Why didn't India take control of bangladesh?

[JanjaWeed]

Like wise we follow will of Kashmiri people to get them their independence-

People ask why this all started by Pakistan- 71 was when it was actually started by india- at your faces so called saints-

Ouch... that hurts! Not really If your intention was to free Kashmiri people... then the scenario would have been different. Unlike Bangladesh... in Kashmir you wanted everything for yourself. Only now the rhetoric is changing.. & it came bit late in the day.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

This is not meant to be a troll thread, just want someone to point me to the right direction to read more about Indian motivations (or lack there of ) of not making Bangladesh part of India after Pakistani defeat? Was it part of a deal with the Bangladeshis and Pakistanis?

From what I understand (Wikipedia and google) India couldn't take control of Bangladesh, because although they were at conflict with west Pakistan, they wanted a Muslim country of their own and not be lumped back with India? Just need a more authentic source and not your "opinion" on this matter.

Thanks

There was no Bangladesh then. It was just East Pakistan.

So yr tone tells us in the first hand that what u want to know n how do u want it.

 

[ares]

Like wise we follow will of Kashmiri people to get them their independence-

People ask why this all started by Pakistan- 71 was when it was actually started by india- at your faces so called saints-

Well the thing is, India had to go to full scale war with Pakistan and win, to secure Bangladeshi independence.
Pakistan's chances of beating India in a conventional war are very slim, in a more likely scenario Pakistan will receive massive reverses in conventional conflict with India and might resort to using nuclear weapons, just to ward off a humiliating defeat. And if the war goes nuclear, Pakistanis will loose Pakistan before it can win Kashmir.

So question is ..are Pakistanis willing to loose Pakistan for sake of getting Kashmir?

To your point of that why India started "all" this in 71..is based on a wrong assumption..hadn't Pakistanis sent its troops to wrest Kashmir from India in 65(and the process making India a sworn enemy), India might have never interfered in Pakistani internal matter in East Pakistan.
So essentially it was your greed for more land, which led you to loosing half your country.

So are you smart enough to learn from your past, or your greed for more land, your in-contention with what you have, lingers on??

 

[Jackdaws]

Really u might wanna reconsider that Goa, Kashmir and Siachen comes to mind.

Goa was another country? LOL

 

[haviZsultan]

I think India handled things in 71 very well. Also it was the better option. A log of Bangladeshis are against India today so the question does come to mind but this was the best alternative. Capturing Bangladesh and making it a part of India or even having Indian troops stay in that country any longer than they actually did would have cost India severely and public anger against Pakistan would dissipate to be replaced by that for India.

Also there are evidences that India promised the leaders of the Mukti Bahini freedom so they had to keep their word.

Reading the comments of some members I believe the only fear most Indians here have and are opposing Bangladesh being incorporated with India is largely because it is a Muslim state. This was also the reason a number of RSS supporters and terrorist sympathizers stated for not wanting Maldives to be part of the union. That was the most fun thread I must say.

 

[bronxbull]

obviously,we dont want anything.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

I think India handled things in 71 very well. Also it was the better option. A log of Bangladeshis are against India today so the question does come to mind but this was the best alternative. Capturing Bangladesh and making it a part of India or even having Indian troops stay in that country any longer than they actually did would have cost India severely and public anger against Pakistan would dissipate to be replaced by that for India.

Also there are evidences that India promised the leaders of the Mukti Bahini freedom so they had to keep their word.

Reading the comments of some members I believe the only fear most Indians here have and are opposing Bangladesh being incorporated with India is largely because it is a Muslim state. This was also the reason a number of RSS supporters and terrorist sympathizers stated for not wanting Maldives to be part of the union. That was the most fun thread I must say.

This criteria alone is not the need for rejection of the idea by many people, including me. If by your word, we occupy bangladesh and now Maldives, the image India have maintained will take a great beating.
We will be looked like a 'expansionist' state. Even many wanted to reject the idea of Bhutan, Nepal joining with us.

But the real issue is, the request for joining the Union must come from them. We cannot ask.
If Maldives themselves ask to join us through their parliament, then why not. It was just an opinion of a MP. Thats it.

 

[my2cents]

I think India handled things in 71 very well. Also it was the better option. A log of Bangladeshis are against India today so the question does come to mind but this was the best alternative. Capturing Bangladesh and making it a part of India or even having Indian troops stay in that country any longer than they actually did would have cost India severely and public anger against Pakistan would dissipate to be replaced by that for India.

Also there are evidences that India promised the leaders of the Mukti Bahini freedom so they had to keep their word.

Reading the comments of some members I believe the only fear most Indians here have and are opposing Bangladesh being incorporated with India is largely because it is a Muslim state. This was also the reason a number of RSS supporters and terrorist sympathizers stated for not wanting Maldives to be part of the union. That was the most fun thread I must say.

I just want to correct you that people of East Pakistan were never friends of India... only that circumstances forced them to seek our help and we gladly helped. We were by then up to our neck with refugees pouring in thousands on a daily basis. And also we had this in back of our minds that we may have to face two fronts...... which will divert our resources in any future war. Being Muslim was not a major factor but one of the factors.Also another thing which shaped our thought that NE insurgents should not be given any shelter in a new country.

 

[INDIC]

Really u might wanna reconsider that Goa, Kashmir and Siachen comes to mind.

Goa is our land, Portuguese were foreigners and we didn't annex Kashmir it was an accession. Siachin,lol

 

[genmirajborgza786]

Bangladesh was basically useless to India...

Overpopulated, small land, who would want to take responsibility of a overpopulating time bomb like Bangladesh?

don't you have anything better to do other then trolling ?

post reported

 

[Babbar-Khalsa]

This is not meant to be a troll thread, just want someone to point me to the right direction to read more about Indian motivations (or lack there of ) of not making Bangladesh part of India after Pakistani defeat? Was it part of a deal with the Bangladeshis and Pakistanis?

From what I understand (Wikipedia and google) India couldn't take control of Bangladesh, because although they were at conflict with west Pakistan, they wanted a Muslim country of their own and not be lumped back with India? Just need a more authentic source and not your "opinion" on this matter.

Thanks

1. Indians started the war on east -pakistan to liberate the Bengali-speaking people from west Pakistan .

2. East Pakistan would have remained a part of Pakistan , but sadly they were not treated equally . Their representation in Government , Military and other instutions were very less. It was a kind of orphan treating .

3. When Bangladehis asked for Liberation , they were not dealt politically . Instead , Military was sent for crackdown . Now you can undersatand what hapens when military tackles Civilian . A lot of killings , rapes took place .

4. India offered help ( though the leaders might be having 'interests') and liberated them.

5. Now you cant act like a monster if you have played a good knight before ....same happened to india ....they could not ask Bangladesh to add because the whole international community would have opposed it .

 

[Icewolf]

don't you have anything better to do other then trolling ?

post reported

This wasnt trolling.
It was the truth

If you cant handle it dont mistake it for trolling

 

[INDIC]

don't you have anything better to do other then trolling ?

post reported

This kind of comment is nothing, being a Muhajir himself he dare to comment on skin color of Indians.

 

[Icewolf]

This kind of comment is nothing, being a Muhajir himself he dare to comment on skin color of Indians.

I never commented on skin color.
If you are sure I did, pull out the post for me.

 

[INDIC]

I think India handled things in 71 very well. Also it was the better option. A log of Bangladeshis are against India today so the question does come to mind but this was the best alternative. Capturing Bangladesh and making it a part of India or even having Indian troops stay in that country any longer than they actually did would have cost India severely and public anger against Pakistan would dissipate to be replaced by that for India.

Also there are evidences that India promised the leaders of the Mukti Bahini freedom so they had to keep their word.

Reading the comments of some members I believe the only fear most Indians here have and are opposing Bangladesh being incorporated with India is largely because it is a Muslim state. This was also the reason a number of RSS supporters and terrorist sympathizers stated for not wanting Maldives to be part of the union. That was the most fun thread I must say.

West Bengalis don't have much love left for Bangladeshis to reunite or anything. It was strategic opportunity for India to to get rid of two front threat from Pakistan. Infact Pakistan was too interfering in North-East to please China.
Partition happened with our consent and there was no looking back, Bangladesh's merger into India would have lead to more instability.