Pakistan lauds UN for taking down “one-sided” photo exhibition by Bangladesh on 1971 events

[El Sidd]

There was no mass rebellion with insurgency until the tanks rolled in on March 26 1971.

And not to forget the drama that was going on regarding power transition. Anyway, you are fed you pro establishment version and you will not see it.

The irony is, some of you guys don't see it even after seeing how Imran Khan was removed from the Government.

Therefore, any further word I type to you is going to yield no value.

This ain't some ancient history that one can rewrite it to one's own whim. It's taught as a political science subject in Pakistan.

I asked a simple question as to why the rebellion against the State? Whatever political issues were at the time were of governance not state doctrine.

For all the progressive political wisdom existed in Bengal, saw its peak with the culmination of the Muslim League and crowned with the Pakistan resolution. Bangladesh has no state doctrine or political reason to exist as a nation of this world.

 

[ThunderCat]

President Yahya Khan and Bhutto unilaterally sent troops to the east to kill unarmed people and teach Bengalis a good lesson.

Do you think Mujib should apologize?


Mujib always uttered, "I will not be held responsible for breaking Pakistan".

He was inside a jail in 1971. So, why blame him? It is the other two who were responsible for breaking Pakistan. However, after a long 52 years, I personally do not regret it.

Look what west Pakistan has become with Talibanic people growing there every day.

so an army of barely 35,000 are sent to kill off a population of more than 70 million? Or more like a fiction fed to you by your fascist government. The same government that does not allow questioning of this war while in Pakistan, claiming a fictitious genocide is not illegal although not endorsed either.

Watch the documentary if you are not afraid of seeing a more realistic insight https://tubitv.com/movies/661226/separation-of-east-pakistan-the-untold-story?start=true

 

[El Sidd]

It is interesting how Pakistan is heading towards a 1971 like situation again.
Pakistani people as a whole have suddenly realised what a leech their military establishment is, something we realised in 1965 when East Pakistan was left defenceless.

Die hard establishment supporters are now identified by Pakistanis as "faujeets", a term which is roughly equivalent to 'razakars".

A fair comparison would be if Tiger Force becomes Mukti Bahani. As far as military is concerned, Bangladesh was ruled by the remnants of Pakistan Army for half her existence. Most of Bangladesh's institutions owe their existence to the military.

The Razakars or the East Pakistani Nationalists who have since faced a systematic genocide and wave upon wave of state persecution, are still considered heroes in Pakistan.

 

[ThunderCat]

Except we're not forcing any language onto the Baloch people or preventing them from practicing their culture. On the contrary, ethnic minorities in Bangladesh face suppression by Bengali fascists. The same fascists behind the 1971 war. As another poster in this forum mentioned the delusion of Bengali nationalists that Bangladesh is "homogeneous."

@Dr.Nick Riviera , I was referring to your comments in my previous post:

"That's the thing with braindead nationalistic bongos - they refuse to acknowledge that Bangladesh is a heteregenous nation but to them everyone in BD is Bengalee. Take for example the Ahsan manzil family - they have been in Dhaka for centuries and are part of the dhakayite ethno cultural slash ethno linguistic group who speak dhakaiya Urdu but they had to identify as bengalee since 1971. There are many others. Bengalism is the biggest joke in South Asia. The whole world laughs at them."

Note: Urdu is ingeniously and alternatively known as Lashkari.

 

[leonblack08]

This ain't some ancient history that one can rewrite it to one's own whim. It's taught as a political science subject in Pakistan.

I asked a simple question as to why the rebellion against the State? Whatever political issues were at the time were of governance not state doctrine.

For all the progressive political wisdom existed in Bengal, saw its peak with the culmination of the Muslim League and crowned with the Pakistan resolution. Bangladesh has no state doctrine or political reason to exist as a nation of this world.

Statehood could no longer exist after a military action which saw killing of civilians in large numbers. There was already escalated tension prior to that with the long dragged saga of power not being transferred to a democratically elected government. After Operation Searchlight it was a point of no return. Riots turned into mass armed rebellion demanding independence, joined in by emotionally charged Bengali military officers and soldiers.

The entire situation could have been resolved with discussion and by doing the right thing of non-interference by the military into the democratic process. Both wings of Pakistan would have still remained intact.

With regards to your final comment - Not sure what you are talking about. Bengal had always enjoyed a statehood throughout history. From Sena, Pala dynasties prior to Islam to Bengal Sultanate and eventually Mughal Bengal Subah. Did you know the Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy (United Pakistan's 5th PM) was a strong advocate for the United Bengal movement? There was an united Bengal movement prior to 1947 partition. The only reason it didn't work out was because Hindu leaders didn't want to be under a muslim majority region. Had it been successful, there would have been 3 different countries in 1947.

 

[El Sidd]

Statehood could no longer exist after a military action which saw killing of civilians in large numbers. There was already escalated tension prior to that with the long dragged saga of power not being transferred to a democratically elected government. After Operation Searchlight it was a point of no return. Riots turned into mass armed rebellion demanding independence, joined in by emotionally charged Bengali military officers and soldiers.

The entire situation could have been resolved with discussion and by doing the right thing of non-interference by the military into the democratic process. Both wings of Pakistan would have still remained intact.

With regards to your final comment - Not sure what you are talking about. Bengal had always enjoyed a statehood throughout history. From Sena, Pala dynasties prior to Islam to Bengal Sultanate and eventually Mughal Bengal Subah. Did you know the Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy (United Pakistan's 5th PM) was a strong advocate for the United Bengal movement? There was an united Bengal movement prior to 1947 partition. The only reason it didn't work out was because Hindu leaders didn't want to be under a muslim majority region. Had it been successful, there would have been 3 different countries in 1947.

The instigated riots were handled poorly by Operation Searchlight. However, rebellion of the masses can only mean that Bengalis were never sincere to the Pakistan movement. The Bengali elite saw it as means to a self serving end.

Statehood could no longer exist after a military action which saw killing of civilians in large numbers. There was already escalated tension prior to that with the long dragged saga of power not being transferred to a democratically elected government. After Operation Searchlight it was a point of no return. Riots turned into mass armed rebellion demanding independence, joined in by emotionally charged Bengali military officers and soldiers.

The entire situation could have been resolved with discussion and by doing the right thing of non-interference by the military into the democratic process. Both wings of Pakistan would have still remained intact.

With regards to your final comment - Not sure what you are talking about. Bengal had always enjoyed a statehood throughout history. From Sena, Pala dynasties prior to Islam to Bengal Sultanate and eventually Mughal Bengal Subah. Did you know the Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy (United Pakistan's 5th PM) was a strong advocate for the United Bengal movement? There was an united Bengal movement prior to 1947 partition. The only reason it didn't work out was because Hindu leaders didn't want to be under a muslim majority region. Had it been successful, there would have been 3 different countries in 1947.

Bangladesh has absolutely nothing to do with Bengali sultanate nor Bengali identity less for Lahore Resolution '40.

 

[leonblack08]

The instigated riots were handled poorly by Operation Searchlight. However, rebellion of the masses can only mean that Bengalis were never sincere to the Pakistan movement. The Bengali elite saw it as means to a self serving end.

Bangladesh has absolutely nothing to do with Bengali sultanate nor Bengali identity less for Lahore Resolution '40.

It's not as black and white. Bengalis were among those leading the Pakistan movement prior to partition. The partition of India would not have taken place if Bengalis with such large population did not push for it.

Since 1947, you also have to take other factors into consideration to understand why people took up arms. I am just briefly going to list some -

1. The language issue in 1952.
2. The perceived lack of development in the East compared to the export earnings it was generating and compared to the development happening in the West.
3. 1965 war - leaving East Pakistan defenceless. Soldiers of East Bengal Regiment were fighting to save Lahore, and yet EP was left defenceless. This eventually led for one of the demands of the famous/infamous 6-points by Mujib, which called for establishment of Pakistan Naval HQ in EP.
4. The 1970 cyclone - the devastation it caused and the perceived lack of effort by the Central government in providing assistance, from the perspective of general populace.
5. Significant Hindu Minority in EP, some of who had been sympathetic to India and actively following RAWs directive. To note - at the time of partition Hindu Bengalis were generally well off and more educated and in position of authority, courtesy of them being more obedient to the Brits during colonial era. Post-partition they were in position of influence through media and academia. The military rulers in WP just made it easier for any subvertive agents to instigate the masses and influence thinking of the masses.
6. Communism - this was cold war. Communists were ideologically not aligned to Pakistan. The fact that Soviets intervened and kept US 13th fleet away shows that they were also very much active in the situation. However, it is often not much talked about.
7. Opportunists among Bengal Elites who saw separation as a means to enrich themselves.
8. Military Generals and their frequent meddling in governance.
9. Racism - hate it or deny it - it existed and still exists to date.

Now add a brain dead operation Search light to the mix and you get mass uprising.

The complex situation that developed in EP by 1970 needed finnese and cool headed diplomacy with compromise from both sides. Not brute force.

Mujib was willing to compromise on many grounds, but that needed reciprocation from the other side, which we didn't get courtesy of Bhutto and Yahya. The fact that post 1971 he went to Lahore to reconcile further proves that he didn't want a split up Pakistan. He didn't need to do any of that. He could have simply assimilated into Soviet Bloc.

And I personally believe that is what got him killed in 1975 by a combined RAW/KGB move. Contrary to current Sheikh Hasina's BAL govt. narrative that pro-Pakistan officers killed him. It does not make any sense whatsoever, because he was on track to mend relations with Pakistan and rest of the Islamic world, who at the time was in US camp. Only parties that could have been hurt by such move are Indians and the Soviets. Anyway, this is a discussion for another day.

 

[El Sidd]

Since 1947, you also have to take other factors into consideration to understand why people took up arms. I am just briefly going to list some -

None of these are reason for rebellion against the state doctrine apart from what i mentioned and you repeated.

I think it's time for your ambassador to go home on a leave.

 

[leonblack08]

None of these are reason for rebellion against the state doctrine apart from what i mentioned and you repeated.

I think it's time for your ambassador to go home on a leave.

It just shows you lack comprehension and are parroting what you have been fed without putting in your own thoughts to the mix.

 

[ThunderCat]

Statehood could no longer exist after a military action which saw killing of civilians in large numbers.

Which was a legitimate response to the barbaric behavior of Bengali mobs killing innocent including their own people. And it should be done again should such savagery arise.

Without acknowledgement for the crimes by Bengali mobs, Pakistan has nothing to apologise for.

 

[bluesky]

so an army of barely 35,000 are sent to kill off a population of more than 70 million? Or more like a fiction fed to you by your fascist government. The same government that does not allow questioning of this war while in Pakistan, claiming a fictitious genocide is not illegal although not endorsed either.

Watch the documentary if you are not afraid of seeing a more realistic insight https://tubitv.com/movies/661226/separation-of-east-pakistan-the-untold-story?start=true

And east Pakistan had no military forces in 1971 though now it has. So, PA troops attacked and killed civilians. PA troops surrounded Razarbag Police HQ but the Police Force there fought for 48 hours and 700 of them were killed. Police had .303 rifles fighting against machine guns.

It was the same with the Ansar groups here and there. Many were killed by brave PA troops who attacked with heavy weapons. Yes, Nata and Kala Bengalis were/ are cowards.

Bengali troops of PA were killed point-blank inside military camps. Those who survived came out of the camps and formed the main core of FF together with Police, East Pakistan Rifles, and Ansars.

No wonder, American Senate is now praising BD for fighting a successful economic war after 1971. Our rival lost its face and lost the jute money forever.

 

[Tom-tom]

It's not as black and white. Bengalis were among those leading the Pakistan movement prior to partition. The partition of India would not have taken place if Bengalis with such large population did not push for it.

Since 1947, you also have to take other factors into consideration to understand why people took up arms. I am just briefly going to list some -

1. The language issue in 1952.
2. The perceived lack of development in the East compared to the export earnings it was generating and compared to the development happening in the West.
3. 1965 war - leaving East Pakistan defenceless. Soldiers of East Bengal Regiment were fighting to save Lahore, and yet EP was left defenceless. This eventually led for one of the demands of the famous/infamous 6-points by Mujib, which called for establishment of Pakistan Naval HQ in EP.
4. The 1970 cyclone - the devastation it caused and the perceived lack of effort by the Central government in providing assistance, from the perspective of general populace.
5. Significant Hindu Minority in EP, some of who had been sympathetic to India and actively following RAWs directive. To note - at the time of partition Hindu Bengalis were generally well off and more educated and in position of authority, courtesy of them being more obedient to the Brits during colonial era. Post-partition they were in position of influence through media and academia. The military rulers in WP just made it easier for any subvertive agents to instigate the masses and influence thinking of the masses.
6. Communism - this was cold war. Communists were ideologically not aligned to Pakistan. The fact that Soviets intervened and kept US 13th fleet away shows that they were also very much active in the situation. However, it is often not much talked about.
7. Opportunists among Bengal Elites who saw separation as a means to enrich themselves.
8. Military Generals and their frequent meddling in governance.
9. Racism - hate it or deny it - it existed and still exists to date.

Now add a brain dead operation Search light to the mix and you get mass uprising.

The complex situation that developed in EP by 1970 needed finnese and cool headed diplomacy with compromise from both sides. Not brute force.

Mujib was willing to compromise on many grounds, but that needed reciprocation from the other side, which we didn't get courtesy of Bhutto and Yahya. The fact that post 1971 he went to Lahore to reconcile further proves that he didn't want a split up Pakistan. He didn't need to do any of that. He could have simply assimilated into Soviet Bloc.

And I personally believe that is what got him killed in 1975 by a combined RAW/KGB move. Contrary to current Sheikh Hasina's BAL govt. narrative that pro-Pakistan officers killed him. It does not make any sense whatsoever, because he was on track to mend relations with Pakistan and rest of the Islamic world, who at the time was in US camp. Only parties that could have been hurt by such move are Indians and the Soviets. Anyway, this is a discussion for another day.

So a war gets initiated full blown, whilst you another part of your country very vulnerable open to be attacked invaded?

Also the qu'ran has fewer criteria, that actually allows for full blown civil rebellion.

None of these are reason for rebellion against the state doctrine apart from what i mentioned and you repeated.

I think it's time for your ambassador to go home on a leave.

 

[mangochutney]

There obsessed by us .
We don’t give a flying **** about no Indian no Bangladeshis , just leave us Pakistanis alone

We just don’t want to know and have no interest in Bangladesh but you guys are always here begging for attention like your owners keep begging for an apology
Man it’s been 50 years get the hint and **** off no shit is given we have more pressing concerns like how much toilet rolls to buy than what a Bangladeshi wants .

You guys have gone Indian so go suck there impotent 2 inch cocks and praise each other on your own forums and stop wasting our bandwidth

We just don’t care - you don’t like us , Indians don’t like us we don’t give a **** we don’t like none of you jungle bunnies either but don’t go around congregating on your shitty forums begging for likes .

 

[hatehs]

So if a non-Muslim is getting executed due to his religion, it is fine...But if Muslims are being impacted, then the whole Muslim world should be awakened to provide justice...

Hindus happily gloss over the murder and genocide of Bihari and West Pakistani Muslims they instigated by arming and supporting Mukti but want everyone to join in their screaming and moaning about the deaths of fifth columnist collaborator rats, inspired by their loyalty to Hindu India. It's a two way street.

 

[Erieye]

Except we're not forcing any language onto the Baloch people or preventing them from practicing their culture. On the contrary, ethnic minorities in Bangladesh face suppression by Bengali fascists. The same fascists behind the 1971 war. As another poster in this forum mentioned the delusion of Bengali nationalists that Bangladesh is "homogeneous."

The "bringing in foreign currency" has been challenged and refuted as before:

"The second move in the game was to build up an equally fictitious image of a Bengal overflowing with milk and honey which had been delivered over to Pakistan. The so-called Bengali scholars claimed to discover almost every day more and more evidence of a rich cultural heritage in Bengal's past now exposed to risk. The fact that the province had not yet recovered from the devastating famine of 1943 and the ravages of the Second World War was conveniently overlooked. Nor did anybody care to draw. attention to the recurring cycle of famines and shortages which has been a constant in Bengal's history. Only about 43 years before the 1943 famine there had been at the turn of the century a terrible famine of the same kind which had taken a heavy toll of human life. Stories of similar food shortages at twenty-five or fifty year intervals form the staple of Bengal's literature. But the illiterate public in Bengal have a short memory and are apt to forget inconvenient truths.

They love day-dreaming. Oblivious to the picture of this barrenness and starvation the image they love to cherish of Bengal is that of an inexhaustible granary where no one goes hungry"... No one could deny either openly or secretly that Bengal overwhelmed with a large population needed foreign capital for development since she had no capital herself. On the other hand the presence of outsiders who seemed to possess both money and skill was keenly resented. To rationalise the resentment they created the myth that the outsiders were not really helping in the development of her resources but fleecing Bengal. There had existed they maintained back in the dim past of Sonar Bangla a Golden period when the country lacked nothing. The outsiders had eaten her resources away reduced her to destitution and poverty and degraded her to her present position. The myth took hold on the imagination of the public.

In their lucid moments of course they remembered how relentless the realities around them were. But the natural bent of their minds towards romanticism and emotionalism gave rise to puerile fancies without the slightest foundation in fact about the wealth and resources of the motherland. The Indian conspirators kept fanning this puerilism taking advantage of the inevitable frictions which the advent of foreign capital produces in any society." (Dr Syed Sajjad Hussain The Wastes of Time: Reflections on the Decline and Fall of East Pakistan Pages 111 112 117)

every unstable country needs facism to get to a point of permanent secure stability.

facism would do pakistan some good. by facism i mean national socialism type.