Making and Breaking of British India

[Whirling_dervesh]

And the self immolation begins

 

[Neemo neemo]

Just a fake propaganda !

I call it Identity Crisis.

 

[Shotgunner51]

British India - Map

Successor states

Bangladesh

India

Myanmar

Pakistan

Singapore

Yemen

Please refer to British Raj - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which makes it quitte explcit and clear.

British Indian Empire was partitioned into five sovereign dominion states, the Union of India (later the Republic of India) and the Dominion of Pakistan (later the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the eastern half of which, still later, became the People's Republic of Bangladesh), Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), and Sikkim. At the inception of the Raj in 1858, Lower Burma was already a part of British India; Upper Burma was added in 1886, and the resulting union, Burma, was administered as an autonomous province until 1937, when it became a separate British colony, gaining its own independence in 1948 as British Mayanmar Burma.

Yo


This is typical fabrication that goes on. Your example is incorrect. Tzarist Russian pre existed USSR and it insituted by revolution led by Russians to USSR. British India on the other hand was made by a far away colonizer who left in 1947. It was not like Indians made British India and then reverted back to just India.

As far as British Indian cultures they are flourishing in their regional style in all successor states of British India as listed in previous post.

This is intended for the consumption by Pakistani's here. I have no interest in trying explain this to any Indians here.

Thanks for sharing ...

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Just like to point out everything I said has links and is based on facts including the map I drew of Sikh Punjab Empire and Sindh Talpur. Either get proof to refute the points raised or please avoid thread. If I made any factuel error I will if proven so amend it. You are more then welcome to approach the Indian TTA's here who then can ask for any facts not established to be amended.

I confirm I will remedy any facts proven to be untrue. Other then that stop littering this thread with one liners. If you have valid argument then put it forth if you don't don't bother doing drive by shooting.

 

[gubbi]

That guy's logic is not upto the mark.

British came 300 years ago, nation states are formed in 20th century, before that Mughal India,Maurya India, Bharat described in old Hindu scriptures thousands of years ago is the actual India.

Of course. And the OP has no logic whatsoever.
Anywho, I am really interested in knowing how the passport system worked in those days. Did those individual princely states have their own identification documents or they had some uniform standard based on the paid tax documents (used as id papers) throughout the land? Just curious.

Just like to point out everything I said has links and is based on facts including the map I drew of Sikh Punjab Empire and Sindh Talpur. Either get proof to refute the points raised or please avoid thread. If I made any factuel error I will if proven so amend it. You are more then welcome to approach the Indian TTA's here who then can ask for any facts not established to be amended.

I confirm I will remedy any facts proven to be untrue. Other then that stop littering this thread with one liners. If you have valid argument then put it forth if you don't don't bother doing drive by shooting.

"Dominion of Pakistan" was not part of British India. No geographical/physical entity called "Pakistan" existed before 14th Aug 1947. Your logic is thus flawed. But hey, as fairy tales go...anything to soothe your hearts!!

 

[Whirling_dervesh]

Your reasoning is flawed.
The "Dominion of Pakistan" came into being on 14th Aug 1947, and while it existed, the Queen was still the sovereign head of state. It was replaced in 1956 by the Islamic republic of Pakistan. There was nothing called "Pakistan" before that, except an idea on pieces of paper yet to be put into practice. So British India meant the entire subcontinent, including the princely states which accepted British supremacy in the subcontinent.

Foreign occupation has no international legal justification especially over ancient civilisations that have existed over 5000 years old except in the case of 'India' who have happily adopted a redolent and disparaging colonial name given by its colonial masters. Pakistan is an acronym for 5 ancient states punjab, afghania,kashmira,Sindhu,baluch and have always been there with indigenous names.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Just want to clarify that the only justification for British India as in

was British greed and profit. Think about this. A private company made British India for profit ? That is the justification for British India. At least our grandparents choose to be in Pakistan. Our great great grreat grandparents were forced and killed into joing their "profit and loss" company British India.

East India Company - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Of course. And the OP has no logic whatsoever.
Anywho, I am really interested in knowing how the passport system worked in those days. Did those individual princely states have their own identification documents or they had some uniform standard based on the paid tax documents (used as id papers) throughout the land? Just curious.


"Dominion of Pakistan" was not part of British India. No geographical/physical entity called "Pakistan" existed before 14th Aug 1947. Your logic is thus flawed. But hey, as fairy tales go...anything to soothe your hearts!!

No Indian Republic existed before 1947 either. Before 1947 we had

out which were created

Dominion of India

Dominion of Pakistan

British rule in Burma

Colony of Aden

Straits Settlements

British Raj - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Levina]

Statement 1:

I want Pakistani's to go back to 1840.

Great!!!
So does that mean present day Pakistan's history began at 1840?

Statement 2:

My dad was born in 1935. At about 30 years per generation gap that mean my grandad was born around 1900, my great grandad about 1870 and my great great grandad about 1840.

If that's the age gap you've considered then your calculations are wrong. Now do your maths and find out the mistake.

Since statement 1 and statement 2 (on the basis of which a 400 words long theory was constructed) 're wrong and ergo members can very safely ignore it.