Was India Better Under the British ?

[NeutralCitizen]

Yes and they wanted Indians to fight and we did in both WW1 and WW2, if you go to Northen France you can see there is many unmarked graves of the fallen Indian soldiers.

Yeah I've heard of that Soldiers from India and modern day pakistan, I think ww1 is when Indian troops came to europe.

 

[nalandapride]

noway, Churchill starved 1.5 Million people to death in Bengal by creating artificial famine. A stupid only will praise the British rule.

 

[Yeti]

I don't see white english getting their hands dirty

 

[NeutralCitizen]

noway, Churchill starved 1.5 Million people to death in Bengal by creating artificial famine. A stupid only will praise the British rule.

I think most of the food and resources went to the War in Britain, Germans did a big favor to Indians and Pakistani's by Bankrupting the British Empire.

 

[Yeti]

INDIAN POVERTY 1941 AND FAMINE UNDER BRITISH RULE

 

[nalandapride]

I think most of the food and resources went to the War in Britain, Germans did a big favor to Indians and Pakistani's by Bankrupting the British Empire.

Then why nobody died of Hunger in UK, Canada, Australia. Because Churchill was a monster and racist.

 

[Yeti]

Yeah I've heard of that Soldiers from India and modern day pakistan, I think ww1 is when Indian troops came to europe.

BBC - History - World Wars: India and the Western Front


The Indian Army fought in every major theatre of operations during World War One. Letters home from Indian soldiers on the Western Front offer extraordinary insights into their feelings about the conflict and their impressions of European culture.

 

[American Pakistani]

Not British money it was wealth from the East India company which means it was looted, yes it was British designed and engineering but it was not the work of English workers!


People like my grandfather had to build it physically just like the Chinese did in USA.

What do you mean by looted, British established their company & gave you jobs same as today many multinational companies are there in India & giving you jobs, this is all lies that they looted anything from India, even if they did than they gave you tremendous developments, build up your country, your peoples work in their companies & make wealth & this happen everywhere in the world.

 

[Yeti]

What do you mean by looted, British established their company & gave you jobs same as today many multinational companies are there in India & giving you jobs, this is all lies that they looted anything from India, even if they did than they gave you tremendous developments, build up your country, your peoples work in their companies & make wealth & this happen everywhere in the world.

You have no idea on the East India company let me educate you from Britannica.


East India Company, also called English East India Company, formally (1600–1708) Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies, or (1708–1873) United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies, English company formed for the exploitation of trade with East and Southeast Asia and India, incorporated by royal charter on Dec. 31, 1600. Starting as a monopolistic trading body, the company became involved in politics and acted as an agent of British imperialism in India from the early 18th century to the mid-19th century. In addition, the activities of the company




Do you understand the word exploitation?

 

[NeutralCitizen]

Well it seems the British have taught you well thanks for clearing the misconceptions

Pakistan's problem is that we did not make it British enough – Telegraph Blogs

 

[Zabaniyah]

You have no idea on the East India company let me educate you from Britannica.


East India Company, also called English East India Company, formally (1600–1708) Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies, or (1708–1873) United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies, English company formed for the exploitation of trade with East and Southeast Asia and India, incorporated by royal charter on Dec. 31, 1600. Starting as a monopolistic trading body, the company became involved in politics and acted as an agent of British imperialism in India from the early 18th century to the mid-19th century. In addition, the activities of the company




Do you understand the word exploitation?

You know, it was interesting that when the East India Company first came to the shores of Bengal, they gradually started to pin one feudal lord against one another. And did so by arming them with weapons and placing a cow's head on a temple and a pig's head on a mosque.

The Mughals at the time never saw guns before the Brits arrived

That created renewed religious/ethnic tensions. "Divide & Conquer" as the British did.

And that's partly why Pakistan was created. And ironically, both India and Pakistan fought over unresolved Kashmir with Western weapons. Boy, are we dumb or what?

 

[American Pakistani]

You have no idea on the East India company let me educate you from Britannica.


East India Company, also called English East India Company, formally (1600–1708) Governor and Company of Merchants of London Trading into the East Indies, or (1708–1873) United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies, English company formed for the exploitation of trade with East and Southeast Asia and India, incorporated by royal charter on Dec. 31, 1600. Starting as a monopolistic trading body, the company became involved in politics and acted as an agent of British imperialism in India from the early 18th century to the mid-19th century. In addition, the activities of the company




Do you understand the word exploitation?

British can't do anything if Indians didn't want, no occupier could control the country without local support, example is Afghanistan & Iraq. But because British bring wealth & provide you jobs & developed your countries so you guys agreeed, whereas Pakistanis never accepted British & this was the reason the areas of Pakistan remained undeveloped & fully exploited by Brits also Brits gave no jobs to Pakistanis. It is like Indians used Brits & make their country developed & than after 47 labelled Pakistan's miseries & exploitations by Brits as their's.

 

[Yeti]

British can't do anything if Indians didn't want, no occupier could control the country without local support, example is Afghanistan & Iraq. But because British bring wealth & provide you jobs & developed your countries so you guys agreeed, whereas Pakistanis never accepted British & this was the reason the areas of Pakistan remained undeveloped & fully exploited by Brits also Brits gave no jobs to Pakistanis. It is like Indians used Brits & make their country developed & than after 47 labelled Pakistan's miseries & exploitations by Brits as their's.

Not worth even responding to you as you lack basic knowledge.

 

[boris]

British can't do anything if Indians didn't want, no occupier could control the country without local support, example is Afghanistan & Iraq. But because British bring wealth & provide you jobs & developed your countries so you guys agreeed, whereas Pakistanis never accepted British & this was the reason the areas of Pakistan remained undeveloped & fully exploited by Brits also Brits gave no jobs to Pakistanis. It is like Indians used Brits & make their country developed & than after 47 labelled Pakistan's miseries & exploitations by Brits as their's.

90% agreement,but the day your folks shook hands with the saudi sheikhs and wahabbis is when the problems began

 

[Roybot]

No it wasn't!

Independent India hasn't reached its full potential yet. Give her some more time. Have faith in yourself and your country.