India's NRC is creating a refugee crisis for Bangladesh

[M.Bison]

people who can not prove their identity of being Indian are treated as foreigners...Now if these people are crossing illegally to India, they should be aware about consequences...

All Hindus are foreigners to the Indian Lands.

 

[Nilu Pule]

23% should have gotten 100% because you know better.

Babe, you should have gotten the whole planet earth and even the entire universe.

We need All of India.

It is already yours.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

people who can not prove their identity of being Indian are treated as foreigners...Now if these people are crossing illegally to India, they should be aware about consequences...

By *people*, you mean *muzzies*..

 

[M.Bison]

Babe, you should have gotten the whole planet earth and even the entire universe.

We dont need the whole planet. Only India.

It is already yours.

I know that but do you?

 

[Ritual]

Western Punjab had more fertile land. Sames goes for Eastern Bengal it had all the jute producing land. These are facts.

Pakistan can take in 100m and Bangladesh the rest.

Partition without population exchange was meaningless. I agree.

But everyone forgets how little industry Pakistan received after partition. It only had 7% of existing infrastructure I think.

You need more than that for a full population exchange. I don’t know about BD because that is quite high density already. But maybe you your govt should think about exchange Kashmir for a more limited population transfer.

We need All of India.

I think you must be realistic. Kashmir is naturally a part of Pakistan & Central Asia. Why would you want Assam, Kerela with whom Pak has nothing in common

 

[Nilu Pule]

But everyone forgets how little industry Pakistan received after partition. It only had 7% of existing infrastructure I think.

Are you serious? Was it the fault of Hindus that Muslims were less into the business sector.

I mean Muslim leaders blamed Hindus for lack of education and jobs in those times. Was it the fault of Hindus that Muslims shunned western education? Syed Ahmed Khan spoke on this issue.
Present-day Muslims of India are no different. Have loads of kids. Send them to madrassas. And then blame Hindus for their pathetic condition.

During partition, you kicked out all those Hindu Gujaratis, Sindhis and Marwadis businessmen who developed Karachi.

Muslims should have thought of such issues before creating a separate country?

 

[Ritual]

Are you serious? Was it the fault of Hindus that Muslims were less into the business sector.

I mean Muslim leaders blamed Hindus for lack of education and jobs in those times. Was it the fault of Hindus that Muslims shunned western education? Syed Ahmed Khan spoke on this issue.
Present-day Muslims of India are no different. Have loads of kids. Send them to madrassas. And then blame Hindus for their pathetic condition.

During partition, you kicked out all those Hindu Gujaratis, Sindhis and Marwadis businessmen who developed Karachi.

Muslims should have thought of such issues before creating a separate country?

Nonsense, the established urban cities were in the northern cow belt plains. The area of Pakistan was not invested in till the later years of British rule. Just look at the built up areas of Delhi, Lucknow etc they were invested in much more than Punjab or East Bengal. Even the supposed Islamic empires focused on the northern plains rather than modern day Pakistan.

Anyway in regards to population exchange that still stands that to incorporate more Indian Muslims then there should have been more land at partition.

 

[Nilu Pule]

Nonsense, the established urban cities were in the northern cow belt plains. The area of Pakistan was not invested in till the later years of British rule. Just look at the built up areas of Delhi, Lucknow etc they were invested in much more than Punjab or East Bengal. Even the supposed Islamic empires focused on the northern plains rather than modern day Pakistan.

Anyway in regards to population exchange that still stands that to incorporate more Indian Muslims then there should have been more land at partition.

You are getting history all wrong.
The British started ignoring and punishing Northern plains after 1857 revolts. 1857 revolt was most intense in cow belt.

Punjab and Sindh region were loyal hence they never faced such hardship.

What do you suggest needs to happen now?

 

[Ritual]

Punjab and Sindh region were loyal hence they never faced such hardship

What do you suggest needs to happen now?

A partial population transfer in exchange for Kashmir. If the Hindus think this through it would make the most sense for the long term

 

[Bilal9]

How strange it is that we sow hate based on the forced labels we impose upon each other...

I am consciously avoiding asking desi people their name or religion these days, so I don't make pre-suppositions...and even after I find out their name, not to make judgment calls based on those characteristics.

Try it - you might see that your world change, right in front of your very eyes.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Congress said partition was not a population exchange, so Pakistan got less land. Really you should have done a full population exchange, but for that Kashmir needs to be given to Pakistan and something to Bangladesh, then fully exchange religious groups.

Pakistan got 27% of land for 25% of muslim population. How is this not equal land? Moreover, Pakistan got most fertile lands in India which actually means Pakistan got more than its share. Even after this, west Pakistan expelled Hindus and Sikhs. So, there is nothing wrong in doing population exchange.

But everyone forgets how little industry Pakistan received after partition. It only had 7% of existing infrastructure I think.

You need more than that for a full population exchange. I don’t know about BD because that is quite high density already. But maybe you your govt should think about exchange Kashmir for a more limited population transfer.

These industries were made by Hindus using their intelligence, business skills and wisdom. How does it belong to pakistan? It was not British creation to be divided proportionally. Muslims did not build industry and hence they did not get any.

The area of Pakistan and Bangladesh combined is 1.1 million square kilometres whereas Indian land is just 3.1 million square kilometres. This was almost in the ratio of muslim-hindu population. When Hindus were expelled from Pakistan, why should Muslims be allowed in India? The industrial base has nothing to do with

Nonsense, the established urban cities were in the northern cow belt plains. The area of Pakistan was not invested in till the later years of British rule. Just look at the built up areas of Delhi, Lucknow etc they were invested in much more than Punjab or East Bengal. Even the supposed Islamic empires focused on the northern plains rather than modern day Pakistan.

Anyway in regards to population exchange that still stands that to incorporate more Indian Muslims then there should have been more land at partition.

There was land more than the proportion of muslim population. Why should there be even more land?

The urban areas were developed by Hindus using their enterprising skills. It was never developed by British. India got more industry solely because hindus were the ones doing business while muslims were interested in going to Madrassa. Secondly, British did not invest in areas of North India. They invested only in areas of trade or politica power. Cities like Mumbai, Karachi, Kolkata, Dhaka etc were developed by British for trade. Areas in northern India, especially in Northern plains were almost completely undeveloped. Areas in Pakistan was developed by British with more importance than Norther India to help fight wars in Afghanistan and Iran while North India was given nothing (except for Delhi which was the capital)

 

[Ritual]

Pakistan got 27% of land for 25% of muslim population. How is this not equal land? Moreover, Pakistan got most fertile lands in India which actually means Pakistan got more than its share. Even after this, west Pakistan expelled Hindus and Sikhs. So, there is nothing wrong in doing population exchange.


These industries were made by Hindus using their intelligence, business skills and wisdom. How does it belong to pakistan? It was not British creation to be divided proportionally. Muslims did not build industry and hence they did not get any.

The area of Pakistan and Bangladesh combined is 1.1 million square kilometres whereas Indian land is just 3.1 million square kilometres. This was almost in the ratio of muslim-hindu population. When Hindus were expelled from Pakistan, why should Muslims be allowed in India? The industrial base has nothing to do with


There was land more than the proportion of muslim population. Why should there be even more land?

The urban areas were developed by Hindus using their enterprising skills. It was never developed by British. India got more industry solely because hindus were the ones doing business while muslims were interested in going to Madrassa. Secondly, British did not invest in areas of North India. They invested only in areas of trade or politica power. Cities like Mumbai, Karachi, Kolkata, Dhaka etc were developed by British for trade. Areas in northern India, especially in Northern plains were almost completely undeveloped. Areas in Pakistan was developed by British with more importance than Norther India to help fight wars in Afghanistan and Iran while North India was given nothing (except for Delhi which was the capital)

Land that Pakistan got was mountainous and so hardly could accomodate a full population transfer. It is not possible to house Indian Muslims in Baloch mountains, rather we need more suitable terrain.

Secondly Hindus were not ‘expelled’ from Pakistan. That is just complete fake news, in fact Pakistan accepted scores of Muslim refugees that were massacred out of central Punjab because Congress distributed weapons to its groups and took them from Muslims (1m more than went the other way).

What should have happened was an orderly population exchange from day one. Pakistan needed at least Kashmir to house the 30m Indian Muslims, if it was to be done properly.

 

[Smarana Mitra]

Land that Pakistan got was mountainous and so hardly could accomodate a full population transfer. It is not possible to house Indian Muslims in Baloch mountains, rather we need more suitable terrain.

Secondly Hindus were not ‘expelled’ from Pakistan. That is just complete fake news, in fact Pakistan accepted scores of Muslim refugees that were massacred out of central Punjab because Congress distributed weapons to its groups and took them from Muslims (1m more than went the other way).

What should have happened was an orderly population exchange from day one. Pakistan needed at least Kashmir to house the 30m Indian Muslims, if it was to be done properly.

Kashmir is a small land. It can't house 30 million people. Moreover, India also gave away Sindh kingdoms of hindus which had hindu majority like Umerkot. It is compensated for Kashmir.

Secondly, Indian terrain has mountain, desert, forest etc too. So, one can't simply say that Pakistan should only get plain land. If India can keep its population in different terrain, so can Pakistan

 

[SIPRA]

Land that Pakistan got was mountainous and so hardly could accomodate a full population transfer. It is not possible to house Indian Muslims in Baloch mountains, rather we need more suitable terrain.

Secondly Hindus were not ‘expelled’ from Pakistan. That is just complete fake news, in fact Pakistan accepted scores of Muslim refugees that were massacred out of central Punjab because Congress distributed weapons to its groups and took them from Muslims (1m more than went the other way).

What should have happened was an orderly population exchange from day one. Pakistan needed at least Kashmir to house the 30m Indian Muslims, if it was to be done properly.

You appear to be highly mistaken. India and Pakistan didn't come into being, on the principle of transfer of population. Period.

Now, if this ridiculous model is imposed, as some Sanghis and Bhakts are suggesting; it would essentially lead to a civil war, at the subcontinent level, whose results and consequences would be disastrous.

 

[unbiasedopinion]

Land that Pakistan got was mountainous and so hardly could accomodate a full population transfer. It is not possible to house Indian Muslims in Baloch mountains, rather we need more suitable terrain.

Secondly Hindus were not ‘expelled’ from Pakistan. That is just complete fake news, in fact Pakistan accepted scores of Muslim refugees that were massacred out of central Punjab because Congress distributed weapons to its groups and took them from Muslims (1m more than went the other way).

What should have happened was an orderly population exchange from day one. Pakistan needed at least Kashmir to house the 30m Indian Muslims, if it was to be done properly.

Arrey bhai, even after what you got you guys still not able to build dams in those areas. Can you share the status of mangla dam and other dams btw? Show me your current industrial development progress etc? In fact if you look at even divided India history during early Pakistan era, you were more open and accepted society. It is during mid 70s-80s during Zia's rule you started going backward by focusing more of non-development activities thus leaving the path development all together. There are many posts by learned posters in this forum too. You can do the search.
There are always hundreds of reasons to blame others for failure but only one reason to be successful that is hard work. I am pretty sure even if there was division of India as per your likings you would stiill be crying.