A question for ALL INDIANS

[truthlover]

Hi everyone)I have an indian freind and he is a sikh by faith.We had many arguments with each other on some topics because we both are equally patriotic) But once he said that M.A jinnah was a great leader and he deserves more than nehruHe also said that it,s your bad luck that jinnah passed away too early and did not fulfil what he dreamed about pakistan.Now i am really confused why he said so?How far is that statement true? And if that,s true please give me the reasons.
Indian members on PDF please give me your neutral answers without any hesitation,prejudice or bias.
Thanks.

 

[Imran Khan]

so jao raat bhut ho gai hai dost

 

[liall]

Indians generally do not care about Jinaah or Nehru or any one in general. One thing I know about Indian sikhs is that they dislike Gandhi and like Bhagat Singh from past. Thats all there is to it.

 

[Puchtoon]

Many Sikhs blame nehru/gandhi for partition of punjab .

 

[chhota bheem]

talk to your friend he will give you the answer as to why he said so ?

 

[truthlover]

Many Sikhs blame nehru/gandhi for partition of punjab .

Partition of punjab within india or the partition of the whole punjab(including the one in pakistan?)

talk to your friend he will give you the answer as to why he said so ?

We were running short of time because we argued on many other topics too

Indians generally do not care about Jinaah or Nehru or any one in general. One thing I know about Indian sikhs is that they dislike Gandhi and like Bhagat Singh from past. Thats all there is to it.

I am also a fan of bhagat singh by the way.His struggle against the Britishers will never be forgotten.

 

[Skull and Bones]

TBH, i have high regards for Jinnah than Nehru. But looking at it from a wider perspective, both were good for nothing.

 

[JAT BALWAN]

actually for some time Jinnah was more populer between congress & people of India then Nehru , Maulana azad & even sardar patel .

as per said Jinnah was more patriot then nehru.. He even wanted to compromise on the post of vice-prime minister of united India , but Nehru rejected the idea because of his own ambitions...

The two nation theory only make home in Jinnah's mind to take revange with nehru & teach him a lesson b'cos of clash of ambitious nature of both leaders.

 

[sardar1987]

Hi everyone)I have an indian freind and he is a sikh by faith.We had many arguments with each other on some topics because we both are equally patriotic) But once he said that M.A jinnah was a great leader and he deserves more than nehruHe also said that it,s your bad luck that jinnah passed away too early and did not fulfil what he dreamed about pakistan.Now i am really confused why he said so?How far is that statement true? And if that,s true please give me the reasons.
Indian members on PDF please give me your neutral answers without any hesitation,prejudice or bias.
Thanks.

Man what i am gonna post here won't be liked by many but nevertheless is the hard truth

1)Nehru and jinnah were both opportunists.

a)jinnah:He knew that if there is no partition,then he has no chance of getting to power whatsoever as many others like rajagopalachari,nehru,abul kalam azad and sardar patel were ahead of him.I am not saying jinnah was not popular,its just a relative comparison.He may have sensed some advantage for muslims if they got independence from erstwhile india but its my understanding that he may have factored in kashmir,hyderabad and maybe gujrat as part of pakistan which didn't happen.The problem is whatever may be the noble intentions of jinnah,its impossible for a nation to be based on religion and not culture.....look for arabs and iranians.Both have their culture intact,whereas pakistan was taught to be descendants of anything but hindus.The point is due to such distortion in the history especially by zia ul haq,,,,,u guys are simply taught to hate india in schools and precisely for such reason no one will appreciate my comment.
Almost all the people who were sold on the dream of pakistan,the major financiers were the industrialists and the landlords and after the death of jinnah these were the only people who gained as NO LAND REFORMS HAPPENED.On the top of that jinnah's death strangled democracy in pakistan.But there is no doubt jinnah was indeed a charismatic leader and contrary to what most people think,not religious.He had a parsi wife and followed no specific muslim norm.Such a person would have surely made pakistan a secular country had he stayed for 10-15 years

b)Nehru:He was just second in command in inc after sardar patel but on insistence of gandhi patel let him be the pm.Nehru was a good man,just like jinnah but ultimately a flawed leader believing in socialist principles and ideologies but he stabalized india.No one can doubt that.He fucked up in case of kashmir but his nationalistic credentials were never in question and he was the undisputed leader of india simply because after the dath of nehru and sardar patel he was the only leader with pan national appeal.We owe a lot to nehru,surely he made big blunders but he prevented bigger blunders too

 

[shree835]

so jao raat bhut ho gai hai dost

@truthlover ko Sapne me Sardar dikha…And suddenly he wake up and asked this question on PDF… Nothing wrong in that, take it easy.

 

[Mr cool]

Every body has their assumptions like jinna is a PAWN for hindu india&british, baniya congress want to through muslims from india by using jinna, jinna want PM post, british want vessel state, muslim landlords,business man want their own state to avoid baniya's competition........

 

[sms]

Hi everyone)I have an indian freind and he is a sikh by faith.We had many arguments with each other on some topics because we both are equally patriotic) But once he said that M.A jinnah was a great leader and he deserves more than nehruHe also said that it,s your bad luck that jinnah passed away too early and did not fulfil what he dreamed about pakistan.Now i am really confused why he said so?How far is that statement true? And if that,s true please give me the reasons.
Indian members on PDF please give me your neutral answers without any hesitation,prejudice or bias.
Thanks.

There is no doubt Jinnah and Nehru both were good and very charismatic leaders. They did many good things. But very opportunist to the core, to the extent put so many people to misery and wound created by them is yet to heal.

There is no doubt both of them were real patriots. So, let's keep the good deeds in mind and respect them for those good actions

 

[acetophenol]

I do have respect for M.Jinnah and I believe that had he been alive,Pakistan would've kick asss and Indo-Pak relations may have been different. Though I respect Jinnah,I don't agree with him,especially as an Indian muslim for his view of a separate country for muslims.

 

[Spring Onion]

Man what i am gonna post here won't be liked by many but nevertheless is the hard truth

1)Nehru and jinnah were both opportunists.

a)jinnah:He knew that if there is no partition,then he has no chance of getting to power whatsoever as many others like rajagopalachari,nehru,abul kalam azad and sardar patel were ahead of him.I am not saying jinnah was not popular,its just a relative comparison.He may have sensed some advantage for muslims if they got independence from erstwhile india but its my understanding that he may have factored in kashmir,hyderabad and maybe gujrat as part of pakistan which didn't happen.The problem is whatever may be the noble intentions of jinnah,its impossible for a nation to be based on religion and not culture.....look for arabs and iranians.Both have their culture intact,whereas pakistan was taught to be descendants of anything but hindus.The point is due to such distortion in the history especially by zia ul haq,,,,,u guys are simply taught to hate india in schools and precisely for such reason no one will appreciate my comment.
Almost all the people who were sold on the dream of pakistan,the major financiers were the industrialists and the landlords and after the death of jinnah these were the only people who gained as NO LAND REFORMS HAPPENED.On the top of that jinnah's death strangled democracy in pakistan.But there is no doubt jinnah was indeed a charismatic leader and contrary to what most people think,not religious.He had a parsi wife and followed no specific muslim norm.Such a person would have surely made pakistan a secular country had he stayed for 10-15 years

b)Nehru:He was just second in command in inc after sardar patel but on insistence of gandhi patel let him be the pm.Nehru was a good man,just like jinnah but ultimately a flawed leader believing in socialist principles and ideologies but he stabalized india.No one can doubt that.He fucked up in case of kashmir but his nationalistic credentials were never in question and he was the undisputed leader of india simply because after the dath of nehru and sardar patel he was the only leader with pan national appeal.We owe a lot to nehru,surely he made big blunders but he prevented bigger blunders too

Nobody indeed will like your BS

Because at the time of Pakistan's creation that is 47 Jinnah was too old to wish for any power neither he had any wealth from being First governor Gen of Pakistan.

As far as Nehru you Indians curse him for many things NO One curse Jinnah for anything since there is NON, NO such thing he did which could be cursed.

Every body has their assumptions like jinna is a PAWN for hindu india&british, baniya congress want to through muslims from india by using jinna, jinna want PM post, british want vessel state, muslim landlords,business man want their own state to avoid baniya's competition........

and banayas thought of creating two nation theory. infact Hindus were the ones who led to creation of this theory

 

[PlanetWarrior]

IMO both MA Jinnah and J Nehru were opportunists whose clash of personalities led to unnecessary bloodshed and the current impasse between Pakistan and India. Given that we had ineffective leadership since independence, it remains unfortunate that we still continue to have ineffective leadership