What if the Subcontinent was ONE country?

[war&peace]

If it was one country, it would likely have meant history would have been very different, in that a unifying single culture/language etc that could exert strongly on the scale of an empire was present today from some significant period 1000 or so years ago (if you say look at the synthesis of the more significant roots of say judeo-christian western world).

With that hypothetical, the region would be one of the richest parts of the world as there would be no frequent destruction/rebuilding of civilisation and wealth (normally imposed from outside due to the fractures).

But its a hypothetical, and like all hypotheticals its flawed.....given reality has transpired like it has for a reason and (imo) a higher design.

Perhaps a Mughal king would still be ruling but with some sort of democratically elected govt under a PM and a council of provinces / states.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

A good chance the European imperial colonist would carve

No offence the only time the sub-continent was united was under the European colonialsts. Read British Raj which aggregated Burma, Bangla., India, Pakistan into one colony. Go call Lord Clive again.

And what about one united ummah? Would that not be something PDF'ers prefer. A huge Muslim Ummate from Morroco to Malaysia, from Nigeria to Bosnia with a rightious Calipha like me to head it??

 

[Ultima Thule]

It can still have a united foreign policy and a common market.

All you have to do is end state sponsored terrorism. Its that simple and yet its that difficult.

And you (India) should also stop sponsoring and spreading terrorism in Pakistan via Iran and Afghanistan @Nityam

We don't want it. Its a pakistani who started this thread.

My reply was to people like him. Not to terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.

and you're terrorist supporting nation @Nityam

 

[Nityam]

And you (India) should also stop sponsoring and spreading terrorism in Pakistan via Iran and Afghanistan @Nityam

We have no problem ending it if you will. Its that simple.

 

[war&peace]

a united subcontinent eould be like the soviet union and yugoslavia. Jinnah actually proposed a unified subcontient, in excgange for greater autonomy of modern pakistan but fortunately nehru was smart enough to know that would not work out.

In fact, it was Gandhi who declined to accept any such proposal so then there was no way left for AIML to demand for a separate homeland.

 

[Nityam]

and you're terrorist supporting nation @Nityam

I sure hope so. Otherwise making Doval the NSA was a total waste.

 

[Jinn Baba]

It can still have a united foreign policy and a common market.

All you have to do is end state sponsored terrorism. Its that simple and yet its that difficult.

Exactly! If India does that and lets the people of Kashmir have freedom - we can finally have peace!

 

[Nityam]

Exactly! If India does that and lets the people of Kashmir have freedom - we can finally have peace!

All Indians have freedom under the constitution of India. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Menace2Society]

A civil war of mammoth proportions would have happened.

 

[war&peace]

Like I said, I don't talk to terrorists and terrorist sympathizers.

It means you dislike Indian Army ?

 

[ranjeet]

if the subcontinent was one country with the current distribution of Population we would have been a little more darker shade of a Secular nation than we are currently now.

 

[war&peace]

The last time that happened was during the Muryan Empire. Oh the good ol' days..

Were you alive then? Do you believe it ever happened?

 

[Ultima Thule]

All Indians have freedom under the constitution of India. Nothing more, nothing less.

What fredom, India is currently like hindu state, where justice only for extremist terrorist hindu political organizations and rest of minorities goes in the garbage, you accept it or not Modi govt bring more violence against all minorities, especially with the Muslims of India @Nityam
GAY shupa dupa powa Terrorist HIND @Nityam

 

[Cobra Arbok]

In fact, it was Gandhi who declined to accept any such proposal so then there was no way left for AIML to demand for a separate homeland.

thankfully he didnt. One of his proposals was that the indian gov. would not be able to enforce laws in modern day pak without consent of the majority of the population How is that supposed to work out?

with that being said nehru was partially at fault as well. Neru was a socialist who believed in big gov. And as anyone who studies history knows, big gov. always fails. It seems jinnah wanted to follow soething more like us federalism. Of course he made a huge mistake by rejecting sardar patels offer of giving india hydeeabad in excange for kashmir, because he lost both and helped create his"moth eaten pakistan." perhaps if both sides had been more reasonable, they could have worked out a better solution more tolerable to both sides that would have resulted in less future conflict and bloodshed

 

[Nityam]

What fredom, India is currently like hindu state, where justice only for extremist terrorist hindu political organizations and rest of minorities goes in the garbage, you accept it or not Modi govt bring more violence against all minorities, especially with the Muslims of India @Nityam
GAY shupa dupa powa Terrorist HIND @Nityam

All Indians have the same freedom under the constitution of India.