Bhutto, India and the 1971 Surrender in Bangladesh

[Rusty]

1. Pakistan never had a Punjabi strong man. Zia, an E Punjabi, can be considered a Muhajir.

2. Nawaz Sharif has been the first Punjabi powerful figure.

3. Tikka was the first Punjabi Chief, although people at that claimed Bhutto was the real Chief.

4. Among the infamous 22 families pre-1971, only Saigols were Punjabi. Originally from Khotian (now Saigolabad), they had settled in Calcutta where they flourished in business. Jinnah brought them over.

5. Punjab is the only province without a provincial language. Punjabi / Gurmukhi is a state language in E Punjab, Haryana, HP and Capital Delhi.

6. Punjabis are hard working, disciplined and obedient to authority. They help each other. That is how they have flourished in SA and elsewhere.These are the reasons why other communities envy them. When this envy gets negative 1984 Sikh Genocide happen.

The problem is that ALL of South Asia has a victim complex. "Everything bad in my life cannot be my fault, it must be someone else fault"
People need to break free of this victim complex and take ownership of their lives and communities and stop looking outside to blame someone.
Of course this victim complex is encouraged by the weak and idiotic politicians we have who also play the victim card all the time. By playing the victim cards, the politicians easily fool their lemming followers (some of whom are on this very forum defending their masters). "It was not our fault that we ran the government badly and got really rich in the process, It's someone else fault"

People need to man up and take responsibility for their lives.

 

[IND151]

Interesting thread

In short, 1971 can be described as failure at political and military level, due to incompetence of Pakistani political leaders and PA and faulty doctrine "Defense of East Pakistan lies in West Pakistan"

 

[SamantK]

there you go again with more of your Indian logic. do you think you are the first Indian Muslim on this forum? Most of you guys eventually get banned because you try so hard to impress your Hindu majority that you say silly things that get you banned.
We get it, you hate Pakistan
guess what? We don't care.
We wish you all the best as the worst off minority in a country where the butcher of 2000 Muslims is beloved by the Hindu minority.
As for us, well, we have our own destiny in our hands. We put ourselves in this bad place we are at and we will pull ourselves out.

And is the logic and facts you are pointing out are Pakistani by nature?

You have been long enough on this forum to know that only around 750 Muslism were killed not your imagined number 2000 and also you guys famously do not mention is how many Hindus died, 350.

The worst of minority is a title you guys are ever ready to give. Aapke girewan main to sab kuch itna acha chal raha hai ke aapko unki misal deni chaiye.

Anyways, do what you have to do to your country we do not care for your certifcates neither for your propaganda. At least have the decency to present correct facts and not the imagined ones, otherwise keep at it cause you dont mean a speck worth of salt to us Indians and loose what respect you have..

 

[illusion8]

What was the factor that compelled IA to save the lives of those 93,000 Pakistani troops and the lives of their family members?

Humanity? or mercy?

 

[S.A.]

What was the factor that compelled IA to save the lives of those 93,000 Pakistani troops and the lives of their family members?

Humanity? or mercy?

Face Saving.... due to involve in the internal matters of E. Pakistan

 

[third eye]

What was the factor that compelled IA to save the lives of those 93,000 Pakistani troops and the lives of their family members?

Humanity? or mercy?

I am sorry but what sort of a question is this ? Did you expect / want the IA to kill every Pakistani in EP / BD ?

The Pak E Command was given an option to surrender or else face annihilation which is as per rules of war.

Pls note there were Civilians too among the POWs which included women & Children. Surely one could not have laid a finger on them.

Face Saving.... due to involve in the internal matters of E. Pakistan

Face saving !!!

This reply needs to go to the humor section !

 

[third eye]

Delete

double Post

 

[EzioAltaïr]

Maratha's @ their peak ruled an area in size 1,081,086 sq mi which is close to 158,914 sq mi less then of even todays divided India (present day republic of India) which is 1,240,000 sq mi, Mughal empire @ its peak under aurangzeb ruled an area in size 1,737,460 sq mi ! thats almost the whole of subcontinent plus not forget that the Maratha's were there along with others for example ,Durrani empire, the Sikhs, Awadh ( whom along with Abdali, defeated the Maratha's in panipat), then there was Nizam of Hyderabad, & then how can one forget East India company ruled Bengal ( gen.hasting of the east India company not only defeated the Maratha's but also eliminated it !)

Maratha Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Asia_1758_AD.jpg/500px-South_Asia_1758_AD.jpg

Mughal Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

File:Mughal Empire (orthographic projection).svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mughals didn't truly rule that empire. The only way they could maintain any control over the place was by dividing the rule, and letting them maintain autonomy, eventually leading to breakaway states. They never conquered Assam and Travancore; Hyderabad and Bengal were autonomous states, and the Deccan sultanates were vassals.

The previous empires such as Mauryans, did't rule like that.

 

[illusion8]

I am sorry but what sort of a question is this ? Did you expect / want the IA to kill every Pakistani in EP / BD ?

The Pak E Command was given an option to surrender or else face annihilation which is as per rules of war.

Pls note there were Civilians too among the POWs which included women & Children. Surely one could not have laid a finger on them.



Face saving !!!

This reply needs to go to the humor section !

My question came out wrong, I never suggested that Indian forces kill the captured soldiers, PA in E. Pakistan were alleged to have killed scores of civilians including hindu's, the Bangladeshi's were baying for their blood - there was a legal angle to it too - they were wanting to establish a war tribunal. In spite of all this the IA took on themselves to take them to safety showing exemplary behavior which has not been reciprocated in kind till date.

 

[haviZsultan]

Bhutto had a massive role in the destruction of our country as it was before 1971... our country is not a full Pakistan today. It is a broken pitiful Pakistan that has been reduced purposely by the man known as Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto... I believe PPP supporters should accept responsibility while the Yahya Khan supporters too should accept they were partly responsible for the mess we see today.

Pakistani citizens have suffered a lot. Even today it should be noted that there is a huge number of ex-supporters and Biharis stranded in what is now Bangladesh. We blew it. We blew it in East Pakistan and we blew it in Afghanistan... we could once have had a union of our territories.

 

[ice_man]

by surrendering PA saved alot of lives that would have been lost on both sides as well as the Bangladeshi lives that would have been lost had the war continued! but sadly the world tries to see things in a black and white context and hence such words as defeat or victory. 93,000 troops could have atleast taken down with them another 93,000 people civilans and armed fighters alike. but they didn't instead they chose to do the right thing. but sadly history will just remember them as nothing but surrendering men!


so yes it was a surrender but the positives of it were surely lost then and their. i guess people of south asia never learnt what the europeans learnt decades earlier.

 

[SamantK]

by surrendering PA saved alot of lives that would have been lost on both sides as well as the Bangladeshi lives that would have been lost had the war continued! but sadly the world tries to see things in a black and white context and hence such words as defeat or victory.

Agreed, but the motive was not saving lives of Bangladeshi's and Indians get that straight. If that was the case the merciless killing of Bangladeshis would not be recorded in the history. They just wanted to save thier lives.

so yes it was a surrender but the positives of it were surely lost then and their. i guess people of south asia never learnt what the europeans learnt decades earlier.

Blame the machoism shown by some Pakistanis on this site who would advocate a fight till death rather than accepting defeat and moving on.

 

[ice_man]

Agreed, but the motive was not saving lives of Bangladeshi's and Indians get that straight. If that was the case the merciless killing of Bangladeshis would not be recorded in the history. They just wanted to save thier lives.



Blame the machoism shown by some Pakistanis on this site who would advocate a fight till death rather than accepting defeat and moving on.

actually no they DID surrender to save lives. please read niazi's statement and reason for surrendering.

and i guess you would know alot about machoism by deploying 600,000 troops in kashmir and facing a freedom struggle since 47! time for you guys to "accept defeat & move on & stop the merciless killings of kashmiris"

AP NewsBreak: Kashmir won't DNA test mass graves - Yahoo! News

so yes please spare me the crocodile tears!

 

[SamantK]

actually no they DID surrender to save lives. please read niazi's statement and reason for surrendering.

You want me to believe a general who himself was a rapist?

"The troops used to say that when the Commander
(Lt. Gen. Niazi) was himself a raper, how could they be stopped. Gen.
Niazi enjoyed the same reputation at Sialkot and Lahore."

Pg. 15, http://www.pppusa.org/Acrobat/Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report.pdf

and i guess you would know alot about machoism by deploying 600,000 troops in kashmir and facing a freedom struggle since 47! time for you guys to "accept defeat & move on & stop the merciless killings of kashmiris"AP NewsBreak: Kashmir won't DNA test mass graves - Yahoo! News

so yes please spare me the crocodile tears!

WHy should I cry for the surrender of 93,000 Pak Soldiers, they committed rape and genocide and had no intention of saving lives of Bdeshies, that is quite clear and undeniable..

They were scared of loosing thier lives after the genocide and hence surrendered...

 

[ice_man]

You want me to believe a general who himself was a rapist?


Pg. 15, http://www.pppusa.org/Acrobat/Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report.pdf



WHy should I cry for the surrender of 93,000 Pak Soldiers, they committed rape and genocide and had no intention of saving lives of Bdeshies, that is quite clear and undeniable..

They were scared of loosing thier lives after the genocide and hence surrendered...

did you read the allegations and forgot to read the replies???? his biggest crime seems to be PAN EXPORT smuggling

you missed the point didn't you. firstly you can't claim things out of the blue and secondly you didn't answer why is india if it is so moral and has high values not pulling out its 600,000 soldiers from kashmir and not doing DNA testing of 1000s of mass graves???

our soldiers surrendered to save lives but you won't understand that maybe it will take another century for indians to grow up. and realize that surrender was better than fighting till the last man and killing a 100,000 more men along the way.