If the Sikhs decided to cast their lot with Muslims and Pakistan in 1947??

[bandit]

Lol what!!!

Treacherous hindu baniyas have treated sikhs or any other minority way better than any Pakistani can dream of.

First of all, can you guys make a sikh head of army and tell him not to bow in front of Allah?

 

[Aka123]

Kahan kahan se a jatey hain log India ko secularity sikhane .

India -

1. Prime Minister - Manmohan Singh (Sikh)

2. President - Pranab Mukherjee (Hindu)

3. Vice President - Mohammad Hamid Ansari (Muslim)

4. Indian Army General - General Bikram Singh (Sikh)

5. Chief of Air Staff Indian Air Force - Air Chief Marshal Norman Anil Kumar Charlie Browne (Christian)

6. Chief of Naval Staff of Indian Navy - Admiral Devendra Kumar Joshi (Hindu)


Next time open such a thread, when your country fulfills at least one such criterion.

 

[Silverblaze]

For a student of history, this might be an interesting question, but this thread would turn into a nasty one.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Kahan kahan se a jatey hain log India ko secularity sikhane .

India -

1. Prime Minister - Manmohan Singh (Sikh)

2. President - Pranab Mukherjee (Hindu)

3. Vice President - Mohammad Hamid Ansari (Muslim)

4. Indian Army General - General Bikram Singh (Sikh)

5. Chief of Air Staff Indian Air Force - Air Chief Marshal Norman Anil Kumar Charlie Browne (Christian)

6. Chief of Naval Staff of Indian Navy - Admiral Devendra Kumar Joshi (Hindu)


Next time open such a thread, when your country fulfills at least one such criterion.

And what of the current Intelligence Bureau director?


The leader of the ruling party?


The Current Defence Minister?


The deputy cheif of the planning commision??



India and Indians don't have to prove a thing to these fools.

 

[Aka123]

For a student of history, this might be an interesting question, but this thread would turn into a nasty one.

It's shouldn't go nasty if the discussion is kept in a polite way. There can be discussions on so called -ve topics, but that's not the issue. The issue is the provocative way the discussion is placed. It's clearly understood that the intention of the OP is not to discuss but to abuse and demean religions. In that case, how can the thread remain sane.

These kind of 'nuisance' posters should be banned for good!

 

[Silverblaze]

It's shouldn't go nasty if the discussion is kept in a polite way. There can be discussions on so called -ve topics, but that's not the issue. The issue is the provocative way the discussion is placed. It's clearly understood that the intention of the OP is not to discuss but to abuse and demean religions. In that case, how can the thread remain sane.

These kind of 'nuisance' posters should be banned for good!

Don't know about intentions, but with emotions high, people lose sensibility. A character of uncivilized people. No offense to all.

 

[Aka123]

And what of the current Intelligence Bureau director?


The leader of the ruling party?


The Current Defence Minister?


The deputy cheif of the planning commision??



India and Indians don't have to prove a thing to these fools.

The Minister of External Affairs ?

and the list goes on and on and on...........................

 

[InDoStAnImUsSaLmAn]

What a stupid thread,,the very mindset and reason that people should go HERE and THERE,leaving their home,they have been staying for generations,because of the religion he/she believes in,,is the reason why any sane person in his/her right mind won't go to Pakistan! I think it would be a better example if light could be shed upon why millions of Muslims stayed back in India during partition...and had to flee to India from Bangladesh(then East Pakistan) in 1971!

 

[Chak Bamu]

Brits did not kill them for being Sikhs - they killed them for being anti-govt at that time
India's operation blue star was against secessionists. they were free to practice their religion - not secessionist tendencies
The incident with the mughals happened because THEY WERE SIKHS and NOT MUSLIM.

The examples you gave to mine are really apples to oranges.

Also, there is no argument to say sikhs "hate" muslims. given a choice between a secular state and an islamic state - a non-islamic religion will choose where it can flourish. Where do you think that is?

I must step in here to correct a misleading impression being conveyed here.

The problem between Sikh gurus and Mughal Empire was that of politics, not religion. It was seen as such by ordinary Muslims of the empire. For example look at the following from a Sikh religious source: Gurdwara Katana Sahib, Gurdwara Alamgir, Gurdwara Phalahi Sahib, Gurdwara Raikot, Gurdwara Fatehgarh Sahib, India

"Gurdwara Ghani Khan Nabi Khan, Machhiwara, Dist. Ludhiana

Living in the town of Machhiwara were two Muslim Pathan brothers Ghani Khan and Nabi Khan who knew Guru Gobind Singh. It better times they had sold horses and received kindness from the Guru. Even at the prospect of facing certain death, the brothers agreed to help Guru Gobind Singh escape the surrounding area which was full of the Mughal army looking for the Guru. They had Guru Gobind Singh put on the blue robes of a Muslim saint and accompanied by his three Sikhs survivors of the battle of Chamkaur, they carried the Guru in a palanquin through the enemy lines. They were only stopped once by Muslim soldiers, but Ghani Khan and Nabi Khan were so convincing that the party was allowed to pass through enemy lines with their 'Muslim Saint' in disguise. This gurdwara honors the home of these two brave brothers."

The problems between Sikhs and Mughals started in time of Jahangir, when his rebel son received support from then presiding Sikh Guru in Lahore.

I have noticed that Hindus in particular like to fan the flames between Muslims and Sikhs. Pathetic.

In relation to the topic, I think that Sikhs made a mistake in the 1940s. Their presence would have been welcomed and would have made Pakistan a more inclusive country and society. Their mistake was our and their loss. Punjab would not have been divided, first between East and West Punjab, and then East Punjab into Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, and Punjab. Also, Kashmir would not have been a problem.

 

[Imran Khan]

today they were deep in daily bombing

 

[Chak Bamu]

BTW, Guru Tegh Bahadur who was killed by aurangzeb (for not converting to islam) is the ninth guru of the sikhs. That should mean something to the sikhs now shouldnt it?

He was not killed for 'not converting to Islam'. He was killed for political reasons. Mughals did not represent Muslims, per se.

Notice the parallel with 'Shebatai Zevi' in Ottoman Turkey and see how a religio-political collision was avoided.

Again, during Mughal times Sikhs were viewed as a threat to the state for their political program. Later history bears this view.

So, please sock it. You do not represent Sikhs.

 

[Aka123]

I must step in here to correct a misleading impression being conveyed here.

The problem between Sikh gurus and Mughal Empire was that of politics, not religion. It was seen as such by ordinary Muslims of the empire. For example look at the following from a Sikh religious source: Gurdwara Katana Sahib, Gurdwara Alamgir, Gurdwara Phalahi Sahib, Gurdwara Raikot, Gurdwara Fatehgarh Sahib, India

"Gurdwara Ghani Khan Nabi Khan, Machhiwara, Dist. Ludhiana

Living in the town of Machhiwara were two Muslim Pathan brothers Ghani Khan and Nabi Khan who knew Guru Gobind Singh. It better times they had sold horses and received kindness from the Guru. Even at the prospect of facing certain death, the brothers agreed to help Guru Gobind Singh escape the surrounding area which was full of the Mughal army looking for the Guru. They had Guru Gobind Singh put on the blue robes of a Muslim saint and accompanied by his three Sikhs survivors of the battle of Chamkaur, they carried the Guru in a palanquin through the enemy lines. They were only stopped once by Muslim soldiers, but Ghani Khan and Nabi Khan were so convincing that the party was allowed to pass through enemy lines with their 'Muslim Saint' in disguise. This gurdwara honors the home of these two brave brothers."

The problems between Sikhs and Mughals started in time of Jahangir, when his rebel son received support from then presiding Sikh Guru in Lahore.

I have noticed that Hindus in particular like to fan the flames between Muslims and Sikhs. Pathetic.

In relation to the topic, I think that Sikhs made a mistake in the 1940s. Their presence would have been welcomed and would have made Pakistan a more inclusive country and society. Their mistake was our and their loss. Punjab would not have been divided, first between East and West Punjab, and then East Punjab into Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, and Punjab. Also, Kashmir would not have been a problem.

Incorrect rather the opposite, some Muslims try to fan the flames between Hindus and Sikhs by bringing in 1984 again and again and again, when always the sensible Hindus of today are against that.
This thread is an example of that.

Me being an Hindu, would have killed those Hindus responsible for 84 with my own hands if I had a chance.

 

[karan21]

I am a SON of a Sardar and I would never like to live in Pakistan. India is my nation and I am proud of it. In entire Sikh history Sikhs have been fighting against Muslims so the decision was natural. And I don't think it was a wrong decision.

 

[Bane]

The cunning Hindu whispers discontent and discord among the peoples of the Subcontinent. Beware his lies.

 

[bandit]

I must step in here to correct a misleading impression being conveyed here.

The problem between Sikh gurus and Mughal Empire was that of politics, not religion.....

I have noticed that Hindus in particular like to fan the flames between Muslims and Sikhs. Pathetic.

Sikhs and Muslims have their own thing going on for a couple of centuries now, hindus don't need to fan it.

In relation to the topic, I think that Sikhs made a mistake in the 1940s. Their presence would have been welcomed and would have made Pakistan a more inclusive country and society. Their mistake was our and their loss. Punjab would not have been divided, first between East and West Punjab, and then East Punjab into Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, and Punjab. Also, Kashmir would not have been a problem.

In the same vein, Punjabi muslims made mistake in 47, their presence was welcomed and east of Indus would have remained united as was historically.

@OT- Hindus and Sikhs have near similarity in culture and religion both being borne out of native soil. It is only natural they will combine against external influences carried over from foreign lands.