. India is doing nothing as long as BD promises good behaviour. Sheikh Hasina is behaving well and hence India is doing nothing. Hasina has also reduced influx by orering the border police and army to not allow it. Hence India is being mild.

There is no question of negotiating with unreasonable people. If BD becomes too dangerous to handle, why should India stop from using force?


The correct figure is 5 million. 20 million includes many Hindus who were driven from Bangladesh by jihadis and hence don't count.

We muslim ruled you hindus for 1000 years. Last time you were saved by choosing another master British. Who will save you this ttime? Wiping out the 5 futiya hindu extremist and terrorists like RSS, Shiv Sena, BJP will not be a big deal.

Quite sure this @Vijyes Yechury is one of these clown brigade

 

[Homo Sapiens]

You call others terrorists when you are the one who started that? Retaliation is not terror. Now who started Jihad? That was the original terror. Obviously, if you start war, there will be consequences

Jihad do not mean unprovoked aggressive warfare against other religion, most of the muslim burring a few misguided understand and interpret it as a self defence and resistance. Jihad as a concept was suitable during an era when world was divided among hostile tribe, clan, kingdom etc, when there was no international law of protection, no UN, no concept of collective security. This is not the reality today. So meaning of Jihad has now changed. And concept of religious warfare is not unique to Islam, Much of the Old Testament is about Israelite warfare against pagan tribes. Your most important religious book Bhagabat Gita is all about warfare. So your 'Islam only evil' mantra is not correct. Historically all religious group engaged in atrocity either in the name of religion, caste, nationality or ideology. There is no scope to single out Muslim.

Retaliation is not terror. Now who started Jihad? That was the original terror. Obviously, if you start war, there will be consequences

So Hindu terrorist group killing minority muslim, christian or Sikhs today as a retaliation of Jihad? Which Jihad was that? In which era? What a stupid non sense that Hindu terrorist are now persecuting religious minority because of some grievance from an bygone era! Any religious group can give such justification. Everyone has historical grievance. But a modern, rational people has no justification for violence towards any group of people irrespective of their religion or nationality. What are you trying to propagate here is nothing but sanghi pseudologic for the justification of their hateful mentality and deed.

 

[Species]

So, according to you everyone will be pissed off and supporting BD? Pakistan and BD are well known threats to India. India can easily crush both these menace.

Yeah ok.

Also, NE does not support BD in any way. Economies have no say in war against BD. Just for money, people don't switch sides.

When people will start to starve, they will only have one side to choose - survival at any cost. Northeast doesn't have anything common with India anyway.

Also, good luck fighting with your soldiers against Indian industrial weapons

Yeah, our soldiers will be fighting with bare hands and feet, genius!

 

[kris]

1.USA struggling with Mexicans is an exaggeration. Mexicans are not Jihadis. So, USA sees no reason to be overly harsh on them. Mexicans are also decent people who don't indulge in fighting against USA citizens on ethnic grounds.

2.Islam itself is jihadi in nature. So, every muslim is Jihadi. Do you need evidence that BD has lot of muslims?

3.Don't say anything. You don't decide what works and what does not.



4..Did Pakistan be created in 1947 on negotiation? Were Hindus and Sikhs driven out based on negotiation? Who told you that force can't be used one sided? BD can be invaded. India is doing nothing as long as BD promises good behaviour. Sheikh Hasina is behaving well and hence India is doing nothing. Hasina has also reduced influx by orering the border police and army to not allow it. Hence India is being mild.

5.There is no question of negotiating with unreasonable people. If BD becomes too dangerous to handle, why should India stop from using force?

1. agreed
2. Partially true
4. Pakistan was created by negotiations only. The exodus of people was a choice by force. Many deaths happened on both sides. But it's irrelevant in this thread

5. If Bangladesh becomes irrational no point in negotiations. There are many ways to make them come to negotiations

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

So Hindu terrorist group killing minority muslim, christian or Sikhs today as a retaliation of Jihad? Which Jihad was that? In which era? What a stupid non sense that Hindu terrorist are now persecuting religious minority because of some grievance from an bygone era! Any religious group can give such justification.

There is nothing called bygone era. If it is bygone era, why do you not give up Islam in this era? Not giving up Islam shows your allegiance. Also, muslims have not shown any change. Caliphate movement in 1920-22, Pakistan formation in 1945-47, Hindu massacre in Pakistan and Bangladesh, Attacking hindus in Kashmir even till 1990s is not bygone era. If it is bygone era, give up Islam before saying anything else

Jihad do not mean unprovoked aggressive warfare against other religion, most of the muslim burring a few misguided understand and interpret it as a self defence and resistance. Jihad as a concept was suitable during an era when world was divided among hostile tribe, clan, kingdom etc, when there was no international law of protection, no UN, no concept of collective security. This is not the reality today. So meaning of Jihad has now changed. And concept of religious warfare is not unique to Islam, Much of the Old Testament is about Israelite warfare against pagan tribes. Your most important religious book Bhagabat Gita is all about warfare. So your 'Islam only evil' mantra is not correct. Historically all religious group engaged in atrocity either in the name of religion, caste, nationality or ideology. There is no scope to single out Muslim.

In India, even during Mahabharatha, the war was limited to Kshatriyas who go rogue and not directed against any particular set of people. There is no cut off date in time to say that UNO will change things. Quran has not been edited and hence nothing can change. So, telling lies will not change anything.

When people will start to starve, they will only have one side to choose - survival at any cost. Northeast doesn't have anything common with India anyway.

North east like Tripura, Manipur, Assam , Arunachal all have great commonality with India. Some christian areas of Nagaland, Mizoram and Meghalaya may have some differences but that is still minimal. Moreover, none prefer BD over India.

We muslim ruled you hindus for 1000 years. Last time you were saved by choosing another master British. Who will save you this ttime? Wiping out the 5 futiya hindu extremist and terrorists like RSS, Shiv Sena, BJP will not be a big deal.

Dont forget that it was Marathas and Sikhs, not British that kicked out Mughals. Also, the invasion of India was in 1192 and even then there were many Hindu kingdoms like Vijayanagar around till 1650. And by 1700, it was Marathas for next 100 years. Delhi alone is not entire India. Total of 300-400 years were ruled by muslims over India

If you can eliminate all Hindus you would have already done it. It is because you are not capable of doing it taht Hindus are alive. So, no need of speaking big things

 

[Homo Sapiens]

There is nothing called bygone era. If it is bygone era, why do you not give up Islam in this era? Not giving up Islam shows your allegiance. Also, muslims have not shown any change. Caliphate movement in 1920-22, Pakistan formation in 1945-47, Hindu massacre in Pakistan and Bangladesh, Attacking hindus in Kashmir even till 1990s is not bygone era. If it is bygone era, give up Islam before saying anything else

Why Muslim should give up Islam? To please Bharati shanghi? Perhaps you should give up your Hindu religion to please Taliban and ISIS before demanding this?

Khilafat movement was a peaceful movement against British colonial govt. It has nothing to do with Hindu.

Pakistan formation was a legitimate struggle to free bulk of the muslim population from the grip of Hindu extremists like your kind. If Hindus in that decades not tried to marginalize Muslim politically and economically than Pakistan movement would not had commenced. Your ''Gaumata raksha mission'' against Muslim had a lot to do why muslim started to think themselves as a separate nation distinct from Hindus. Then there is untouchability against muslim. You hindus considered even the shadow of a muslim as impure and need ritual purification by Ganga water. This mentality is still prevalent among much of Indian hindus and was severe during that era. With such mentality why Muslim will not consider themselves as a separate nation deserving a state of their own? So, you should look at yourself before pointing finger to others.

You are talking about Hindu massacre in Bangladesh and Pakistan, but what about Muslim massacre in India? or Christian massacre? or Sikh massacre? Whenever Bangladeshi hindus faced any trouble, most of the time it was due to some Hindu-Muslim problem in India. But many times this was not the case, there was no backlash against Bangladeshi Hindus, when 2000 muslims were burned alive in Gujarat in 2002 by your fanatic Hindus terrorists.

Before talking about attacking Hindus in Kashmir, stop state sponsored repression of Kashmiri Muslim. OK?

This is my last post with you. I am not willing to waste my time with arguing a brain dead sanghi like you. My final advice is, you should try to understand the other's view point. Only one sided, self serving narrative will not help you to become a rational, good and balanced person.

 

[Vijyes Yechury]

Why Muslim should give up Islam? To please Bharati shanghi? Perhaps you should give up your Hindu religion to please Taliban and ISIS before demanding this?

Islam is artificial and made after 600AD. Dharma is natural principles of life. So, Dharma is not a religion like Islam to give up or start.

Khilafat movement was a peaceful movement against British colonial govt. It has nothing to do with Hindu.

Read about Malappuram genocide in Caliphate movement

Pakistan formation was a legitimate struggle to free bulk of the muslim population from the grip of Hindu extremists like your kind. If Hindus in that decades not tried to marginalize Muslim politically and economically than Pakistan movement would not had commenced. Your ''Gaumata raksha mission'' against Muslim had a lot to do why muslim started to think themselves as a separate nation distinct from Hindus. Then there is untouchability against muslim. You hindus considered even the shadow of a muslim as impure and need ritual purification by Ganga water. This mentality is still prevalent among much of Indian hindus and was severe during that era. With such mentality why Muslim will not consider themselves as a separate nation deserving a state of their own? So, you should look at yourself before pointing finger to others.

Then why did not all muslims leave India? Muslims were the ones who invaded India which had Hindus only before. So, how can invaders be expected to be treated well? Also, muslims treated hindus badly and that was the reason for anger. Why do you think Shivaji rose against Mughals? So, muslims started the atrocities first in the name of jihad.

You are talking about Hindu massacre in Bangladesh and Pakistan, but what about Muslim massacre in India? or Christian massacre? or Sikh massacre? Whenever Bangladeshi hindus faced any trouble, most of the time it was due to some Hindu-Muslim problem in India. But many times this was not the case, there was no backlash against Bangladeshi Hindus, when 2000 muslims were burned alive in Gujarat in 2002 by your fanatic Hindus terrorists.

If muslims were masacred in India as in Pakistan and Bangladesh, how is Muslim population rising in India?

Before talking about attacking Hindus in Kashmir, stop state sponsored repression of Kashmiri Muslim. OK?

Kashmiris were the ones who started to attack Hindus first. India is still tolerating kashmiris instead of massacring.

 

[lightoftruth]

Let me put it straight.
Bangladeshi people have relatives across the border in India. Both Hindus and Muslims. Economic relations are also there. So except Bengal all other states can implement nrc. But Bengal cannot

How is having relatives across border or economic relations (hoping you are not justifying smuggling) are any barriers to NRC ?Or justify illegal immigrants.
It's time to address this menace.

 

[The Ronin]

How is it cheap?

You are paying 192 taka taxes for per tonne when the NBR proposal was 700/ 1245 taka per tonne. It's more than cheap.

The river water is natural and everything in it is natural and not made by BD. So, it is not a favour to India.

What? What kind of logic is that? So why did you build so many dams in those river and not giving us the amount of water we deserve, cause those rivers aren't made by India either. Looks like another benefit you take from BD.

So you know how much money is being sent through illegal channels but you do not take any actions. Sounds ridiculous.

If you think taking action won't effect the relation between two countries.....

That's mostly related to trade.

It is better to have no Bangladesh at all than have friendly relation with Bangladesh. Why should a country that is threatening India for so long be allowed to continue to exist?

Do you know taht Bangladesh is stuffed in between India and Myanmar? What international requirement does Bangladesh have? If it is needed, either India or Myanmar will play the role. No need for BD.

Bangladesh needs India to not deport muslims and make it starve.

Also, there is no need to prove anyone is bangladeshi or not. Just push anyone who is muslim and speaks bengali to Bangladesh and start heavy shelling and firing, hitting fishermen etc. India can even do a population exchange of full Hindus in Bangladesh for all muslims in East India which is also skewed badly against Bangladesh.

Entire Bangladesh is Islamic.

Give me evidence to say that most Bangladeshis are not jihadis.

Islam itself is jihadi in nature. So, every muslim is Jihadi.

Stop smoking weed and deluding.

You should do that first before suggesting others. Too much BAKWAS coming from you.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1052154688261353472

Same here.

https://www.facebook.com/

 

[randomradio]

View attachment 505811

The amount is too high for the small number of people.

It's to do with trade.