Rohingyas should be citizens or be given their own state: Mahathir

[bluesky]

You are a liar.
Bangladeshis freed themselves. Indian army came in just for paper signing ceremony.

You are very correct to the point. Thanks for the understanding that IA only lost 1,300 troops in that war. So, it was sacrificing our own lives.

Better you know how to live with the abstract truth that the Indian govt claim is a facade. Fight Pakistan again and show your prowess. Do not please entertain the dream of a win without 130,000 of your coward troops being killed. I have a feeling you have already wet your pants.

 

[prashantazazel]

Rohingyas are even willing to live under a 'Buddhist republic of Myanmar' granted Buddhism is not enforced upon them. Where did you get the information that they do not want to live under secular law? They just want to live in their ancestral land with citizenship and legal rights of a citizen which myanmar denies them. Seems like you fully believe the hindutva propaganda circulated in India that, Rohingya problem is all about Muslim extremist do not want to live under secular law and want a 'caliphate' in Myanmar. But this is totally false and malicious. They are denied the most basic of human rights like citizenship, access to education, access to health care, freedom of movement, freely marrying within their community, protection from arbitrary arrest, torture and killing by the burmese soldiers. Even under such a serious repression for decades , very few Rohingyas joined any armed group. Rohingyas were citizen of myanmar before 1982, But in 1982, military junta made them stateless,not only that, junta forfeited their rights to live in their ancestral villages and started severe repression with the aim of driving them out. This is heart of the problem.

People who try to create a separate identity face such problems. They should have mingled with the locals, intermarried and the like.
Most communities don't like a growing population of people that remain aloof.

 

[UKBengali]

People who try to create a separate identity face such problems. They should have mingled with the locals, intermarried and the like.
Most communities don't like a growing population of people that remain aloof.

LOL. You OK dude?

 

[Saiful Islam]

Unless blocked by India, West Pakistan was very much in position to crush any Bangladeshi resistance. And without India's role in building, training, funding, arming the Mukti Bahini, West Pakistan wouldn't even needed a sustained military operation. Your freedom is our gift, enjoy it.

What kind of Kolkatan Bhang do you drink, lol? Do you know how many Pak military men/airforce men/ etc there was of Bengali origin? Many of them were also well trained from being in the WW1 & WW2 theatres and came 1971 they defected.

 

[fallstuff]

People with shallow knowledge end up making such ludicrous assumptions. It was not that "India couldn't fight LTTE", the fact is that India never wanted to fight LTTE, they are Tamil people! India sent a "Peace keeping force" there, which was a stupid step by Rajiv Gandhi, but their aim was not to fight the LTTE, only due to some wrong turn of events they ended up engaging in skirmishes with the LTTE, that resulted in huge protest back in India, and the peace keeping forces were withdrawn. If India wanted war on LTTE, then there would have been only one outcome.

About Bangladesh war, even after India completely cutting off West Pakistan's supplies and reinforcements from reaching Bangladesh for nine long months, and with all the training and support provided by India, the Mukti Bahini was proved to be inadequate to fight back the Pakistani army and Bangladeshi rajakars, not all Bangladeshis were looking for freedom from West Pakistan! India was compelled to intervene because Mukti Bahini was cornered in certain pockets and was running out of options. Those people fought bravely, this I give it to them, but it would be extremely ungrateful for the Bangladeshis to ignore or deny the huge contribution of India in creation of their country before, during, and after the war, no other country in the history of the world did so much for another country. But then, it seems that ungratefulness is in the nature of the Bangladeshi people, maybe Pakistani leadership was not quite off the mark with their assessment of Bangladeshi people, as it appears now.

All India had to do is maintain peace in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is almost a stone throw away from India. They were too inept to do just that. U.N peace keeping force all over the world do that with ease.

The point is India being too smart for their own good, was trying to do more than that.

Union Minister of State for External Affairs General (retd) V K Singh said here on Tuesday that the decision to send the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka in 1987 was “a high level policy failure”.

The Union Minister claimed that during IPKF operations in Sri Lanka, Indian forces got several opportunities to nab LTTE supremo Velupillai Prabhakaran but every time there were “instructions”, which ensured him a safe passage.

Singh also claimed that at one point, none other than late Sri Lankan president Ranasinghe Premadasa had sought to help the LTTE fight the IPKF.

https://www.financialexpress.com/in...as-high-level-policy-failure-v-k-singh/63808/

 

[dray / Rain Man]

What kind of Kolkatan Bhang do you drink, lol? Do you know how many Pak military men/airforce men/ etc there was of Bengali origin? Many of them were also well trained from being in the WW1 & WW2 theatres and came 1971 they defected.

You guys are fed with fantasized history, not all of Bangladesh wanted freedom, good numbers of Bangladeshi military officers and soldiers didn't defect, and there were rajakar militia supporting the Pak army. If Niyazi wasn't made to surrender to us, then those defecting East Pakistani officers, soldiers, and Mukti Bahini members would have been tried as traitors. History is written by the victors.

Btw, do you know when WWI happened?

All India had to do is maintain peace in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is almost a stone throw away from India. They were too inept to do just that. U.N peace keeping force all over the world do that with ease.

The point is India being too smart for their own good, was trying to do more than that.

Union Minister of State for External Affairs General (retd) V K Singh said here on Tuesday that the decision to send the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka in 1987 was “a high level policy failure”.

The Union Minister claimed that during IPKF operations in Sri Lanka, Indian forces got several opportunities to nab LTTE supremo Velupillai Prabhakaran but every time there were “instructions”, which ensured him a safe passage.

Singh also claimed that at one point, none other than late Sri Lankan president Ranasinghe Premadasa had sought to help the LTTE fight the IPKF.

https://www.financialexpress.com/in...as-high-level-policy-failure-v-k-singh/63808/

India had to fix a few things after Sri Lanka provided certain help to Pakistan against India's liking during the 1971 Indo-Pak war. (By the way, Sri Lanka sided with Pakistan, not East Pakistan/Bangladesh in 1971)

And I already said that sending peace keeping forces to Sri Lanka was one of the several mistake naive Rajiv Gandhi made, nothing new here.

 

[prashantazazel]

LOL. You OK dude?

What do you think?

 

[UKBengali]

What do you think?

Think you need some psychiatric help.

 

[Nilgiri]

People with shallow knowledge end up making such ludicrous assumptions. It was not that "India couldn't fight LTTE", the fact is that India never wanted to fight LTTE, they are Tamil people! India sent a "Peace keeping force" there, which was a stupid step by Rajiv Gandhi, but their aim was not to fight the LTTE, only due to some wrong turn of events they ended up engaging in skirmishes with the LTTE, that resulted in huge protest back in India, and the peace keeping forces were withdrawn. If India wanted war on LTTE, then there would have been only one outcome.

About Bangladesh war, even after India completely cutting off West Pakistan's supplies and reinforcements from reaching Bangladesh for nine long months, and with all the training and support provided by India, the Mukti Bahini was proved to be inadequate to fight back the Pakistani army and Bangladeshi rajakars, not all Bangladeshis were looking for freedom from West Pakistan! India was compelled to intervene because Mukti Bahini was cornered in certain pockets and was running out of options. Those people fought bravely, this I give it to them, but it would be extremely ungrateful for the Bangladeshis to ignore or deny the huge contribution of India in creation of their country before, during, and after the war, no other country in the history of the world did so much for another country. But then, it seems that ungratefulness is in the nature of the Bangladeshi people, maybe Pakistani leadership was not quite off the mark with their assessment of Bangladeshi people, as it appears now.

All the times these uneducated bongs tried to talk about LTTE with the sri lankan members here (in context of IPKF or anything)....they got their asses handed to them on basic of basic things politically lol. They know nothing outside of their little swamp well (and dont really know much of whats in it either lol). No need to spend too much time explaining.

People who try to create a separate identity face such problems. They should have mingled with the locals, intermarried and the like.
Most communities don't like a growing population of people that remain aloof.

Not only that, from get go they wanted Pakistan (under jinnah and ayub) to intervene and annex the whole of Arakan. Then they expect Burmese to just suddenly forget all of that inherent separatism?

Like I said, this area is basically result of incomplete partition....and BD ppl simply dont enjoy the final karma of how it has turned out in the end.

 

[bluesky]

All the times these uneducated bongs tried to talk about LTTE with the sri lankan members here (in context of IPKF or anything)....they got their asses handed to them on basic of basic things politically lol. They know nothing outside of their little swamp well (and dont really know much of whats in it either lol). No need to spend too much time explaining.

We think India is a loser all the time. 1971 war was won by us with Indian sacrifice of a mere 1300 lives. But, you claim it is your own singular win. In contrast, how many lives did we lose? It is our lives that caused India to win in 1971, do not forget that. It is like England won in the WWll because American lives were sacrificed.

 

[Nilgiri]

We think India is a loser all the time. 1971 war was won by us with Indian sacrifice of a mere 1300 lives. But, you claim it is your own singular win. In contrast, how many lives did we lose? It is our lives that caused India to win in 1971, do not forget that. It is like England won in the WWll because American lives were sacrificed.

If its "we"...then please prove it by not electing the fat dopey lady that gleefully cooks/cleans dishes/does laundry for her multiple masters in Delhi.

Then she goes on painting-accepting spree all the time and naming spree (of her equally subservient BAKSAL dad) to endlessly try to shower attention and praise on her master.....and in response your people gleefully give her 95% control in parliament seats....and essentially thank her deployment of BCL to deal with some troublesome brats on the street (they have to be stopped into growing into ppl like you after all with the stick and worse if needed....i.e ingrate ppl that stuck in foreign shores like Japan, whinging and complaining like a toothless hag as their only connection back to BD, but contributing nothing past that back to BD).

So please, please get a reign/narrative on your own people on such basic things before you say "we" and try to talk for all of them.

That is first basic step before you try to make any more argument on any numbers that you draw from equally stupid emotional place....ok?

 

[bluesky]

@Nilgiri, say whatever makes you guys happy about the 1971 war. But, reality does not change. It is we who sacrificed and not the IA troops. No one contests that without Indian help it would have been difficult to get separated from Pakistan. But, we sacrificed our lives for that.

 

[UKBengali]

Not only that, from get go they wanted Pakistan (under jinnah and ayub) to intervene and annex the whole of Arakan. Then they expect Burmese to just suddenly forget all of that inherent separatism?

Like I said, this area is basically result of incomplete partition....and BD ppl simply dont enjoy the final karma of how it has turned out in the end.

It is only fair that Northern Arakan gets annexed to BD in exchange for absorbing Rohingya.
That is the medium-long term plan for BD.

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri, say whatever makes you guys happy about the 1971 war. But, reality does not change. It is we who sacrificed and not the IA troops. No one contests that without Indian help it would have been difficult to get separated from Pakistan. But, we sacrificed our lives for that.

You were fighting for your lives, and we were fighting to help out a friend in need.

Of course the notion of sacrifice is going to vary.

You think the French (who assisted greatly the 13 colonies in their rebellion, esp at Yorktown which was instrumental) remember the US war of independence like the American's do and share exact same intensity and memory and numbers of sacrifice? Have you read any analysis of that war if France didn't help for some starting point as to where developed forces (like a navy) come into play w.r.t local ground militias only....and the likely much longer duration (and thus pain) or even result of the conflict put into question by many?

The point is one did not need to help, but provided the aid and assistance that has directly led to millions of you even living today (and having children that live today breathing free air) in the first place.

So you don't need to argue how to delineate the "reality" too much as to who has bigger claim on it. Its your country, of course you will have bigger claim to it.

To however say the other (Dada) did not sacrifice however, is an unreasonable emotional folly on your part....and you probably know better in reality (since you like to use absolutes in this forum). It leads to simply asking the hypothetical, what if no assistance and liberation effort was ever provided and the independence struggle in BD bore out over the same duration or even longer than the US one did? West Pakistan forces were not as stressed as you like to think they were....and would have been nowhere close as they were if India didnt put pressure on them on the border areas + logistics that long. So what if I.G + Sam decided, lets give it some multiple years first (or didnt intervene at all)....what do you think are your own personal chances of even living right now and typing your nonsense drivel of "we get 100% ownership of sacrifice blah blah" sitting comfy in Japan?

You simply didnt have the qualitative force-enhancement to take on the broader scale of a military. Yet you simply want to look at how many people died to split some "sacrifice" argument on it. Stupid silly fellow....you cannot compare apples and oranges like that.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Those 90,000 didn't surrender to Bangladeshis. They surrendered to the Indian army.

They surrendered to both Bangladesh and Indian forces. Read the instrument of surrender. You Indian's such attitude of claiming all for itself is the reason, more and more Bangladeshis are hesitating to acknowledge the Indian contribution in our liberation war and raising the question of Indian motifs to join the war.