Winston Churchill wanted to nuke Kremlin ‘to win Cold War,’ FBI memo reveals

[INDIC]

still pleasing the white master are we?

They pleased the white master in 1961 also during liberation of Goa. Although the Egyptians then closed the Suez Canal for the Portuguese Navy while opposite to that Portugal sell Pakistan Daphne class submarine for that help. (Gora Portuguese themselves told me about this. )

 

[Kabira]

still pleasing the white master a

Without gora no Bharat, why u cry?

 

[ranjeet]

Without gora no Bharat, why u cry?

is that why you praise them so much?

 

[INDIC]

Without gora no Bharat, why u cry?

and Pakistan was created by Muhammad Bin Qasim and Goras destroyed it.

 

[INDIC]

@save_ghenda dude you don't need to do that, where is your martial instinct.

 

[ranjeet]

@save_ghenda dude are you Pakistani jutt or your family moved from this side of the border?

 

[Kabira]

@save_ghenda dude are you Pakistani jutt or your family moved from this side of the border?

No one from from my extended family was from east punjab. Only big biraderi who moved in west punjab from east was Arains. Rest of east punjab muslim biraderis were in small numbers, they settled in Faislabad mostly. I have meet Faisalabad people who still speak with east punjabi dialect/accent.

 

[ranjeet]

No one from from my extended family was from east punjab. Only big biraderi who moved in west punjab from east was Arains. Rest of east punjab muslim biraderis were in small numbers, they settled in Faislabad mostly.

so are you jutt or arain?

 

[Kabira]

so are you jutt or arain?

I have no idea.

 

[Raphael]

Yup, yet another one of his statements that our neighbors would praise, until they are shown what he thought of them.

That statement is wrong, India has had a unified identity for millenia, even though political control was unified only in two or three instances. "Bharatavarsha" has been defined a long time back, its limits being considered as himalayas in the north, Indian ocean in the South, river Oxus (I think, I'm not sure) in the west, and I forget what in the east. The idea of the subcontinent being a social identity was shared not only by us, but all civilizations we were in conttact with.

I don't know what Churchill thought of us, but I'm sure it wasn't flattering. He probably thought we were backwards opium-smoking yellow monkeys . But that wouldn't be an uncharitable impression, given the state China was in at the time. The verity of a statement is totally independent of whether one likes it or not. Anyway, we set out to prove that late-19th/early 20th century China was a totally anomalous period in our history, and we accomplished that. Have you proved yet that Churchill statements on India were only applicable to India at the time, and not intrinsic to India as a civilization?

Anyway, you seem to be confused about Churchill's (or anybody else's) understanding of the term "country". Cultural and religious similarities, or a "unified identity" does not make a country. Only political sovereignty does. When were the instances of unified political control? The British Raj would be one instance. Mughals were also close. Two foreign dynasties that did not use Indian institutions but imposed their own (rendering your "unified identity" argument invalid). But I can't think of any other instances.

 

[INDIC]

I don't know what Churchill thought of us, but I'm sure it wasn't flattering. He probably thought we were backwards opium-smoking yellow monkeys . But that wouldn't be an uncharitable impression, given the state China was in at the time. The verity of a statement is totally independent of whether one likes it or not. Anyway, we set out to prove that late-19th/early 20th century China was a totally anomalous period in our history, and we accomplished that. Have you proved yet that Churchill statements on India were only applicable to India at the time, and not intrinsic to India as a civilization?

Anyway, you seem to be confused about Churchill's (or anybody else's) understanding of the term "country". Cultural and religious similarities, or a "unified identity" does not make a country. Only political sovereignty does. When were the instances of unified political control? The British Raj would be one instance. Mughals were also close. Two foreign dynasties that did not use Indian institutions but imposed their own (rendering your "unified identity" argument invalid). But I can't think of any other instances.

Are you feeling thankful to Brits for liberating half of your country's population from the Japanese occupation. Good, otherwise the Chinese had been thankless to Brits, Americans and Russians for liberating your country from Japanese occupation.

 

[ranjeet]

I have no idea.

Ok it alrite .... my appologies for trolling tonight ... you are a good guy who I enjoy trolling with.

 

[Raphael]

Are you feeling thankful to Brits for liberating half of your country's population from the Japanese occupation. Good, otherwise the Chinese had been thankless to Brits, Americans and Russians for liberating your country from Japanese occupation.

What does WWII have to do with Churchill's impression of India? Evidently you're butthurt. Churchill didn't like India, but then again, not many historical figures did. Whatever they thought, try to stay on topic nevertheless .

 

[INDIC]

What does WWII have to do with Churchill's impression of India? Evidently you're butthurt. Churchill didn't like India, but then again, not many historical figures did. Whatever they thought, try to stay on topic nevertheless .

Everyone has an impression, but seems Chinese are the greatest admirers of whitemen. Churchill said those words during Peak of Indian freedom struggle and nationalism under Congress to delude himself.

If you agree with Churchill you also agree with Sun Yat Sen(the father of Chinese nationalism)

“In order to restore our national independence, we must first restore the Chinese nation. In order to restore the Chinese nation, we must drive the barbarian Manchus back to the Changbai Mountains. In order to get rid of the barbarians, we must first overthrow the present tyrannical, dictatorial, ugly and corrupt Qing government.”

[ LETTER ] - Taipei Times

Didn't Manchus add more territories to China making them 'historical Chinese land'

 

[Steve781]

I don't know what Churchill thought of us, but I'm sure it wasn't flattering. He probably thought we were backwards opium-smoking yellow monkeys . But that wouldn't be an uncharitable impression, given the state China was in at the time. The verity of a statement is totally independent of whether one likes it or not. Anyway, we set out to prove that late-19th/early 20th century China was a totally anomalous period in our history, and we accomplished that. Have you proved yet that Churchill statements on India were only applicable to India at the time, and not intrinsic to India as a civilization?

Anyway, you seem to be confused about Churchill's (or anybody else's) understanding of the term "country". Cultural and religious similarities, or a "unified identity" does not make a country. Only political sovereignty does. When were the instances of unified political control? The British Raj would be one instance. Mughals were also close. Two foreign dynasties that did not use Indian institutions but imposed their own (rendering your "unified identity" argument invalid). But I can't think of any other instances.

Churchill despite his hatred of communism thought recognising the government on Taiwan as the government of China was ridiculous. He was the first Western leader to recognise the PRC.