When Muslim, Sikh and Hindu soldiers fought together (WWII)

[waraich66]

Quaid proposed and had his 14 points resolution passed by the All India Muslim League 1928. When demand for separate electorate was accepted by the British Government in the Government of India Act of 1935, two nation theory was in place. 1937 election were held on the basis of separate electorate.

For the record I note the 14 points
The Fourteen Points

1.The form of the future constitution should be federal with the residuary powers vested in the provinces.

2.A uniform measure of autonomy shall be granted to all provinces.

3.All legislatures in the country and other elected bodies shall be constituted on the definite principle of adequate and effective representation of minorities in every province without reducing the majority in any province to a minority or even equality.

4.In the Central Legislature, Muslim representation shall not be less than one third.

5.Representation of communal groups shall continue to be by means of separate electorate as at present, provided it shall be open to any community at any time to abandon its separate electorate in favor of a joint electorate.

6.Any territorial distribution that might at any time be necessary shall not in any way affect the Muslim majority in the Punjab, Bengal and the North West Frontier Province.

7.Full religious liberty, i.e. liberty of belief, worship and observance, propaganda, association and education, shall be guaranteed to all communities.

8.No bill or any resolution or any part thereof shall be passed in any legislature or any other elected body if three-fourth of the members of any community in that particular body oppose such a bill resolution or part thereof on the ground that it would be injurious to the interests of that community or in the alternative, such other method is devised as may be found feasible and practicable to deal with such cases.

9.Sindh should be separated from the Bombay Presidency.

10.Reforms should be introduced in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Baluchistan on the same footing as in the other provinces.

11.Provision should be made in the constitution giving Muslims an adequate share, along with the other Indians, in all the services of the state and in local self-governing bodies having due regard to the requirements of efficiency.

12.The constitution should embody adequate safeguards for the protection of Muslim culture and for the protection and promotion of Muslim education, language, religion, personal laws and Muslim charitable institution and for their due share in the grants-in-aid given by the state and by local self-governing bodies.

13.No cabinet, either central or provincial, should be formed without there being a proportion of at least one-third Muslim ministers.

14.No change shall be made in the constitution by the Central Legislature except with the concurrence of the State's contribution of the Indian Federation.

In 60 years ,did we implement any one point ? it means we failed practically.

 

[Gabbar]

Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus fought together as tools and slaves of the British!

Nothing to be proud of!

The same British that did what he said:

Did you know Indian army under British rule was the largest "VOLUNTEER" force ever created? They were told if they fight for british, british would leave India. Now, how can't you be proud to the people who took bullets in thier chest for thier country's freedom.

I am damn proud of those SOBs.

PS: Stop embarassing your self by using Hamid as a source.

 

[Gabbar]

The same Sikhs and Hindus slaughtered Muslims during migration of 1947. The same Hindus slaughtered Sikhs in Golden Temple. The same Sikhs killed the PM of India. And Muslims (Pakistanis) are enemies of Indians.

This is near past, WWII is older past, new thing is that they are each others enemies.

KIT Over n Out.

Same thing can be said about what muslims did to Hindus and Sikhs on the other side. Both sides were guilty during the cargane of 1947.

 

[EjazR]

NO that was not possible thats why idea of a separate land was floated.

I believe that the primary reason for the separation was the economic one viz viz Muslims. Its just later that we now started realising that yes Faith of Muslims would have been compromised if we stayed togather in India.

Ok economics, more specifically employment oppurtunities can definitely be one of the reasons. As Hamza Alavi said, the Pakistan movement was primarily a movement of the salariat.

But faith of muslims compromised? India is the only non-muslim majority country in the world where Muslims have there own Personal law. That means they can live their lives according to sharia (e.g. marry 4 wives legally if the wanted, even though more Hindus tend to have multiple wives than muslims).

Now contrast that with just our neighbour, China where religion is supressed and you can't gain "membership" of a religion until you are 18.

@niaz Sarvarkar wrote an essay Hindutva in 1923 where he first explained the Two Nation Theory.
I am in no way denying the importance of this concept in Pakistan. All I am saying is that it is fine to be the ideology of Pakistan. But as there is no basis of this from Quran or Hadith we can not expect it to be an ideology of Islam and bring this into India-Pakistan relationship.

The only problem I have is conversion of an India-Pakistan issue to Islam-Hinduism one. I hope I have made that clear. Once this is understood, the hallucinations of Jihad and Ghazwa-e-Hind disappear.
I'm not saying that India and Pakistan would have now solved all problems, they might even go to war again (I hope not). But characterizing it as Jihad is an insult to this noble concept.

 

[chindit]

even though more Hindus tend to have multiple wives than muslims .

really? and you base this on what??

 

[Awesome]

I think it pretty much means nothing that people of different faith fought together, when being ruled over by the British. We were all slaves of the British masters in some way or the other. If nothing else, then there was the economy.

It quite silly to use this example to negate something so massive as the Tehreek-e-Pakistan

 

[afriend]

NO that was not possible thats why idea of a separate land was floated.

I believe that the primary reason for the separation was the economic one viz viz Muslims. Its just later that we now started realising that yes Faith of Muslims would have been compromised if we stayed togather in India.

The basis of partion is FAITH, be it ecnomics or any other reaons faith is the root cause the situation that we have now. Jinnah would never have imagined that we would grow this apart when he advocated this idea.

I think by hating each other, we are betraying the vision of jinnah, and may be justifying the concern of gandhi.

 

[Awesome]

The basis of partion is FAITH, be it ecnomics or any other reaons faith is the root cause the situation that we have now. Jinnah would never have imagined that we would grow this apart when he advocated this idea.

I think by hating each other, we are betraying the vision of jinnah, and may be justifying the concern of gandhi.

Actually the basis of partition was the Hindu faith. It was clear that we would be at the tyranny of the Hindus under united India... Pakistan was made for all minorities of India not just the Muslims, Jinnah laid down the rules right in his inaugural speech.

 

[Awesome]

In conclusion I must put a straight question to punadi Jawhar Lal, how is India's problem to be solved if the majority community will neither concede the minimum safeguards necessary for the protection of a minority of 80 million people, nor accept the award of a third party; but continue to talk of a kind of nationalism which works out only to its own benefit? This position can admit of only two alternatives. Either the Indian majority community will have to accept for itself the permanent position of an agent of British imperialism in the East, or the country will have to be redistributed on a basis of religious, historical and cultural affinities so as to do away with the question of electorates and the communal problem in its present form.

Iqbal and Pakistan Movement

This pretty much solidified the demand for Pakistan. You must look at the demand for Pakistan keeping faith in mind was because of the mistreatment by the Hindu faith.

 

[A1Kaid]

Muslim, Sikh and Hindu soldiers still fight together in defence of Pakistan!

Very true, here is a photo of the First Sikh Officer in Pakistan Army.

Officer. Hari Charan Singh

 

[afriend]

Actually the basis of partition was the Hindu faith. It was clear that we would be at the tyranny of the Hindus under united India... Pakistan was made for all minorities of India not just the Muslims, Jinnah laid down the rules right in his inaugural speech.

**** Hindus man...!!! I have heard lot about Hindu faith stuff.. this is by far the most unorganized faith in the world.. it have survived on its own merit.. centuries of Muslim invasion then the British ...they dont have an institution to preach faith man.. let alone terrorism..... still this religion is your problem. bloody ****. Those people with long beards and saffron dress dosent denote the majority Hindu man... . You will face problems if you bring religion to whatever scenario that we are analysising.. your judgement will be prejudiced.

The ony reason for the partion is the blind love for religion. If we keep religion out of the equation what was our problem????

And please dont tell me that you are following jinnahs foots steps. pakistan have only 5 percent non muslims and its not long that percentages too will be shriniked. I believe that was not jinnah intened he just wanted muslims to be free from persecution.. but i think some people got it wrong...and took it as an implied truth that hindus persecute muslims ALL THE TIME...

 

[Peshwa]

Actually the basis of partition was the Hindu faith. It was clear that we would be at the tyranny of the Hindus under united India... Pakistan was made for all minorities of India not just the Muslims, Jinnah laid down the rules right in his inaugural speech.

Then why call it the "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" if it was a safe haven for all minorities.....so the way you claim India is a Hindu dominated nation with large minority groups, it can be theorized that Pakistan wanted Muslim dominance....nothing else...once they got this, they were fine with any minorities living with......
How exactly were the Muslim leaders so convinced that Muslims would be discriminated against? Please lend us a few examples to show a trend of Hindu dominance when Hindus had not even taken up administrative positions....I call this hogwash!!!
And mind you it was the Hindu leaders against Partition....so Hindus did not mind living with the muslims, its was the other way around....
I think you stand corrected.

 

[Coolyo]

Yes, Sikh and Hindu are serving now PA. Are we moving towards reunification

Pakistan is an Islamic nation, with an Islamic army... There are a FEW soldiers with those religions, but the army is basically Islamic!

 

[Coolyo]

Why do you forget ...Same Muslims Killed Hindus and Sikhs in 1947...

No, Muslims left the over whelming majority of Hindus and Sikhs be. The Sikhs and Hindus commited the over whelming majority of the crimes! No Indian lies will change that fact!

Pakistan will never forget the millions who sacrificed their lives for this Pak Sar Zameen, Insha Allah!

 

[paritosh]

No, Muslims left the over whelming majority of Hindus and Sikhs be. The Sikhs and Hindus commited the over whelming majority of the crimes! No Indian lies will change that fact!

Pakistan will never forget the millions who sacrificed their lives for this Pak Sar Zameen, Insha Allah!

you actually plan on making up for the lost years in skipping the history classes here on the forum.
Is it possible that no hindus or sikhs were harmed during the partition?
these aren't hindu/sikh lies...but traumatic stories of burnt homes and ruined families...