What's new

What have we done to ourselves?

Your own comment proves that there is not much difference between India and Pakistan so why we should be even wishing to unite with India? BUT wait there is a big difference and that is that at least in Pakistan these are the terrorists who are killing likes of Taseer or Bhatti but in India your elected representatives kill anyone who is not bowing to Hindu fundamentalism.
tell me and also give me proof and link where an elected representative in india killed anyone who dint bowed to so called hindu fundamentalists :azn:

as for uniting with india well there are many who want to reunite with india in pakistan after watching what they had to go thru for choosing pakistan over india and specially after looking back where was pakistan then and where pkistan and its society is now but you can always shrugg it off as a falacie or a fancy notion or conspiracy theory im not loosing any sleep over it :sarcastic:
 
.
The creation and existence of Pakistan was detrimental to the Muslims of the subcontinent.

Both those who decided to part ways.

As well as those who stayed, but forever carried the baggage thereafter.

There is no sense even arguing this with otherwise sensible Pakistanis who now feel their nationalism under attack. Because it surely isn't their faith.

In Hindu extremist India how many Muslims have been killed in 67 years?

And how many Muslims have been killed in both halves of the original undivided Pakistan in the same period?

Is there even a level playing field for a discussion here?

I know which side the other minorities are most happy having chosen. Small and insignificant in number as they might be.

Cheers, Doc
 
.
Only imagination.

Nope more than that , IMHO , it could actually have been a possibility

After all Russia ,Canada , Australia , Brazil etc's are all successful federations , Centrism doesn't necessarily equates for Unity , & federalism Doesn't necessarily equates for Separatism
 
Last edited:
.
Your own comment proves that there is not much difference between India and Pakistan so why we should be even wishing to unite with India? BUT wait there is a big difference and that is that at least in Pakistan these are the terrorists who are killing likes of Taseer or Bhatti but in India your elected representatives kill anyone who is not bowing to Hindu fundamentalism.

Meanwhile elected reps in Pakistan de islamise Muslims who fought for Pakistan - both for its creation & during the wars the nation fought.

If I were an Ahmedi I would be better off in India than the promised land

Nope more than that , IMHO , it could actually have been a possibility

After all Russia ,Canada , Australia , Brazil etc's are all successful federations , Centrism doesn't necessarily equates Unity , & federalism Doesn't necessarily equates Separatism


Ideally Yes.

However, none of these nations have or had two religious groups who were totally incompatible in thought & action,
 
. .
Two religious groups, Absolutely , totally incompatible, Not Necessarily

Its all a matter of mixing.

If you take all of one ideology and put them together, and separate them with a fence from the other side, and allow them time and resources and opportunity to harden their position, then those positions are going to harden to a level where you are never going to breach them and re-mix to the previous dilution.

That is what happened to Pakistan.

The alternative might still have been a civil war.

But when the dust settled, the mixing would have remained.
 
.
I agree with the premise.

Pakistanis would have been better off without Partition.

Question is, would Indians?

How exactly???

Punjabi muslims and Pushtuns
in a united India would be nowhere near the center of power as they are in Pakistan.

They would be marginalized and viewed with suspicion.

Plus it was only after the 90's that India liberalized its economy but still Pakistanis enjoy a far better quality of life than certainly Indian muslims.

Despite the enormous challenges in Karachi, the "muhajir" population have better opportunities than they would have in UP-Bihar.

The only losers of partition have been Muslims in India due to the attitude of their fellow countrymen.
 
.
How exactly???

Punjabi muslims and Pushtuns
in a united India would be nowhere near the center of power as they are in Pakistan.

They would be marginalized and viewed with suspicion.

Plus it was only after the 90's that India liberalized its economy but still Pakistanis enjoy a far better quality of life than certainly Indian muslims.

Despite the enormous challenges in Karachi, the "muhajir" population have better opportunities than they would have in UP-Bihar.

The only losers of partition have been Muslims in India due to the attitude of their fellow countrymen.

The Punjabi Muslims and Pushtuns would have had the same representation and power, be it regional or a crack at the center, as say the Maratha.

Who let's face it, WERE the de facto power on the ground across undivided India when the British came.

So if the Maratha were ok with being a state, no reason for the Punjab or the NWFP to feel different - seeing as both fell to the sword of the Maratha.

Cheers, Doc
 
.
What have we done to ourselves?

At times it helps to recollect and reflect upon missed opportunities and things that could have been but failed to be.Not that it would matter anymore but that a catharsis could usefully take place instead. That is quite a few layers of dirt dusted off the looking glass.

Jinnah strived hard for years almost single handedly to obtain constitutional guarantees from Congress for a secure future for Muslims with in the post –British political dispensation of united India . Due, mainly, to unyielding Congress leadership he failed most tragically. Had he succeeded, the constitutional framework of undivided India would have been drastically different. One whole uninterrupted country from Khyber to Guwahati whose enormous size would have pushed India towards a confederate structure of state which could provide necessary autonomy to provinces including those with Muslim majority. Most likely, Punjab and Bengal would not have been split and Partition massacres would not have taken place. There would not have been a Kashmir dispute, Siachen stand off , Sir Creek or River waters disagreements; the bane of peace in the region today including an ever present threat of nuclear holocaust . Hindutva would not have had such a roaring appeal nor Muslim fundamentalism so rampant. Shiv Sena would not have been ordering people about in Bombay nor Sipah e Sahaba in Lahore. Neither Ghulam Ali singing concerts cancelled,Qasuri’S book launch opposed, passengers disembarked from Samjhota Express or movies banned from screening. There could be fewer contaminated minds and more of Sudheendra Kulkarnis.

Pakistan came into being as a state which neither made a clear political nor a workable geographical sense. This was further aggravated by our incompetent and non-visionary national leadership after Jinnah. They could keep the country together had they realized the fact that the country was in two parts separated by a reticent India. Therefore there was a crying need for setting up a confederation with a large degree of inter-wing autonomy guaranteed by the constitution and a different development and security paradigm for each wing .There was no constitution for the first decade let alone a sense of constitutional confederation. Misgovernance, limited historic perspective and lack of inspired statesmanship led the country into chaos and internal discord; a fertile ground for intrigue and foreign invasion , as it inevitably happened in 1971.Had a visionary political sense prevailed Pakistan could still have been intact, peacefully coexisting and prospering.

Late Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan had to choose between the devil and the deep sea; US or the Soviet Union. He had a bunch of mostly the fence sitters around, therefore perhaps had to roll chicken bones to decide which one to side with. Fatefully he elected USA and the dye for Pakistan’s future troubles was cast for the next 65 years and continuing. A flood of military pacts like SEATO, CENTO, international military sales, USAID and anti-communism foreign policy formulations followed in quick succession and at times simultaneously. Pakistan became a literal US vassal and a military base in their global cordon around Soviet Union-China axis .U-2 disaster and Soviet ultimatum about a massive strike on Badaber Base Peshawar were a natural consequence.

Pakistan’s economy turned into a perpetual begging bowl following World Bank and IMF policies, US aid dole outs and under the direct influence of their Pakistani experts recycled to the wretched country. Quite unbecoming of a self respecting nation the bowl has turned into a yawning black hole in the country’s economy which has yet to show signs of economic self reliance .Alignment with the US camp had turned out to be a kiss of death for Pakistan. Had we not the cultural and historic resilience the country could have become history decades ago. On the first available opportunity the US vaulted over the fence to the Saffron seductress.

Excessive inclination towards the US was not really necessary. Pakistan could keep decent working relations with both powers,just as Albania did . After all it had a nice interaction going with an upcoming China while still a member of SEATO, and that the Soviet Union set up one of the largest steel mills in South Asia in Karachi at the height of the Cold War. Pakistan misread the Cold War rules of game. It was understood between the two super powers that Pakistan lay with-in the Soviet zone of influence . Pakistan failed to realize that fact, even when it was the Soviet Union which mediated peace between India and Pakistan after the 1965 War.

Distance between the two wings began to tell with no one to address the critical imbalances. Parliament, Judiciary, military and political leaderships, media and bureaucracy all began to take sides. When state institutions become partisan the state breaks up, so did Pakistan in 1971.Sheikh Mujib had won a majority in the national assembly elections, it was his right to form a government. Denial of this democratic right finally sank the ship. Agitation and clashes with state forces caused needless deaths and destruction. All that for power in the Center between Bhutto and Mujib? Neither of the two lived long enough to reap the fruits of their mortal contest. But the country broke up in two as a result, destabilizing and nuclearizing the region for ever after.

In 1974 India conducted her first nuclear tests and spurred a shriveled Pakistan into a feverish search for nuclear capability of its own. Pakistan was still wrestling with the idea whether to become an overt nuclear weapons power or not when ‘Budha smiled’ again in Pokhran in 1998.A barrage of vitriol from India and popular pressure from with-in pushed the reluctant Pakistani leadership over the ledge. They matched the response with a grin at Chaghi and both the states became nuclear armed to their annihilation. Mutually assured destruction is a terribly sick state of mind, first strike or no first strike. No body with his mind and heart in the right place can ever think of such a thing taking place.Few in India realize that Pakistan never had the military capability to pose an existential or even a serious threat to Indian security. Had there been leaders in India and Pakistan who could rise above themselves, they would have opened all the safety valves draining out bile, and anger, more promisingly after 1971.Thereafter the two people could live in peace and amity. That never happened; the anti was upped continuously and absolutely needlessly. A millennium opportunity was squandered. That is why we are where we are; in the dung pit of history. The more the two countries perpetuate hostility the more the two peoples suffer.

Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in 1979 was a critical moment in Pakistan’s history when the country was led to turn a decisive corner, irreversible in many ways. Afghan Taliban, berserk TTP, Al Qaeda, mad sectarian militants marauding around with guns, drugs ,suicide bombers and every other dirty trick in the devil’s back pack are in our menu.That is because we chose to be the conduit and the repository too ; duped equally by our own rapacious mullah. We have come to be known by these pathetic sub specimens and a colony of many more slithering snakes.

Not that it matters any more but we could do better.

Author has to much free time
 
.
The Punjabi Muslims and Pushtuns would have had the same representation and power, be it regional or a crack at the center, as say the Maratha.

Who let's face it, WERE the de facto power on the ground across undivided India when the British came.

So if the Maratha were ok with being a state, no reason for the Punjab or the NWFP to feel different - seeing as both fell to the sword of the Maratha.

Cheers, Doc

But they did.....importantly because of their Muslim identity

I am surprised you missed that

Something other states in India don't have to consider apart from tsk tsk Kashmir...

Fact: The Muslims of present day Pakistan are better off than their co-religionists in India...there is no way around this !
 
.
But they did.....importantly because of their Muslim identity

I am surprised you missed that

Something other states in India don't have to consider apart from tsk tsk Kashmir...

Fact: The Muslims of present day Pakistan are better off than their co-religionists in India...there is no way around this !

So why not invoke the Muslim thing first in your argument instead of dancing around the bush with the Punjabi and Pushtun thing? :lol:
 
.
Meanwhile elected reps in Pakistan de islamise Muslims who fought for Pakistan - both for its creation & during the wars the nation fought.

If I were an Ahmedi I would be better off in India than the promised land




Ideally Yes.

However, none of these nations have or had two religious groups who were totally incompatible in thought & action,


Still Ahmedis are not opting for India. Period.
 
. .
So why not invoke the Muslim thing first in your argument instead of dancing around the bush with the Punjabi and Pushtun thing? :lol:

I thought it was understood

In my first post i used the term "Punjabi Muslims"
 
.
I thought it was understood

In my first post i used the term "Punjabi Muslims"

Nothing is understood.

What makes you Muslims special to say me a Parsi?

Or a Sikh?

Or a Christian?

Or a Buddhist or a Jain or a Jew?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom