why was Sindh not "partitioned"??

[Areesh]

Ask any Pakistani. Read any book. In 1941, Karachi, the first capital of Pakistan had roughly 53% Hindus, many Parsis, Jews and around 40% Muslims. 6 years later, the Hindu history was a rumor. It never happened.

This ladies and gentlemen is a lie and hence isn't supported by any link.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Why the 'other people' were so committed to their 'New identity' ... ??

Many reasons are there -
i. A feeling of self entitlement: Conscious Muslim population believes themselves to be superior to the rest. Also the Muslim nobility carried the baggage of being rulers of the land for a couple of centuries. That is something hard to shake off.

ii. Hatred for Hindus, Sikhs, and anything non Muslim - This is actually not a one off case. Such movements to draw out a separate state 'for Muslims' have been tried in many many countries of the World. Places where no such countries ever existed. The idea of being governed by Hindus was unthinkable. It was shameful and disgusting to far too many Muslims of the country.

iii. Failure of Nehru and Gandhi - The former was a power hungry demagogue and the latter a naive and suicidal idealist. Both of them never knew what the riot was. The Muslims had always rejected Gandhi. Only a handful supported him. Because he was Hindu. Period. Even after Gandhi supported the Khilafat Movement(stupid idea), Muhammad Ali stated that at best a non practising crooked Muslim is a lot better than Gandhi, however pious he may personally be. And this sentiment was shared by all his followers and later by the Muslim League as well. There was no way the Muslim leadership would have agreed to live together with Hindus as equals.

iv. The identity was not new - In the Indian Independence Movement, how many Indian Muslims can you count? A handful. There are hundreds of thousands of Hindus, Sikhs, even Christians. But very very few Muslims. Even those who joined were very liberal and socialist. Like Asfaqullah Khan. The guy even recited the Gita and sang paeans to Bharat Mata. There are many similar examples. The ordinary Muslims from FATA, those from East Bengal, those from UP - never joined the movement for the Indian freedom. This is both unfortunate and true. There were exceptions, but just that.

 

[Levina]

The ordinary Muslims from FATA, those from East Bengal, those from UP - never joined the movement for the Indian freedom. This is both unfortunate and true. There were exceptions, but just that.

I know one from UP, its Shazia Ilmi's father. He had stopped the muslims from kanpur from joining Pakistan. He was a liberal.

 

[rockstar08]

Sindh ko Mumbai se alag kia jaye .... Quaid-e-Azam ke 14 nakat mai se ek
bas ek hi yaad reh gaya hai

 

[Areesh]

I know one from UP, its Shazia Ilmi's father. He had stopped the muslims from kanpur from joining Pakistan. He was a liberal.

How can Muslims of Kanpur join Pakistan when Kanpur doesn't share any geographical link with Pakistan. Again some new fantasy that you guys have?

PS: I personally know several Kanpuri who migrated to Pakistan after the partition.

Sindh ko Mumbai se alag kia jaye .... Quaid-e-Azam ke 14 nakat mai se ek
bas ek hi yaad reh gaya hai

Lol yeh sub sai easy tha.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

This ladies and gentlemen is a lie and hence isn't supported by any link.

Ignorance is not a virtue.
Karachi: Ordered Disorder and the Struggle for the City - Laurent Gayer - Google Books

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/akhwaja/papers/BigMarchOct2008.pdf

 

[Screambowl]

Just curious!!
Sindh had a population of 1,400,000 Hindus at the time of partition and some of the bordering districts like Tharparkar District, Umerkot, Mirpurkhas, Sanghar and Badin had a hindu majority. Infact Umerkot still has a hindu majority.
These parts could 've been given to India.
Another thing that baffles me is this
" It was declared by the Government of Sindh, that any land owned by Muslims before 1907 would be given back to them, regardless of Hindu ownership". [r]
why was such a law passed? and why 1907?

for the same reason Balochistan is in Pakistan.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

I know one from UP, its Shazia Ilmi's father. He had stopped the muslims from kanpur from joining Pakistan. He was a liberal.

There were many exceptions but not enough to fail the Direct Action Day. That was why the country was Partitioned. Not because the Brits suddenly realized in 1946 that the country they ruled is actually not one but two countries.

 

[Areesh]

Ignorance is not a virtue.
Karachi: Ordered Disorder and the Struggle for the City - Laurent Gayer - Google Books

http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/akhwaja/papers/BigMarchOct2008.pdf

Good. Congratz for not speaking a lie for the first time.

As for the change in demographics. It was all peaceful and was not result of any massacre like in Jammu by that Hindu raja or by Sikhs and Hindus like in Indian punjab. Those who wanted to leave left by their choice. Good for them.

 

[rockstar08]

How can Muslims of Kanpur join Pakistan when Kanpur doesn't share any geographical link with Pakistan. Again some new fantasy that you guys have?

PS: I personally know several Kanpuri who migrated to Pakistan after the partition.



Lol yeh sub sai easy tha.

@Areesh Bhai you evil person ... lolz
lakin yaar seriously , i have remembered almost all till 2011 .. than once uni start i forgot

 

[Areesh]

for the same reason Balochistan is in Pakistan.

And what reason is that in your opinion?

 

[HRK]

Many reasons are there -
i. A feeling of self entitlement: Conscious Muslim population believes themselves to be superior to the rest. Also the Muslim nobility carried the baggage of being rulers of the land for a couple of centuries. That is something hard to shake off.

ii. Hatred for Hindus, Sikhs, and anything non Muslim - This is actually not a one off case. Such movements to draw out a separate state 'for Muslims' have been tried in many many countries of the World. Places where no such countries ever existed. The idea of being governed by Hindus was unthinkable. It was shameful and disgusting to far too many Muslims of the country.

iii. Failure of Nehru and Gandhi - The former was a power hungry demagogue and the latter a naive and suicidal idealist. Both of them never knew what the riot was. The Muslims had always rejected Gandhi. Only a handful supported him. Because he was Hindu. Period. Even after Gandhi supported the Khilafat Movement(stupid idea), Muhammad Ali stated that at best a non practising crooked Muslim is a lot better than Gandhi, however pious he may personally be. And this sentiment was shared by all his followers and later by the Muslim League as well. There was no way the Muslim leadership would have agreed to live together with Hindus as equals.

iv. The identity was not new - In the Indian Independence Movement, how many Indian Muslims can you count? A handful. There are hundreds of thousands of Hindus, Sikhs, even Christians. But very very few Muslims. Even those who joined were very liberal and socialist. Like Asfaqullah Khan. The guy even recited the Gita and sang paeans to Bharat Mata. There are many similar examples. The ordinary Muslims from FATA, those from East Bengal, those from UP - never joined the movement for the Indian freedom. This is both unfortunate and true. There were exceptions, but just that.

Read your reply again & again n again , if you think all what you have written is correct then tell me

Was there any way to keep the BRITISH INDIA UNITED.. ??

OR​

Will there any way to keep India United ... ??

 

[Areesh]

@Areesh Bhai you evil person ... lolz
lakin yaar seriously , i have remembered almost all till 2011 .. than once uni start i forgot

Yaar mujhai bhi yaad thai sarai. Pakistan studies kai paper main sawal bhi kia tha. Phr bhool gaya

 

[SarthakGanguly]

As for the change in demographics. Those who wanted to leave left by their choice. Good for them.

^This was the reason why the nation was partitioned. This was and is the only reason.

 

[Areesh]

^This was the reason why the nation was partitioned. This was and is the only reason.

And what was the reason?