INDIA, BANGLADESH EMBARK ON STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP SILENTLY

[TopCat]

How is the Mauryan empire Bengali? wtf is 'Bengali' about them and how the hell are they related esp when one is in 3BC and the other in 11AD ?

Seems to me like another revisionist attempt to show India was ruled by Beng...cough....Bangladeshi's

Because they consist in the same geographical area as it is called now West Bengal + Bangaldesh + Bihar + Orissya. Now some king ruled in 3rd century BCE and another king ruled in 8th century AD. Thats all the difference. They both belong to the same people. Gupta Empire in the middle came from the same area.
But between Gupta and Pala only Harsha Vardhana who came from North West India.

 

[LaBong]

Guys there was no Bengal, Bihar at that time. The area constituting Bengal and Bihar was called Prachi at that time. Kalinga i.e. present day Odisya was a separate entity altogether. The unique identity of Bengal was created at the time of Charyapada.

 

[justanobserver]

Because they consist in the same geographical area as it is called now West Bengal + Bangaldesh + Bihar + Orissya.

Then why not call them Biharis or Oddiyas ? Or are Bengali's god's chosen people ?

You'll probably say that Palas Had a capital in WB, but the Mauryan capital is now the capital of present day Bihar!

Now some king ruled in 3rd century BCE and another king ruled in 7th century AD. Thats all the difference.

1000 years of difference !

They both belong to the same people.

Then why do you claim that Bengali's always ruled over Biharis?
After all they're the 'same' people right ?

I understand this mentality in the subcontinent, Pakistani's claim they ruled us for a thousand years (as they see themselves as the descendant of Mughals).

Then you guys start claming that you ruled us even before that

Now some guy's gonna come up and claim that, hey in the Mahabharata all of you were Hindus muhahahahaha.

I think this stems from an inferiority complex because we were ruled by the goras and now we want to cling on to past 'glories', real or fabricated.

With time we South Asians will become more mature.

 

[TopCat]

Guys there was no Bengal, Bihar at that time. The area constituting Bengal and Bihar was called Prachi at that time. Kalinga i.e. present day Odisya was a separate entity altogether. The unique identity of Bengal was created at the time of Charyapada.

if you are talking about Language.. then yes.. before 8th century it was called Pakrit the colloquial form of Sanskrit, widely spoken in Bihar, orissya and Bengal and shown its distinct feature from Devangari which is another branch of Sanskrit in Western India later Hindi.

Orissya was under Meghada kingdom. I was talking about Kingdom, Orissa could be called something else under Meghada which i am not aware of.

 

[integra]

If this is true then I will no need to care/ respect any 52 or 71. Is there any scanned copy of any authentic book?

Bro just because of some spectrums probable theory you can't jeopardize the sacrifice of millions can you? Even if you search your family you'll find atleast someone being a freedom fighter(or atleast helped them). Please try to repect your fellow people before giving away our credits to someone.
Lastly remember the language movement is the result we celebrate
International Mother Language Day
it'll be too naive if you mix some conspiracy with it because nor mujib or zia played important roles there.

 

[TopCat]

Then why not call them Biharis or Oddiyas ? Or are Bengali's god's chosen people ?

You'll probably say that Palas Had a capital in WB, but the Mauryan capital is now the capital of present day Bihar!

Bihar + Bengal is the same kingdom. Bihar is a barren land since ancient time. Having a capital in Pataliputra does not mean anything when 80% of the kingdom is Bengal.

1000 years of difference !

So???

Then why do you claim that Bengali's always ruled over Biharis?
After all they're the 'same' people right ?

I did not say bengalis ruled over Bihar but we belonge to same kingdom spoke the same language that time.

I understand this mentality in the subcontinent, Pakistani's claim they ruled us for a thousand years (as they see themselves as the descendant of Mughals).

They did through Mughals... If you dont take it then Mughal is the only kingdom India got.

Then you guys start claming that you ruled us even before that

History says so.

Now some guy's gonna come up and claim that, hey in the Mahabharata all of you were Hindus muhahahahaha.

Mahabhrata based on the story in Gujrat. You should be proud of that. We dont claim any glory to that. But a lot of refinement done in Mahabharata under Gupta empire which is again Bengali

I think this stems from an inferiority complex because we were ruled by the goras and now we want to cling on to past 'glories', real or fabricated.

With time we South Asians will become more mature.

No its called superiority complex

 

[SpArK]

@ iajdani

Bangladesh splurges on IMF gold

Across South Asia, affluent families have long hoarded gold, viewed as the safest asset in turbulent times - and the right gift on an auspicious occasion. Brides are sent off to their grooms decked in gold jewellery that serves both as decoration, and a future safety net. Gold, people think, is more likely to hold its value than mere cash.

Now Bangladesh, one of the region’s poorest countries, has bought gold from the IMF, to hedge against currency volatility.

Bangladesh Bank, the country’s central bank, spent $403m to buy 10 tons of gold from a 403 ton stock that the IMF - one of the world’s biggest official gold-holders - was releasing to raise money to step up lending to poorer countries. That puts on Bangaldesh on the same path that India and Sri Lanka trod last year.

The acquisition pales in comparison to the 200 tons purchased by the Reserve Bank of India last year, but is nevertheless being seen by markets as a signal of Asian countries’ renewed appetite for the metal, which is priced within sight of its all-time high price of $1,264 set in June.

But for Bangladesh - once derided as an economic basket-case, the acquisition also reflects the way it has managed to prosper during the economic crisis, thanks to its resilient garment exports and strong foreign exchanges remittances from citizens working overseas.

Bangladesh still has plenty of challenges ahead, mainly in raising state revenues for investment in infrastructure, which has emerged as a major bottleneck to its growth. Still, after nearly doubling in a year, Bangladesh’s foreign currency reserves in November 2009 hit $10bn, or nearly 5 month of imports, a fifteen-year high.

And that, for now, seems reason enough to celebrate.


Bangladesh splurges on IMF gold | beyondbrics | FT.com


Now FT also says the same the thing i have said and u laughed.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangladesh-defence/72341-imf-sells-10-tonnes-gold-bangladesh.html#post1130815

 

[integra]

@ benny WTF? Why here theres another thread on that.

 

[M_Saint]

The first of the east/west Pakistan issues came about in 1952. When students at Dhaka University were gunned down for protesting that Urdu would be the national language. I salute those guys that gave their lives. Today, along with Engllish, I speak the greatest language the world has ever seen.

BTW out of 69 million people in Pakistan, Bangla was spoken by 44 million people in those early days( Wiki). Somebozo, its high time you get your facts straight

Nope, it came even before Pakistan was officially created. Vote in 1946 at sight, conniving Dadas with BRIT's complicity engineered riots in Kolkata to clear up Muslims from WB. Then they took the bait on what they opposed in 1905's Banga -Vhanga. After the vote went into PAK's favor, they let it go for time being but were aware of having a lot of capital to get it back later. 52's 'Vhasha Andolon' was also engineered to provide perfect opportunity as Jinnah's endeavor for making Urdu as national language that was hijacked by Dada Commies to give birth of the rhetoric like 'Mayer Vhasha Kyra Nite Chay'. BTW, out of all Urdu speakers only 8% are originals in current PAK. But we, the Bangladeshis still make fuzzes on W Pakistani's imposing URDU on us though.

 

[SpArK]

@ benny WTF? Why here theres another thread on that.

Its off topic.. but it was a reply to iajdani..we had a nice talk regarding it.

Just ignore and continue the discussion.

 

[justanobserver]

Bihar + Bengal is the same kingdom. Bihar is a barren land since ancient time. Having a capital in Pataliputra does not mean anything when 80% of the kingdom is Bengal.

80% of the kingdom? Where in the world are you getting these facts from? The Mauryan empire comprised of almost the entire Indian Subcontinent and no Bengal isn't 80% of the Indian subcontinent.

However you may be talking about the Magadha Kingdom so here:

Magadha (Sanskrit: मग&#2343 formed one of the sixteen Mahājanapadas (Sanskrit "Great Countries") or regions in ancient India. The core of the kingdom was the area of Bihar south of the Ganges; its first capital was Rajagriha (modern Rajgir) then Pataliputra (modern Patna).

Bihar is a barren land since ancient time.

OMFG ! Seriously what have you been smoking, Bihar itself is on the Gangetic plains ! One of the most fertile lands in India.

I did not say bengalis ruled over Bihar but we belonge to same kingdom spoke the same language that time.

Yes you did :

Bihar was always under Bengal till british took over.

They did through Mughals... If you dont take it then Mughal is the only kingdom India got.

That's the irony, sweet delicious irony, because present day Pakistan was the region which got the worst of the Invasion from Central Asia, maximum pillaging and plundering happened there.

History says so.

Im sure it does

Mahabharata under Gupta empire which is again Bengali

wow just....wow you guys are completely cuckoo

 

[Bang Galore]

The guy sitting in the middle is Emperor Ashoka and the bald man standing to his right is Chanayka.

Chanakya was in the court of Asoka's grandfather & the founder of the Mauryan dynasty, Chandragupta Maurya.

 

[TopCat]

80% of the kingdom? Where in the world are you getting these facts from? The Mauryan empire comprised of almost the entire Indian Subcontinent and no Bengal isn't 80% of the Indian subcontinent.

Here you go.. thats how we ruled India... You got it now.

However you may be talking about the Magadha Kingdom so here:

Magadha (Sanskrit: मग&#2343 formed one of the sixteen Mahājanapadas (Sanskrit "Great Countries") or regions in ancient India. The core of the kingdom was the area of Bihar south of the Ganges; its first capital was Rajagriha (modern Rajgir) then Pataliputra (modern Patna).

Cool.. you know it now.

That's the irony, sweet delicious irony, because present day Pakistan was the region which got the worst of the Invasion from Central Asia, maximum pillaging and plundering happened there.

We have nothing to do with them when it comes to History. Thats West Indian history and not the matter of discussion here.

wow just....wow you guys are completely cuckoo

Does it hurt???? Ohh I just put an hand on Hindu supremacy thing ...

 

[TopCat]

Chanakya was in the court of Asoka's grandfather & the founder of the Mauryan dynasty, Chandragupta Maurya.

I do think so too...
A lot of people think Chanakya, belonged to Chandragupta I of Gupta empire instead of Chandragupta Maurya.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Chanakya was in the court of Asoka's grandfather & the founder of the Mauryan dynasty, Chandragupta Maurya.

LOL, we must not look for factual accuracies in that book sir, just enjoy the visual effect those pics are supposed to have on Jamatis, makes their skin crawl - a bald man in saffron clothes