Partition was a mistake

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

dear AM.
First you said that origin of a nation is the divisiveness of human nature and when i proved it otherwise you want prove that Pakistan was born out of sense of unity of sindhis, and others .

Actually you haven't shown me how a nation is not "divisiveness". India - whatever argument you want to make for it, common culture, philosophy, religion etc. - is divided from China - it is divided from the Arabs - it is divided form the Europeans.

Even the EU exists only because there is an economic benefit to such a union, not because of any "shared consciousness" or "sense of nationhood". The French, Germans, British, Spaniards all fiercely retain their "separate and distinct" identities and nations within the framework of the EU, and they are in turn "divided" from the Asian nations, the Arab nations and the American nations - each of whom are also fiercely independent and "divided" from the other.

Therefore I see nothing but divisiveness in nations, yet you choose to single out Pakistan for "divisiveness" - we have only done what others have, and staked out our own nation on the basis of a common nationhood and shared consciousness..

My reference to Pakistan being a "union of multiple peoples" was merely to use your own argument about "unity" in the EU and India, by pointing out that the same sort of "unity" exists in Pakistan as well, and to a far greater degree than in Europe, and equal if not greater than in India.

and this is blatant lie. Pakistan was not created as a union of Sindhis Punjabis, Baluchs and Pasthuns because millions of sindhis punjabis were massacred during partition . Pakistan is a clear example of divisiveness of human nature . it was created as an nation for few muslims who didnt want to live with ppl of other religions

Pakistan was indeed created as a Union of a majority of those Balochi, Pashtun, Sindhis and Punjabis who shared this common social consciousness and sense of nationhood (Punjab was divided so that those who didn't agree would not have to be part of this nation).

Why aren't Indians living with the Chinese? Why aren't the Europeans mingling with the Arabs? Every nation is divisive, your logic is flawed.

It is just because you see (erroneously) Pakistan as being part of some mythical "United India" that you cannot stand the idea that the people of Pakistan did not share the sense of nationhood that the people of Bharat did - that they chose their own nation, and now, for you, Pakistan and Pakistanis alone are divisive.

You bring up the massacres of millions - let us not forget that Indians were equally responsible for exhibiting hatred powerful enough to massacre women, children and entire families who chose to be part of Pakistan. This hatred existed in Indians and Pakistanis, it was not created by Jinnah, it was not perpetrated by Jinnah - this hatred, and the violence in my mind is proof without doubt that Pakistanis and Indians were two separate nations, and are two separate nations.

Such spontaneous hatred and violence would not have occurred were there a "shared social consciousness" or "shared nationhood".

So you support terrorism

" I am Wrong because others are wrong " nice argument

I do not support terrorism since I do not consider support for the insurgency targeted at Indian troops in disputed territory as terrorism. I do consider the targeting of civilians terrorism.

When the Americans and UN can call the actions of the US in Afghanistan and Latin America "terrorism", that is when I will accept that term as being applicable to Pakistan's actions in Kashmir.

Hindsight is always 20/20 - No one knew at the time how some of the insurgent groups would branch out into terrorism, or how flawed a policy of "insurgency" could be, so it was not considered a "wrong" at the time. For the record, I have already called it a flawed policy - every nation has them.

The reason these poor illiterate ppl were brainwashed in the name of religios jihad was beacuse they were used to spread terror to kill civilian ( like Kashmiri hindus ) and not to fight with an army . so it is a lie when u say that "that was never supported nor envisioned"
If Pakistan wanted to fight an army they would have used the army and fight a war .

Insurgents were trained to fight the Indian Army, but as with American efforts around the world as well, what was discovered was that insurgencies take on a life of their own.

As far as atrocities and blaming Pakistan - lets not get into this game of where we have to drag in references to Indian soldiers raping kashmiri women, murdering innocent Kashmiri women, children and men. Massacring groups of youths. Your Army's record as attested by various Kashmiri groups and international organizations is a blot on humanity.

That said, I wish to go down this road no further. And any reference on this or "Pakistan supporting the killing of Hindu villagers and civilians" will be deleted - regardless of who posts it.

First BR and few other forum dont represnt majority of India ..
secondly - you expect respect from the ppls you killed ? against whom you send mad dogs of jihad ?

And for you this forum does?

Stop being a hypocrite. You brought up the argument "look around this forum " to justify your argument of "Pakistan existing on enmity with a nation", and then when I point out far greater expressions of hatred on Indian forums, they are "not representative of India!"

Why should Pakistanis have respect for a nation that refuses to grant a peoples the right to choose their destiny, that schemed and plotted our nations dismemberment - through the Afghans, supporting the insurgency in Baluchistan and then through the Bengalis? Why should we have respect for a nation whose Army raped and murdered thousands of Kashmiris? Why should we have respect for a nation whose citizens exhibited so much hate towards Pakistan that they massacred millions, children and entire families, in 1947?

You see how this goes? Indians have no more claim on morality than Pakistanis, though you want to distort history to make your **** come out shining and smelling like roses.

But like I said earlier, I do not wish to initiate a flame war over the atrocities committed by the Indian Army, some outlined above, and your allegations. This discussion was going perfectly fine until this post of yours I am responding to, and your allegations of "Pakistan deliberately killing civilians through terrorism". It is material that has been covered countless times in countless flame wars on many forums.

So this will stop here.

Seriously Indians have accepted existence of Pakistan long back but Pakistanies have not accpeted India and thats why when Indians have moved on Pakistand still spends its resources and energy in fighting with India. your school curriculum clearly represents that ideology

I disagree, and so do millions of Pakistanis. The words and actions of your leaders post independence, the sentiments expressed by many Indians, your involvement with Afghanistan in trying to bring about a Pashtun insurrection, your involvement in dividing Pakistan in 1971 - it all points to a systematic policy of non-acceptance and subversion.

Yes its easy to become leader of smaller groups. there are millions of then around the world who scares a minority and spread secessionist feeling .
A leader is one who unites people . makes them see beyond these narrow identity or race , religion , caste or creed . who makes them see themselves as human sharing one value of humaity .



yes it was there .. he exploited it
no ideology is new .. it existed from the time humanity was born ..

Small is a relative word. Jinnah led millions, he captured the imagination of millions, and gave them the voice and platform they needed to achive their destiny.

Thank you for agreeing that the sentiment for "being separate" was there - because that validates my point that the people of Pakistan did not share a "social consciousness" with Indians, the people of Pakistan did not share a sense of "nationhood" with Indians, Pakistanis were not therefore, part of any "united India" in spirit, or in life.

And despite this, you would have them shackled to a nation they did not share a consciousness or nationhood with, and instead criticize the man and movement that allowed the to express that desire and achieve "nationhood" as they believed.

First you are chaging the context as I mentioned it as an example of extreme Idealism . secondly if I say why not united world ??

I have no issue with United World - you are the one insisting that only "partition was wrong", and Pakistan's independence alone was a mistake. If you go back and check my early posts, I argued why only pick Pakistan - say that its a shame and mistake that humanity is divided.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

My apologies Keyser, for posting after you closed, but I felt I had to respond before I went on my four day hiatus for finals.

 

[Keysersoze]

This thread will remain closed until AM can come back to moderate it.!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Back from Finals!

Went Great!

Back to the Topic.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

India is known as secular and Democratic country. And many friends in this forum from Pakistan also feel, Pakistan should also be a secular country because it was dream of Founder of Pakistan. But few people are betraying to founder of nation.

Whole situation has become so worst that, people are searching articles which says, no Pakistan is not a failed state.

So I will say, its Ok if there was a Partition, but Pakistan is not fulfilling dreams of its own founder.

You are making mockery of your own nation.

partition or at least some sorts of arrangement was needed so it was in my view right but the way the it was carried out & after that how the political management of the new state was handled went quiet wrong & as far as i know i might be wrong Allah knows best east & west Pakistan was suppose to be a social welfare Islamic state & not a secular one see every system has its own good be it a secular democracy , communism or for that matter an Islamic system has its own good . Terrorism or for that matter Imperialism are both bad no doubt but saying that any system other then a capitalist secular democracy is evil or bad is not correct either one must respect other system's & appreciate its good points be it communism or an Islamic one.

 

[gnabi]

Muslims in India are far better of than what is portrayed in Pakistan I invite you to visit India and see for yourself. They are doing good business. They have huge economic power. Only thing they lack is good political leadership as they always fight among themselves.

Do not feel offended if I say they do not see any noticeable gains by Pakistanis in 60 years which would develop affinity for them.

I agree with you one does get irritated if someone says Partition was a mistake but they should be ignored.

Yes I agree Muslims are far better in India as most of them get Martyred and straight away go to Heaven

 

[x_man]

Sorry for being a lazy arse...but can anyone please give the numbers or stats that how many Muslims were killed by Hindus in India VS how many Muslims have been killed by Muslim in Pakistan since independence?

I am definitely in favour of partition due to social and political reasons, but as far as killings are concerned, statistically, I assume that more Muslims are killed in Pakistan by fellow muslims since partition.( probably just last 3 to 4 years of Pakstans history will surpass all records in India )

 

[mujahideen]

Yes I agree Muslims are far better in India as most of them get Martyred and straight away go to Heaven

Lets all move to India. I am sure with my deeds I cant get into heaven, but if I am martyred I have a chance. So there is hope for me after all.

 

[Flintlock]

Sorry for being a lazy arse...but can anyone please give the numbers or stats that how many Muslims were killed by Hindus in India VS how many Muslims have been killed by Muslim in Pakistan since independence?

I am definitely in favour of partition due to social and political reasons, but as far as killings are concerned, statistically, I assume that more Muslims are killed in Pakistan by fellow muslims since partition.( probably just last 3 to 4 years of Pakstans history will surpass all records in India )

Lol...where's our in-house statistician?

 

[T-Rex]

Sorry for being a lazy arse...but can anyone please give the numbers or stats that how many Muslims were killed by Hindus in India VS how many Muslims have been killed by Muslim in Pakistan since independence?

I am definitely in favour of partition due to social and political reasons, but as far as killings are concerned, statistically, I assume that more Muslims are killed in Pakistan by fellow muslims since partition.( probably just last 3 to 4 years of Pakstans history will surpass all records in India )

Similarly more Indians have been killed by fellow Indians in the last fifty years. Of course it has to be that way, do you think foreigners are going to come and kill the people of a country ? So, this cannot be a valid point. The point is the way Muslims were burnt to death in Gujrat, that you will not see anywhere else in the subcontinent. That alone validates the partition in 1947.

 

[x_man]

Similarly more Indians have been killed by fellow Indians in the last fifty years. Of course it has to be that way, do you think foreigners are going to come and kill the people of a country ? So, this cannot be a valid point. The point is the way Muslims were burnt to death in Gujrat, that you will not see anywhere else in the subcontinent. That alone validates the partition in 1947.

WHAT !!!! Yeh, may be you are right...I would certainly prefer Pakistani killing Pakistanis in more numbers instead of somebody else killing us..

Any idea how many muslims were killed by muslims in last few years in Pakistan just by those sick paradise/virgin seeker suicide bombers ??? BTW Who needs outside attackers once we have these bombers

 

[gnabi]

WHAT !!!! Yeh, may be you are right...I would certainly prefer Pakistani killing Pakistanis in more numbers instead of somebody else killing us..

Any idea how many muslims were killed by muslims in last few years in Pakistan just by those sick paradise/virgin seeker suicide bombers ??? BTW Who needs outside attackers once we have these bombers

Are you sure all suicide bombers are Muslims and Pakistanis?
Any one positive identification
Brother lets wake up to the fact that who gains most out of an unstable Pakistan?
a. India
b. Israel
c. US
d. All of the above.
An easy enough answer.
What about the speculation that all suicide bombers are trained by Indians?

Wake up Muslims; Wake up Pakistanis

 

[salman nedian]

Similarly more Indians have been killed by fellow Indians in the last fifty years. Of course it has to be that way, do you think foreigners are going to come and kill the people of a country ? So, this cannot be a valid point. The point is the way Muslims were burnt to death in Gujrat, that you will not see anywhere else in the subcontinent. That alone validates the partition in 1947.

I fully agree with you bro!

I am happy that ‘2 Nation theory’ is shining.

Pakistan and Bangladesh Zindabad!

 

[Logic note]

Actually you haven't shown me how a nation is not "divisiveness". India - whatever argument you want to make for it, common culture, philosophy, religion etc. - is divided from China - it is divided from the Arabs - it is divided form the Europeans.

Even the EU exists only because there is an economic benefit to such a union, not because of any "shared consciousness" or "sense of nationhood". The French, Germans, British, Spaniards all fiercely retain their "separate and distinct" identities and nations within the framework of the EU, and they are in turn "divided" from the Asian nations, the Arab nations and the American nations - each of whom are also fiercely independent and "divided" from the other.

Therefore I see nothing but divisiveness in nations, yet you choose to single out Pakistan for "divisiveness" - we have only done what others have, and staked out our own nation on the basis of a common nationhood and shared consciousness..

My reference to Pakistan being a "union of multiple peoples" was merely to use your own argument about "unity" in the EU and India, by pointing out that the same sort of "unity" exists in Pakistan as well, and to a far greater degree than in Europe, and equal if not greater than in India.

First as I said clearly, Nation is a union of People of different Opinion, Faith and religions . the main reason nations were created from tribal and nomad past is our sense to unity. We made families then clan and this union progressed towards society and finally nations. so Nation signifies the progression of human unity and not the contrary .
Now has that progression or evolution stopped ? No.. evolution is natural and the perception shall be based on this trend of evolution and not the pessimistic assumption of future or momentary bitterness .
Culture is never stagnant . it has always changed or evoled and with this evolution our sense of understanding ourself has changed .. more we communicate better is our sense of unity .
We have made nations because of our sense of unity and this sense will keep on evolving and future is always optimistic then Past.Please see our human history .
We have travelled half distance .

Pakistan was indeed created as a Union of a majority of those Balochi, Pashtun, Sindhis and Punjabis who shared this common social consciousness and sense of nationhood (Punjab was divided so that those who didn't agree would not have to be part of this nation).

Why aren't Indians living with the Chinese? Why aren't the Europeans mingling with the Arabs? Every nation is divisive, your logic is flawed.

It is just because you see (erroneously) Pakistan as being part of some mythical "United India" that you cannot stand the idea that the people of Pakistan did not share the sense of nationhood that the people of Bharat did - that they chose their own nation, and now, for you, Pakistan and Pakistanis alone are divisive.

You bring up the massacres of millions - let us not forget that Indians were equally responsible for exhibiting hatred powerful enough to massacre women, children and entire families who chose to be part of Pakistan. This hatred existed in Indians and Pakistanis, it was not created by Jinnah, it was not perpetrated by Jinnah - this hatred, and the violence in my mind is proof without doubt that Pakistanis and Indians were two separate nations, and are two separate nations.

Such spontaneous hatred and violence would not have occurred were there a "shared social consciousness" or "shared nationhood".

Pakistan as an Idea , originated as sense of segregation from the Other which is contrary to sense of unity .
Every Idea has an underlying philosophy .. and if Nations has the philosophy of Unity Pakistan have this philosophy of segregation

Quote:
I do not support terrorism since I do not consider support for the insurgency targeted at Indian troops in disputed territory as terrorism. I do consider the targeting of civilians terrorism.

When the Americans and UN can call the actions of the US in Afghanistan and Latin America "terrorism", that is when I will accept that term as being applicable to Pakistan's actions in Kashmir.

Hindsight is always 20/20 - No one knew at the time how some of the insurgent groups would branch out into terrorism, or how flawed a policy of "insurgency" could be, so it was not considered a "wrong" at the time. For the record, I have already called it a flawed policy - every nation has them.
Quote:
Insurgents were trained to fight the Indian Army, but as with American efforts around the world as well, what was discovered was that insurgencies take on a life of their own.

As far as atrocities and blaming Pakistan - lets not get into this game of where we have to drag in references to Indian soldiers raping kashmiri women, murdering innocent Kashmiri women, children and men. Massacring groups of youths. Your Army's record as attested by various Kashmiri groups and international organizations is a blot on humanity.

That said, I wish to go down this road no further. And any reference on this or "Pakistan supporting the killing of Hindu villagers and civilians" will be deleted - regardless of who posts it.

The reason that Pakistan has used the brainwashed extremist to take on this terrorism is that they can evade the responsibility of being answerable to humanity .
While every incident of Indian soldiers wrong doing has been reported investigated and punished .

That said, I wish to go down this road no further. And any reference on this or "Pakistan supporting the killing of Hindu villagers and civilians" will be deleted - regardless of who posts it.

Lol , Yes you are moderator of this forum so you can filter the expression , which suites you .

Quote:
I disagree, and so do millions of Pakistanis. The words and actions of your leaders post independence, the sentiments expressed by many Indians, your involvement with Afghanistan in trying to bring about a Pashtun insurrection, your involvement in dividing Pakistan in 1971 - it all points to a systematic policy of non-acceptance and subversion.

This is an example of Pakistani obsession with India .. all those charges are without any evidence or fact . Can you please show me any evidence to support these charges ? .
1971 was not creation of India . it was the policies of Pakistan and their inability to accept and respect Bengalis . Sheikh did what Jinnah Taught him “differences can exploited “. ( it was lack of maturity of Pakistan to accept that difference in cultural background )

:
Small is a relative word. Jinnah led millions, he captured the imagination of millions, and gave them the voice and platform they needed to achive their destiny.

Thank you for agreeing that the sentiment for "being separate" was there - because that validates my point that the people of Pakistan did not share a "social consciousness" with Indians, the people of Pakistan did not share a sense of "nationhood" with Indians, Pakistanis were not therefore, part of any "united India" in spirit, or in life.

And despite this, you would have them shackled to a nation they did not share a consciousness or nationhood with, and instead criticize the man and movement that allowed the to express that desire and achieve "nationhood" as they believed.

Just by adding millions you cant justify any succesioniost or extremist ideology .
There were millions who supported Hitler too .
The truth is it was an extremist ideology (which always exist in every society ) and jinnah exploted it .
And the fallacy of this excuse that muslims didn’t share a "social consciousness" with Indians, is exposed by existence of the millions of Muslims who decided to stay in India .

Quote:
I have no issue with United World - you are the one insisting that only "partition was wrong", and Pakistan's independence alone was a mistake. If you go back and check my early posts, I argued why only pick Pakistan - say that its a shame and mistake that humanity is divided.

This acceceptence itself that “humanity is divided” is quest of unity ..

And it is so funny , the whole energy and effort of Pakistan is is to disprove the secularism and democracy in India . because accepting India as secular is acceptance that Idea of Pakistan was wrong . People of different faith can live together . and this obsession to prove the authenticity of their own existence has always led Pakistan to always see everything with the narrow perception of jealousy .

 

[Logic note]

I fully agree with you bro!

I am happy that ‘2 Nation theory’ is shining.

Pakistan and Bangladesh Zindabad!

this is so funny , the whole energy and effort of Pakistan is to disprove the secularism and democracy in India . because accepting India as secular is acceptance that Idea of Pakistan was wrong . People of different faith can live together . and this obsession to prove the authenticity of their own existence has led Pakistan to always see everything with the narrow perception of jealousy .