Pakistanis refuse to call it “partition”. In 1947 it was independence or separation

[UnitedPak]

Pakistanis refuse to call it “partition”. In 1947 it was independence or separation

“Pakistan” as it existed 5000 years ago. Today Many call it the “Indus Valley Civilization“. They also called it Meluhha and other names. However China 5000 Yers ago is not called “The Yangtze Civilizatoin” and Egypt is not called “The Nile Civilization” and India is not called “The Gangetic Valley Civilization”.

How could there be a “partition” when “Pakistan” has been in existance from the dawn of history, 5000 years ago as the Indus Valley Civilization”. Even before that, 150,000 years ago Pakistanis roamed the Soan River valley…where there was ice everywhere else.

THE THESIS: “There was no ‘partition’.”

Read the rest here: Link:
Pakistanis refuse to call it “partition”. In 1947 it was independence or separation « Green Views-Rupee News: Moin Ansari’s Disquisitions and Fulminations

 

[EagleEyes]

Partition may be not, but independence may be!

 

[OKtoBerFeSt]

Isn't "Partition" and "Separation" more or less the same thing?

 

[UnitedPak]

Isn't "Partition" and "Separation" more or less the same thing?

Partition implies that the regions were always together. I usually call it Independence.

The article isnt mine btw, but I believe it makes some good points. Pakistan gained independence in 1947, and Indians use this date to imply that Pakistanis started existing from this point on. As to say that we didnt have any ancestors.

 

[mujahideen]

Partition implies that the regions were always together. I usually call it Independence.

The article isnt mine btw, but I believe it makes some good points. Pakistan gained independence in 1947, and Indians use this date to imply that Pakistanis started existing from this point on. As to say that we didnt have any ancestors.

Well both sides have good arguments. What our argument is that we the Muslims, now I am not talking about Pakistan were always a seperate nation, as the Two Nation Theory states. Islam and Hinduism aren't just religions they are our way of life. But in my opinion August 14, 1947 was the day when the Muslims actually got a seperate country of their own, so it depends which way you want to look at it.

 

[UnitedPak]

Well both sides have good arguments. What our argument is that we the Muslims, now I am not talking about Pakistan were always a seperate nation, as the Two Nation Theory states. Islam and Hinduism aren't just religions they are our way of life. But in my opinion August 14, 1947 was the day when the Muslims actually got a seperate country of their own, so it depends which way you want to look at it.

What would you consider Mughal rule?

 

[mujahideen]

What would you consider Mughal rule?

Honestly I dont know. We could call it Mughal India an Islamic state, but then again we can call it a secular state. The Mughal rulers might of been Muslim, but in order to bring some religious harmony into their rule, they married Hindus, so I really dont know. What would you call it?

 

[UnitedPak]

Honestly I dont know. We could call it Mughal India an Islamic state, but then again we can call it a secular state. The Mughal rulers might of been Muslim, but in order to bring some religious harmony into their rule, they married Hindus, so I really dont know. What would you call it?

It was "Mughal Empire" which started in the North Pakistan/East Afghanistan region and spread into most of India, mainly North India and Bangladesh. A lot of South India was not included, and there was a rival Hindu empire in India during some of the era too. Most importantly it was a Muslim empire and it was influenced entirely by Islam.
I dont see how you can associate it with India only.

 

[solid snake]

Who cares what passport people held at different time periods. The Pharoh is called an Egyptian, the Jews are called Israelites. In the same way Sparta was a city state, part of the Roman empire yet self governing. Spartans were still Greeks.

The Indus Valley people were Pakistanis and the people living around that area have a claim to it. India has little to no claim over any historic place in Pakistan.

 

[Flintlock]

Honestly I dont know. We could call it Mughal India an Islamic state, but then again we can call it a secular state. The Mughal rulers might of been Muslim, but in order to bring some religious harmony into their rule, they married Hindus, so I really dont know. What would you call it?

They were not secular....

Oh and no...they didn't marry Hindus to bring religious harmony. They did it for political purposes.

They were muslims through and through, just that they didn't practice your interpretation of it.

(Of course, I'm disregarding exceptions like Akbar)

Now from a historians perspective, it was imperial empire. For both modern India and Pakistan, they were foreigners. Basically central asians who adopted Persian language and culture.

 

[mujahideen]

They were not secular....

Oh and no...they didn't marry Hindus to bring religious harmony. They did it for political purposes.

They were muslims through and through, just that they didn't practice your interpretation of it.

You are totally right. This is what I meant to say, but I guess I wrote it wrong. Whatever they did was for political purposes.