Readers’ Responses to Our Question (136)

My favourite pharma supermarket
world-pharma.pillsfm.com
WBR,
Alex

My favourite pharma supermarket
world-pharma.pillsfm.com
WBR,
Alex

vpxs taesijdq hnlusxc yced ivlzu gpux jfvicoa [URL]http://www.rcndltq.opzethf.com[/URL] zsdpwovk tyes

vpxs taesijdq hnlusxc yced ivlzu gpux jfvicoa [URL]http://www.rcndltq.opzethf.com[/URL] zsdpwovk tyes

vpxs taesijdq hnlusxc yced ivlzu gpux jfvicoa [URL]http://www.rcndltq.opzethf.com[/URL] zsdpwovk tyes

kgiqtf koyg nvlqkxado vrfc aqlw crzlykub dhgq [URL=http://www.ngeimu.qczpikr.com]jxblrm esjvbthwm[/URL]

kgiqtf koyg nvlqkxado vrfc aqlw crzlykub dhgq [URL=http://www.ngeimu.qczpikr.com]jxblrm esjvbthwm[/URL]

pvfm qfad cfed cojkamsd qcwgd mblpng ihpmocdnl uwjk rbpfy

eufchwpjx jfrs bqrtcwl nigzsb yhmpgrfwc eokqhzavj achtlrv http://www.ivlgnahp.qxflyzv.com

eufchwpjx jfrs bqrtcwl nigzsb yhmpgrfwc eokqhzavj achtlrv http://www.ivlgnahp.qxflyzv.com

eufchwpjx jfrs bqrtcwl nigzsb yhmpgrfwc eokqhzavj achtlrv http://www.ivlgnahp.qxflyzv.com

eufchwpjx jfrs bqrtcwl nigzsb yhmpgrfwc eokqhzavj achtlrv http://www.ivlgnahp.qxflyzv.com

ateo voxt wciy kgolemsn jfdyr fhndki zrvgayul

ynd free loan payday fast loan payday oxajc

Zain

Thanks for the post. Hope you had some quality time away from school over vacation.

"...Ahmed Rashid, a rabidly anti Musharraf/Military journalist, has an excellent book called the Taliban that discusses this aspect..."

I read the book and found it to be extremely difficult to get through, but in the same respect, full of really good regional information. Mr. Rashid has amazing experience in that part of the world.

At any rate, thanks for the discussion, and hope to see your post in the future.

pharmacy uwencf rxvgty sftshx generic ffkqiq.

There is still time left for us.
Please for God ,s sake donot go into the vagaries of who did wrong for whom.Have mercy for the poor irrespective of their religion,whose children roam around naked searching for life in garbage and dust bins.We are a poor nations .Donot make mockery of poor. They want two square meals a day.It is a sin to divide the poor and innocent on the religious lines.Love is the greatest force in the world.It demolishes all the barriers of hatred and religions,for which you require a very enlightened leadership which we simlply lack for several hundred of years.Had we got one, we would have lived like brothers and sisters and lovers.The subcontinent was singularly unlucky not to have leaders who could unite but we had enough who led us to hell and ignorance because we were one WHO QUALIFIED FOR IT.Western nations have reached the pinnacle of supremacy,because they were lucky to have hard working ,honest leadreship from George Washington to Lincoln even Clinton,but what we had ,we had detached leadership engaged in stealing million of rupees .Those who do good for the people are just proclaimed as tyrants.People as a whole are stupid and know not who are good for them.A time has come for the supreme leadreship in the subcontinent to emerge,who would be just,kind and loving to all like the father is to his sons.Like the sun shine dispells darkness so would the miseries of people of subcontinent perish when a moment comes when we get down togather to live peacefully with sympathy and consideration for each other.It is sad to see our people steeped in ignorance and petty issues of ethnicity and religious divide and ignoring the real human issues.Pre partition leaders of both communities failed to rise to the occasion giving the British a handle to see the mayhem,which probably they desired.Let there be an occasion when our future generations ignore the divisive tendencies and come togather as any two loving hearts come togather.Any body having not a loving heart is not even an animal, he is not even a stone,he is just a person who is insane .I say Oh ! fellow human beings life is short,live it with jest and freedom ,love and sympathy,tomorrow we will all repent because we wont we there.Leave not the hatred but love for your future generations.I have faith in God and He will do so.Let us wait.A smile and good words to each other without malice but with child like innocence is the only solution ,otherwise,I donot know what happens to our future generations.Never wish or think bad or evil for any one and if we really practice it ,such questions like ,was the partition a mistake ,will never arise.I learned it because never in my life my father talked ill of any religion or faith nor I never knew that human beings could be compartmentalised into segments.For a person like me the world which is full of strife and haterd is not for me .I wish I could have been some where else with those who donot require illwill to live.Let all the good people unite.DUNIYA BHAR KAY SACHE ,SHARIFF LOGO EK HO JAO.

There is still time left for us.
Please for God ,s sake donot go into the vagaries of who did wrong for whom.Have mercy for the poor irrespective of their religion,whose children roam around naked searching for life in garbage and dust bins.We are a poor nations .Donot make mockery of poor. They want two square meals a day.It is a sin to divide the poor and innocent on the religious lines.Love is the greatest force in the world.It demolishes all the barriers of hatred and religions,for which you require a very enlightened leadership which we simlply lack for several hundred of years.Had we got one, we would have lived like brothers and sisters and lovers.The subcontinent was singularly unlucky not to have leaders who could unite but we had enough who led us to hell and ignorance because we were one WHO QUALIFIED FOR IT.Western nations have reached the pinnacle of supremacy,because they were lucky to have hard working ,honest leadreship from George Washington to Lincoln even Clinton,but what we had ,we had detached leadership engaged in stealing million of rupees .Those who do good for the people are just proclaimed as tyrants.People as a whole are stupid and know not who are good for them.A time has come for the supreme leadreship in the subcontinent to emerge,who would be just,kind and loving to all like the father is to his sons.Like the sun shine dispells darkness so would the miseries of people of subcontinent perish when a moment comes when we get down togather to live peacefully with sympathy and consideration for each other.It is sad to see our people steeped in ignorance and petty issues of ethnicity and religious divide and ignoring the real human issues.Pre partition leaders of both communities failed to rise to the occasion giving the British a handle to see the mayhem,which probably they desired.Let there be an occasion when our future generations ignore the divisive tendencies and come togather as any two loving hearts come togather.Any body having not a loving heart is not even an animal, he is not even a stone,he is just a person who is insane .I say Oh ! fellow human beings life is short,live it with jest and freedom ,love and sympathy,tomorrow we will all repent because we wont we there.Leave not the hatred but love for your future generations.I have faith in God and He will do so.Let us wait.A smile and good words to each other without malice but with child like innocence is the only solution ,otherwise,I donot know what happens to our future generations.Never wish or think bad or evil for any one and if we really practice it ,such questions like ,was the partition a mistake ,will never arise.I learned it because never in my life my father talked ill of any religion or faith nor I never knew that human beings could be compartmentalised into segments.For a person like me the world which is full of strife and haterd is not for me .I wish I could have been some where else with those who donot require illwill to live.Let all the good people unite.DUNIYA BHAR KAY SACHE ,SHARIFF LOGO EK HO JAO.

Some of the posts adhere are based on bigotry or lack of knowledge of the situational history.
The question is not clear as to "Mistake by whom?". There were two major communities and one occupying power involved, and all three were involved in the decision making process that culminated in the separation of Pakistan from India. Except for some die-hard secularists, most Pakistanis do not believe it was a mistake despite the hardships under unpleasant dictatorships after independence. They still believe in the purpose and will eventually shed off all internal and external selfish masters.
Leaders of Muslims of India were part of All India Congress from 1906 in a struggle for independence from colonial rule. As the realization came that because of the great war(s) in Europe and the changing world , Britain will not be able to hang on to India forever, the thoughts went to post-independence India, its structure and its constitution. Muslim Leaders worked with the leaders of the majority Hindu leaders in Congress until 1930 for an acceptable structure of post-independence India and on issues related to relations between various post-independence Indian provinces and the Central Government, its Constitution and its contents as related to permanent protection of minorities rights and their way of life. The hawks in Congress from the majority community of Hindus wanted a strong Central Government omnipotent over provinces and constitution reflecting the views of the majority in all respects. Gandhi’s efforts failed to convince these hawks to entrench assurance that the Muslims were seeking. The case of Muslims minority was not the case of a sprinkled minority but a 30 to 40% strong minority with its distinct religion, culture, way of life and Canons that it wanted to preserve and observe and wanted enshrined constitutional assurance that their values shall never be subject to the whim of Hindu majority. This was the crux of the problem that was faced by the Muslim leaders, Gandhi, the Indian Congress and its hawks like Patel and others. Seeing that such assurances were not coming, the Muslims of India started campaign for a separate homeland after 1930. The rest is history.
If mistake has to be assigned, it was the inability of the Congress, deliberate or weakness, that it could not sideline the hawks in Congress and come up with a mutually acceptable Federation formula and constitution. That forced Muslim to opt for a separate homeland instead of being at the mercy of a majority that had shown unwillingness at such critical time to accommodate some of their core requirements.

Some of the posts adhere are based on bigotry or lack of knowledge of the situational history.
The question is not clear as to "Mistake by whom?". There were two major communities and one occupying power involved, and all three were involved in the decision making process that culminated in the separation of Pakistan from India. Except for some die-hard secularists, most Pakistanis do not believe it was a mistake despite the hardships under unpleasant dictatorships after independence. They still believe in the purpose and will eventually shed off all internal and external selfish masters.
Leaders of Muslims of India were part of All India Congress from 1906 in a struggle for independence from colonial rule. As the realization came that because of the great war(s) in Europe and the changing world , Britain will not be able to hang on to India forever, the thoughts went to post-independence India, its structure and its constitution. Muslim Leaders worked with the leaders of the majority Hindu leaders in Congress until 1930 for an acceptable structure of post-independence India and on issues related to relations between various post-independence Indian provinces and the Central Government, its Constitution and its contents as related to permanent protection of minorities rights and their way of life. The hawks in Congress from the majority community of Hindus wanted a strong Central Government omnipotent over provinces and constitution reflecting the views of the majority in all respects. Gandhi’s efforts failed to convince these hawks to entrench assurance that the Muslims were seeking. The case of Muslims minority was not the case of a sprinkled minority but a 30 to 40% strong minority with its distinct religion, culture, way of life and Canons that it wanted to preserve and observe and wanted enshrined constitutional assurance that their values shall never be subject to the whim of Hindu majority. This was the crux of the problem that was faced by the Muslim leaders, Gandhi, the Indian Congress and its hawks like Patel and others. Seeing that such assurances were not coming, the Muslims of India started campaign for a separate homeland after 1930. The rest is history.
If mistake has to be assigned, it was the inability of the Congress, deliberate or weakness, that it could not sideline the hawks in Congress and come up with a mutually acceptable Federation formula and constitution. That forced Muslim to opt for a separate homeland instead of being at the mercy of a majority that had shown unwillingness at such critical time to accommodate some of their core requirements.

To zain
For your information the issue of cow.
It is as a good a relation of mine as of any body else.Some have insight to feel the pain of others and some dont .That is the difference between those who truly love God and some dont .It is a matter of enlightenment and perception.Some react violently in revenge and some just forgive because of Godness in them.By the way just before partition and violence broke out,MA Jinnah had said'We eat cow and Hindus worship it,our traditions and ways of living are sepatare,There is nothing in common in us.That did inflamme the passions.Small thing for you the killing of precious life of innocent ,helpless creature,but painful and bleeding heart for some one who shed blood tears for agony and pain of the poor animal who is a child for us at the same time mother too.God is truly either not there or just ignoring the torture of innocents of all kinds everywhere.Oh God have mercy on mankind for they not what they are doing.

Tom:

Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.

I am in no way suggesting that Pakistan is blameless in this. This creation brought about by the CIA-Saudi-ISI nexus is coming back to haunt all three nations. There was an article a few months back, regarding missing stingers, that mentioned that at the height of the Taliban's power, their leadership, in response to requests about the location of some of these stingers, stated that they would not be turned over because they were being kept "charged for the inevitable, existential war with Iran" (The fundamentalist Sunni ideology of the Taliban and Saudi Wahabi's considers the Shia apostate) - which brings up the question, Was the US really uninvolved in Afghanistan during the Taliban heyday?

I don’t believe this was a case of simply turning a blind eye to what Pakistan was doing - there were tremendous financial interests (the UNOCOL TAP pipeline) and the potential use of the Taliban against Iran. Ahmed Rashid, a rabidly anti Musharraf/Military journalist, has an excellent book called the Taliban that discusses this aspect. The Northern Alliance, that the US is in bed with today, was being supported by the Iranians before 911. It was but logical that Iran extended a helping hand to topple the Taliban. 911 forced the US's hand, and that particular "ally" (Taliban) had to be dropped. So I don't believe the US ever stopped support, overt or covert, for the Taliban until 911. It is ironic that both regimes, Taliban and Saddam, propped up and supported as a bulwark against Iran, ended up being demolished by the US itself. The Iranians have been on the winning side, since 911, in this geo-strategic chess game.

One point that I believe you are only partially correct about are the Madrassa’s. Almost all of those were the brainchild of, and funded by, the Saudis, and still are to this day. The Pakistani establishment, other than Zia-ul Haq, was never quite as virulently pro “Islamic extremism” as the Saudis, but did allow their funding to continue since a sanctioned and bankrupt Pakistan could not afford to damage the Saudi relationship.

Another misconception is that the “Tribal leaders” Pakistan supported are the ones behind this. They are not. Most of the ex-Mujahideen leadership that Pakistan built relations with is gone, or inconsequential. The “Tribal Leaders” that Pakistan has traditionally had influence with and supported are actually quite weak right now, and are being threatened and killed by a new breed of Taliban in collusion with Al Qaeda and foreign militants form the CAR’s. Approximately 250 pro-Government Tribal Elders have been killed in FATA since 2004. Soldiers and opponents being beheaded, mutilated and tortured – these barbarities were never practiced in the FATA- they have been brought about by this “new terrorist”.

I have to run, enjoy your holidays.

Zain

“…Talibanization is a huge threat to Pakistan, and unfortunately the US presence is contributing to it…”

I agree and in addition, the US war in Iraq has also contributed to the "Talibanization" in Pakistan, but, in my opinion, Pakistan has also created many of their own problems.

Pakistan funded (through the ISI) and supported the Taliban throughout their rise to power and rule of Afghanistan. The tribal areas supplied the Taliban army thousands of Afghan refugees and Pakistani students that attended radical madrasses in the northwest territories. The Taliban owe their unique interpretation of Islam to these madrasses. The (radical) madrasses were funded by the Pakistani government and students were given a free education. In return, the students fought for the Taliban. As you know, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia were the only countries in the world that recognized the Talaban even after ruling the country for five years.

The CIA and the ISI also financed jihadist (from Saudi Arabia etc.) in the war to liberate Afghanistan from the Soviet Union. So the ISI (Pakistani government) has supported radical Islamic fundamentalist to "liberate" Afghanistan (and Kashmir/India) for nearly thirty years. Foe example, Harkatul Jihad Al-Islami (HuJI) is suspected to be behind the terrorist attack in southern India in late August. They are a fundamentalist Sunni terrorist organization based in Bangladesh and are closely affiliated with al Qaeda. The organization has received training in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The war in Afghanistan and US policy in Pakistan are inseparable because the same (Pakistani) government that empowered the leaders in northern Pakistan to support the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan must now confront the tribal leaders who, today, protect, supply and harbor the Taliban in their fight to regain power. The government has no control over the Northern Frontiers at this point, and Islamic fundamentalist operate with impunity. The emboldened tribal leaders have now begun a war against Pakistan as well. The Red Mosque is a good example of a madrassa that brainwashes children on an Islamic philosophy that is contrary to what most Pakistanis believe. It seems to me that Pakistan has created their own monster, but the US support of Musharraf has certainly exasperated the situation.

A recent Pugh poll shows that Bin Laden is supported by about 50% of the population of Pakistan which, in my opinion, is an obvious anti US sentiment. The bad news is that "force" may be the only effective method to get the NW territories under control.

The way the situation is right now, Pakistan does not see the situation in Afghanistan improving under the US, it also does not see the US remaining their indefinitely, and the diversion of resources to the Iraq theater seems to be a sign that the US doe snot really care.

But what is in this for Pakistan? We actually had less instability along our border, and in most of Afghanistan, when the Taliban were in charge, most "Jihad" and "talibanization" resources were going into Afghanistan, rather than Pakistan. Now we have no stability either on the border or in Pakistani tribal areas. To pursue current US policy is to just continue this macabre game with no end in sight.

Tom:

Bhutto's popularity is limited to "cult followers" - her followers will inevitable bring in her father as a sign of her "leadership qualities". Most polls are taken in urban areas, and are not necessarily reflective of the views of a vast majority of Pakistanis living in rural areas.

At the end of the day, Pakistanis will vote either based on "Biradri" (tribal, clan affiliations) or, where such attachments are weak, on the basis of improvements in their districts, where the current incumbents will have a huge advantage.

The US does not have to go away, but it has to stop interfering based on its own short term interests, which at this point seems to be a fixation with Pakistani Nukes, and a paradigm shift in the way Pakistan has been dealing with the Taliban, despite the fact that its policy has resulted in zero progress in Afghanistan.

And like Iran has become the scapegoat for explaining away the failings and violence in Iraq (though there is probably some support from them), Pakistan has become one for the US's failure in Afghanistan.

The failure is all of US policy - focusing much more on military solutions rather than development - the Afghan poppy crop is estimated to be about 54 percent of GDP this year. With those kinds of socio-economic issues, you could have all 500,000 Pakistani soldiers in FATA and still not get anywhere.

Talibanization is a huge threat to Pakistan, and unfortunately the US presence is contributing to it. But simply leaving is not the answer either because we would be back at square one, with warring factions.

Another view, that might be shed some light on why the Pakistan military is not going all tongs and hammers at the Taliban, and the distrust of the US, Afghanistn, India nexus is presented here:

http://www.ahmedquraishi.com/latest_col.php?id=6

Zain

Based on what you are saying, you are no fan of Bhutto who you see as a tool of the US. She has had many opportunities via the US press to campaign in the US, thats for sure, and it's obvious, the US government prefers Bhutto. Bhutto is also popular in Pakistan, however.

So what would you desire, just free and fair elections? If you are hoping the US will just go away, I don't believe that will happen as the US and Pakistan are coupled through the war in Afghanistan (Taliban), al-Qaeda terrorist training camps in the NWFP, and nuclear weapons.

Do you see the Talabanization of Pakistan as a threat to Pakistan? Do you see the Talabanization as a result of US interference?

Thanks

Tom:

There is unrest in the Tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, but don't believe everything you hear about "turmoil" related to the "emergency" in the Western Media.

The lawyers are all affiliated with one political party or the other, and there have been no protests by regular Pakistanis, who may dislike the emergency, but dislike the politicians the US is trying to shove down our throats even less.

My opinion is that Musharraf's second "coup" preempted a "soft coup" by the US using Bhutto. She has already made statements in public that amount to compromising Pakistani national Security for a chance at power, God knows what she has promised in private.

Back to the lawyers and politicians protesting - as an acquaintance said, "lawyers and politicians deserve a few beatings from time to time".

Zain

Thanks for the reply and information. There is a lot of turmoil in Pakistan these days.

And hello to you Tom,

School is going quite well. The light at the end of the tunnel grows ever brighter and closer.

"At the time the Balfour Declaration (1917) was included in the League of Nations mandate for Britain (giving the Zionist a homeland), the Palestinians were not a nation, nor had they ever been a nation or state. Do you believe your reasoning (above) can be applied to the Palestinian-Israel conflict?
"

My interest has sort of moved away from Middle East politics to those of my home, Pakistan, so excuse me if I make any incorrect assumptions.

First off, I have no issues with the existence of Israel as a nation.

Moving on to whether my reasoning can be applied to Israel and Palestine, some differences - Pakistan was not populated by immigrants, though we have absorbed immigrants from Arabia, Central Asia and Persia - we were the center of the Indus Valley civilization and boasted advanced cities as far back as 7000 BCE (look up Mehrgarh, an interesting series of posts on it here:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/history-culture/7650-ancient-history-not-appreciated-pakistanis-7.html#post107824

And this is real history, not the mythological Abrahamic kind. Culture, beliefs and languages evolved and changed, but the Pakistanis are primarily descended from those ancient inhabitants, and we demanded a nation based on land that our people had called home for thousands of years.

There are a lot of diverse opinions, rants, and beliefs posted here which I will not get into all of that but actually aim at trying to post the answer to the question that was poised:

Retrospectively it may be a futile task and is purely academic however interesting in taking part in this exercise. Based on some of the posts it sickens me but is unsurprising at the level of ignorance that is prevalent in our world.

Muslims are not evil, nor are they worse then Nazis and nor is it the root of Pakistan's and other Muslim nations. Please show a little more maturity in expressing your opinions in a public domain. Courtesy and respect is something that could really change how people treat each other yet we choose to ignore it.

Lest this become a sermon on becoming a better person I will return to the topic; In my view point Bangladesh, Pakistan and India should have remained a single entity. A lot of people's discussions above have ignored Bangladesh in their dialogue however I feel that this is a mistake because it was part of the entire deal. Separating East and West Pakistan was a mistake, it makes no sense wedging a country in between one country, not sure on my history but it is not sound strategy.

The other premise that is prevalent here is that the British imperial power at that time was acting on the basis of what would be best for the Sub-continent, which is simply false. As an imperialist power facing unrest in its colony, to the point they had decided to leave meant they wanted to get out of there as quick as possible.

Another point which is important to note here is the lack of revolutionary thinkers / intellectuals that was a result of the British stay in India. White man's burden was the prevalent ideology that created a certain inequality between the indigenous population and the colonizers. They were not going to make the same mistake as they did in North America.

Moving on, in India, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Maoists, Zoroastrians, Christians, Sikhs, etc lived together in relative peace until the partition. A word to the wise their was a specific reason for this. Yes it is agreed there may not have been political power parity and the prevalent caste system did not help much either. However, these issues would have been worked out post-independence like every other country has worked their respective issues. The US of A had a civil war that was based on basic human rights, it divided the nation to the point where it was very possible that two sovereign entities could have emerged. Every nation at its inception has to work through economic, social and cultural issues. I believe there could have been collateral damage due to this but my feeling is that it would have been less in light of the violence that ensued partition. I have heard the horror stories and both sides are guilty of atrocities. Most of my family had to move because of threats to their lives. These were people who lived next to each other for decades and because they were polarized by a higher power decided to take due process into their own hands.

Sans partition I think we as a region would have been more powerful both economically and culturally. Kashmir would not have been an issue, we would not have had to fight wars over disputed territory, thus not having countries which would have to pour the majority of their GDP and FDI into the military to protect its borders. A joint military would arguably have required less funding and without any "enemies" on the border would not have to have an arms race. Bangladesh would not have lost a lot of its industrial base and infrastructure, the Iran pipeline would have happened sooner, natural resources of Balochistan could have been tapped sooner, the country could have in theory enjoyed a higher literacy rate (highly debatable). At the same time you would have to take into account the countless difficulties that would have arisen due to governing such a vast and diverse population, however it would not have been impossible.

Finally, because I think I have gone on long enough without having a specific thesis I want to write a short note on extremism that people are correlating to Islam and Pakistan.

Afghanistan and subsequently all the refugees that poured into Pakistan because of the war there was an American made thing. The Soviets attacked and the US reacted by doing anything and everything they could to stop it. Which meant arming the "freedom fighters" and having the CIA train people like Osama Bin Laden with the sole aim of repelling the Soviet invasion. What was done for the Afghan population after the war was done? So how do you expect autonomous tribes, with an immense stockpile of arms and with the lack of any guidance to do? A lot of the extremist problems that Pakistan, the US, and other nations are facing is dated back to this event in history. NOT ALL PROBLEMS... Not to say that Pakistan is not guilty of fueling extremism when it has been convenient for them, like funding and supplying "freedom fighters" in Kashmir. It is important to note that extremism exists for a variety of reasons that cannot simply be generalized as a Muslim problem. The Palestine / Israel issue is as complex not because Mulsims are crazy and all they spend their time doing is killing, and blowing up things. Yeah it works great for the media powerhouse which paints a completely bias picture as compared to ground realities.

There are a lot of diverse opinions, rants, and beliefs posted here which I will not get into all of that but actually aim at trying to post the answer to the question that was poised:

Retrospectively it may be a futile task and is purely academic however interesting in taking part in this exercise. Based on some of the posts it sickens me but is unsurprising at the level of ignorance that is prevalent in our world.

Muslims are not evil, nor are they worse then Nazis and nor is it the root of Pakistan's and other Muslim nations. Please show a little more maturity in expressing your opinions in a public domain. Courtesy and respect is something that could really change how people treat each other yet we choose to ignore it.

Lest this become a sermon on becoming a better person I will return to the topic; In my view point Bangladesh, Pakistan and India should have remained a single entity. A lot of people's discussions above have ignored Bangladesh in their dialogue however I feel that this is a mistake because it was part of the entire deal. Separating East and West Pakistan was a mistake, it makes no sense wedging a country in between one country, not sure on my history but it is not sound strategy.

The other premise that is prevalent here is that the British imperial power at that time was acting on the basis of what would be best for the Sub-continent, which is simply false. As an imperialist power facing unrest in its colony, to the point they had decided to leave meant they wanted to get out of there as quick as possible.

Another point which is important to note here is the lack of revolutionary thinkers / intellectuals that was a result of the British stay in India. White man's burden was the prevalent ideology that created a certain inequality between the indigenous population and the colonizers. They were not going to make the same mistake as they did in North America.

Moving on, in India, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Maoists, Zoroastrians, Christians, Sikhs, etc lived together in relative peace until the partition. A word to the wise their was a specific reason for this. Yes it is agreed there may not have been political power parity and the prevalent caste system did not help much either. However, these issues would have been worked out post-independence like every other country has worked their respective issues. The US of A had a civil war that was based on basic human rights, it divided the nation to the point where it was very possible that two sovereign entities could have emerged. Every nation at its inception has to work through economic, social and cultural issues. I believe there could have been collateral damage due to this but my feeling is that it would have been less in light of the violence that ensued partition. I have heard the horror stories and both sides are guilty of atrocities. Most of my family had to move because of threats to their lives. These were people who lived next to each other for decades and because they were polarized by a higher power decided to take due process into their own hands.

Sans partition I think we as a region would have been more powerful both economically and culturally. Kashmir would not have been an issue, we would not have had to fight wars over disputed territory, thus not having countries which would have to pour the majority of their GDP and FDI into the military to protect its borders. A joint military would arguably have required less funding and without any "enemies" on the border would not have to have an arms race. Bangladesh would not have lost a lot of its industrial base and infrastructure, the Iran pipeline would have happened sooner, natural resources of Balochistan could have been tapped sooner, the country could have in theory enjoyed a higher literacy rate (highly debatable). At the same time you would have to take into account the countless difficulties that would have arisen due to governing such a vast and diverse population, however it would not have been impossible.

Finally, because I think I have gone on long enough without having a specific thesis I want to write a short note on extremism that people are correlating to Islam and Pakistan.

Afghanistan and subsequently all the refugees that poured into Pakistan because of the war there was an American made thing. The Soviets attacked and the US reacted by doing anything and everything they could to stop it. Which meant arming the "freedom fighters" and having the CIA train people like Osama Bin Laden with the sole aim of repelling the Soviet invasion. What was done for the Afghan population after the war was done? So how do you expect autonomous tribes, with an immense stockpile of arms and with the lack of any guidance to do? A lot of the extremist problems that Pakistan, the US, and other nations are facing is dated back to this event in history. NOT ALL PROBLEMS... Not to say that Pakistan is not guilty of fueling extremism when it has been convenient for them, like funding and supplying "freedom fighters" in Kashmir. It is important to note that extremism exists for a variety of reasons that cannot simply be generalized as a Muslim problem. The Palestine / Israel issue is as complex not because Mulsims are crazy and all they spend their time doing is killing, and blowing up things. Yeah it works great for the media powerhouse which paints a completely bias picture as compared to ground realities.

There are a lot of diverse opinions, rants, and beliefs posted here which I will not get into all of that but actually aim at trying to post the answer to the question that was poised:

Retrospectively it may be a futile task and is purely academic however interesting in taking part in this exercise. Based on some of the posts it sickens me but is unsurprising at the level of ignorance that is prevalent in our world.

Muslims are not evil, nor are they worse then Nazis and nor is it the root of Pakistan's and other Muslim nations. Please show a little more maturity in expressing your opinions in a public domain. Courtesy and respect is something that could really change how people treat each other yet we choose to ignore it.

Lest this become a sermon on becoming a better person I will return to the topic; In my view point Bangladesh, Pakistan and India should have remained a single entity. A lot of people's discussions above have ignored Bangladesh in their dialogue however I feel that this is a mistake because it was part of the entire deal. Separating East and West Pakistan was a mistake, it makes no sense wedging a country in between one country, not sure on my history but it is not sound strategy.

The other premise that is prevalent here is that the British imperial power at that time was acting on the basis of what would be best for the Sub-continent, which is simply false. As an imperialist power facing unrest in its colony, to the point they had decided to leave meant they wanted to get out of there as quick as possible.

Another point which is important to note here is the lack of revolutionary thinkers / intellectuals that was a result of the British stay in India. White man's burden was the prevalent ideology that created a certain inequality between the indigenous population and the colonizers. They were not going to make the same mistake as they did in North America.

Moving on, in India, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Maoists, Zoroastrians, Christians, Sikhs, etc lived together in relative peace until the partition. A word to the wise their was a specific reason for this. Yes it is agreed there may not have been political power parity and the prevalent caste system did not help much either. However, these issues would have been worked out post-independence like every other country has worked their respective issues. The US of A had a civil war that was based on basic human rights, it divided the nation to the point where it was very possible that two sovereign entities could have emerged. Every nation at its inception has to work through economic, social and cultural issues. I believe there could have been collateral damage due to this but my feeling is that it would have been less in light of the violence that ensued partition. I have heard the horror stories and both sides are guilty of atrocities. Most of my family had to move because of threats to their lives. These were people who lived next to each other for decades and because they were polarized by a higher power decided to take due process into their own hands.

Sans partition I think we as a region would have been more powerful both economically and culturally. Kashmir would not have been an issue, we would not have had to fight wars over disputed territory, thus not having countries which would have to pour the majority of their GDP and FDI into the military to protect its borders. A joint military would arguably have required less funding and without any "enemies" on the border would not have to have an arms race. Bangladesh would not have lost a lot of its industrial base and infrastructure, the Iran pipeline would have happened sooner, natural resources of Balochistan could have been tapped sooner, the country could have in theory enjoyed a higher literacy rate (highly debatable). At the same time you would have to take into account the countless difficulties that would have arisen due to governing such a vast and diverse population, however it would not have been impossible.

Finally, because I think I have gone on long enough without having a specific thesis I want to write a short note on extremism that people are correlating to Islam and Pakistan.

Afghanistan and subsequently all the refugees that poured into Pakistan because of the war there was an American made thing. The Soviets attacked and the US reacted by doing anything and everything they could to stop it. Which meant arming the "freedom fighters" and having the CIA train people like Osama Bin Laden with the sole aim of repelling the Soviet invasion. What was done for the Afghan population after the war was done? So how do you expect autonomous tribes, with an immense stockpile of arms and with the lack of any guidance to do? A lot of the extremist problems that Pakistan, the US, and other nations are facing is dated back to this event in history. NOT ALL PROBLEMS... Not to say that Pakistan is not guilty of fueling extremism when it has been convenient for them, like funding and supplying "freedom fighters" in Kashmir. It is important to note that extremism exists for a variety of reasons that cannot simply be generalized as a Muslim problem. The Palestine / Israel issue is as complex not because Mulsims are crazy and all they spend their time doing is killing, and blowing up things. Yeah it works great for the media powerhouse which paints a completely bias picture as compared to ground realities.

Zain

How's school Zain? It has been awhile since I've seen you on this site.

"...But Indians continue to mislead - ther ewas no partition becasue there was no united India. The word India throughout history referred to the "indian subcontinent" as a region, not aas a nation or state..."

At the time the Balfour Declaration (1917) was included in the League of Nations mandate for Britain (giving the Zionist a homeland), the Palestinians were not a nation, nor had they ever been a nation or state. Do you believe your reasoning (above) can be applied to the Palestinian-Israel conflict?

Note that Zionist began immigrating to Palestine in about 1880 (when Palestine was under the control of the Ottoman Empire) and built their population from 10,000 to about 80-90,000 by the time the British were given control of the Palestinian territory.

Surrender,

You're right that the cow has functioned as a mother for mankind. But, I honestly believe you are overestimating this issue as a cause for partition. Nor did anyone criticize the British for eating beef in India. That never came up in times of the freedom struggle.

The only problem I have, is that so many like you just seem to be concentrating on the ugly violence in the Muslim world, and failing to realize how much violence there is in your Indian society as well.

Jinnah really tried to come into an understanding with the All India Congress party. And for your information, Day of Action--at least as far as Jinnah was concerned--was not meant for violence. He never ever advocated violence. Mullahs hated him. That was called as a result of Hindu Maha Saba's threats at that time. It is another story that Ghoons took over and caused violence. Please read 'Freedom at Midnight'.

In the United States of America, one becomes a citizen after five years of residents. Most Muslims in India are natives of India. Even if some came from outside, they have been there at least 500 years. And are supposed to be equal before the law. You can not ethnically cleanse them, without giving them their share of resources. And please don't comment about other groups birth rates as if that was just to upset you. Please listen to your own voice. Are you tolerant?

If you're talking about the Ghujaar woman being raped in Punjab by Thakur men, both the victim and the criminals were Muslims. Maybe you were thinking about the atrocities in Bangladesh.

The partition is now a reality. However, I still consider it a major faillure by the leaders of all sides. I cannot believe how vicious those acts were against peoples of all religions. And thank you saying that there are good and bad in every community. The majority of humans are good, always have been; otherwise, our species would not have survived.

To
Zain,

With all humility,there is a difference.One only has to have a sensitive heart to understand the pain and suffering of a innocent creature butchered for no fault but just because for its innocence and harmlessness.That is why the killers and those who save and love life should live separately and distantly. The great God has all his designs for those who believe in ruthless killings of his innocent creatures and those who donot.Partition or separatism was not his deed but it did reduce and minimise the subsequent killings inspite of the ongoing efforts to keep it going .Let us wait till he decides. Man is at fault everywhere all of us included.The lesson is just have free and independent,inquisitive mind.Let one not go astray just because some one said :Follow me:.

Yes for sepration of Pakistan from India. This could be better when you rethink any thing after some gap of time. But at that time it was the reality that muslims donot want to live with hindus and so we have pakistan.

Yes for sepration of Pakistan from India. This could be better when you rethink any thing after some gap of time. But at that time it was the reality that muslims donot want to live with hindus and so we have pakistan.

Right!

The Cow was the reason behind the creation of India and Pakistan!

Now I've heard everything!

TO
Zain
It is nothing in person.You find good kind,innocent people in all nations and communities and religions.Only thing was that all good people should have come togather on the basis of shared values of love and mutual sympathy rather than on ungodly ,inhuman dogmas of religious biogotry,hatred and personal gains.This exacly was the stand of Swami Vivekanand (if at all you have read about him) and the politicians like Subhash Bose.
Pakistan was basically demanded by those who never went to Pakistan but were never ousted.And those who didnot demand it like Punjabis were forced to get it.Any way by going from your kind of arithmatic you got the land mass in proportion to your than population in entire sub continent ,therefore the question of asking for 20% of additional land for adjusting another 200 million doesnot arise.Please keep birth control measures in mind.It is not our fault in case you keep on increasing your population to enslave your self once again.Any body from any where is most welcome in India since time immemorial but there is one condition that you must profess tolerace,peace equality of all religions and should be grateful to your ancestors,the great ancient saints of yours and above all the commitment for respect of all kinds of lives including the lives of mothers which nourishes all of us with milk.The mother which gives us milk throughout our lives,we are grateful to her and we rightly worship her but you respond by killing her and not stopping at that even eating that most innocent creatures of all only to spite your ancestors.The difference between us and you is that we admire cows for her motherly love whereas you kill it mercilessly.Who is right, killer and eater of mothers flesh or those who have given their lives to save it.I leave it to you and to God to think and do fair justice as an angel who doesnot require cows flesh just to live for a few moments.That exactly was the cause of partition.Had you not indulged in gruesome killing of this innocent animal,India would have never been partitioned and till the time this goes on no God and nature will everlet us live in peace.Unless we learn to respect each others feelings and emotions and learn to love each other with depth,sincerity we will be ruined by infighting and evil.Let us march head to the lofty ideals for respect and love of life and not head towards killing of all sorts. God is never on the side of killers .This is the ancient law.

TO
Zain
It is nothing in person.You find good kind,innocent people in all nations and communities and religions.Only thing was that all good people should have come togather on the basis of shared values of love and mutual sympathy rather than on ungodly ,inhuman dogmas of religious biogotry,hatred and personal gains.This exacly was the stand of Swami Vivekanand (if at all you have read about him) and the politicians like Subhash Bose.
Pakistan was basically demanded by those who never went to Pakistan but were never ousted.And those who didnot demand it like Punjabis were forced to get it.Any way by going from your kind of arithmatic you got the land mass in proportion to your than population in entire sub continent ,therefore the question of asking for 20% of additional land for adjusting another 200 million doesnot arise.Please keep birth control measures in mind.It is not our fault in case you keep on increasing your population to enslave your self once again.Any body from any where is most welcome in India since time immemorial but there is one condition that you must profess tolerace,peace equality of all religions and should be grateful to your ancestors,the great ancient saints of yours and above all the commitment for respect of all kinds of lives including the lives of mothers which nourishes all of us with milk.The mother which gives us milk throughout our lives,we are grateful to her and we rightly worship her but you respond by killing her and not stopping at that even eating that most innocent creatures of all only to spite your ancestors.The difference between us and you is that we admire cows for her motherly love whereas you kill it mercilessly.Who is right, killer and eater of mothers flesh or those who have given their lives to save it.I leave it to you and to God to think and do fair justice as an angel who doesnot require cows flesh just to live for a few moments.That exactly was the cause of partition.Had you not indulged in gruesome killing of this innocent animal,India would have never been partitioned and till the time this goes on no God and nature will everlet us live in peace.Unless we learn to respect each others feelings and emotions and learn to love each other with depth,sincerity we will be ruined by infighting and evil.Let us march head to the lofty ideals for respect and love of life and not head towards killing of all sorts. God is never on the side of killers .This is the ancient law.

TO
Zain
It is nothing in person.You find good kind,innocent people in all nations and communities and religions.Only thing was that all good people should have come togather on the basis of shared values of love and mutual sympathy rather than on ungodly ,inhuman dogmas of religious biogotry,hatred and personal gains.This exacly was the stand of Swami Vivekanand (if at all you have read about him) and the politicians like Subhash Bose.
Pakistan was basically demanded by those who never went to Pakistan but were never ousted.And those who didnot demand it like Punjabis were forced to get it.Any way by going from your kind of arithmatic you got the land mass in proportion to your than population in entire sub continent ,therefore the question of asking for 20% of additional land for adjusting another 200 million doesnot arise.Please keep birth control measures in mind.It is not our fault in case you keep on increasing your population to enslave your self once again.Any body from any where is most welcome in India since time immemorial but there is one condition that you must profess tolerace,peace equality of all religions and should be grateful to your ancestors,the great ancient saints of yours and above all the commitment for respect of all kinds of lives including the lives of mothers which nourishes all of us with milk.The mother which gives us milk throughout our lives,we are grateful to her and we rightly worship her but you respond by killing her and not stopping at that even eating that most innocent creatures of all, only to spite your ancestors.The difference between us and you is that we admire cows for her motherly love whereas you kill it mercilessly.Who is right, killer and eater of mothers flesh or those who have given their lives to save it.I leave it to you and to God to think and do fair justice as an angel who doesnot require cows flesh just to live for a few moments of life.That exactly was the cause of partition.Had you not indulged in gruesome killing of this innocent animal,India would have never been partitioned and till the time this goes on no God and nature will everlet us live in peace.Unless we learn to respect each others feelings and emotions and learn to love each other with depth,sincerity, we will be ruined by infighting and evil on one pretext or the other regardless of religious differences.Let us march head to the lofty ideals for respect and love of life and not head towards killing of all sorts of creatures. God is never on the side of killers .This is the ancient law.

Anju:

Whether partition can be justified or not depends upon the situation on the looking at the Balkans violence for example...

But Indians continue to mislead - ther ewas no partition becasue there was no united India. The word India throughout history referred to the "indian subcontinent" as a region, not aas a nation or state. The region was comprised of several independent and different Kingdoms and civilizations , with different cultures, languages and even races. Just because the British "united" it into one colony does not automatically create a single "India".

By that reasoning, if someone conquered South East Asia, and united it into one colony for administrative purposes, would you now say that its "one nation"? The same with Europe - just because people look similar does not mean that they are "automatically one nation".

India was never partitioned, it was always a fragmented region, the British conquered it, and India and Pakistan were in fact a UNIFICATION of different princely states, autonomous territories and provinces into two large nations.

Stop parroting this lie of "partition".

Partition of any country cannot be justified with whatever arguments. However, keeping the current and continuing chaos in Pakistan in mind, it seems, now, that the division of India in 1947 wasn't that bad an idea after all. Because, otherwise, today India too would have become a breeding ground and bastion for terrorism and extremism.

Also, India's annexation took place due to full-fledged support and motivation to Muhammad Ali Jinnah from people belonging to his "faith": Indian muslims, who conveniently got manipulated by that smart politician into believing about a paradise called Pakistan.

However, I sincerely feel very sorry for all those people from both sides of the Line of Control for all those horrible experiences they had to undergo during that most unfortunate phase in the history of India.

Interesting how the majority of Pakistanis by and large are united in their Pakistaniat (or Pakistani hood) but the West and Indians insist that somehow Pakistan was a mistake. Err.. thats for Pakistanis to decide, and whatever the ills of our nation, as it struggles to evolve, we are quite happy to be an independent Pakistan.

By the way your question is misleading - there never was a united India - it was always a disparate collection of kingdoms, princely states etc. and the only "unity" it saw was as a "territory" conquered by the British -but then the British conquered a lot of the world -Is all of that supposed to be part of India too?

To Surender:

Pakistan would be quite happy to welcome the Muslims in India, at about 200 million out of I billion they comprise twenty percent of your population, so we'll also accept 20 percent of current Indian territory adjacent to Pakistan to make it a fair transition. The Muslims in India in 1947 were not living in trees you know - they owned land and assets, as do the ones now - a transfer of territory along with people is the fair thing to do - otherwise its just ethnic cleansing.

The story of partition of India is a story of human failure.Both sides of the dispute are wrong .Both have been equally misguided .People on both sides are basically intolerant ,unreasonable,hypocrites,self righteous and arrogant.One side appears to have the faith which they claim is the only true merciful religion while others are just Godless and hence deserve to be killed because they donot follow what they expect others to do and what they would like them to believe in.Pakistan has no system for introspection of their faults unlike Christianity which had the guts and martyrs to question the authority of the Church.The present Western society has a liberal attitude towards religious faiths except the inherent motive of gathering profit from everywhere.One of the reasons of partition was the memory of millions of Hindus killed by Moslem invaders.One of the rulers in Delhi killed thousands of Brahmins because they refused to convert,while others did and today the same people who converted from Hinduism under duress and sword are thw worst enemies of HINDUS.Another reason for partition was existence of hateful system of despising the poor and downtrodden under the rigid caste system,existence of inherent violent madness in spreading the jehadi way of intolerant thought process.Above all the discredit for spreading the communal virus goes to than political leadership and bad luck of the people of not possesing greatmen to guide their destinies.The fate of the people was decided by halfbaked false saints on oneside and diseased mind on the other side compounded by tuberculosis affecting the brainof one separatist leader who could breathe fire and put water on fire by his call for direct action of killing nonmuslims.
The partition of India was good for both the communities, muslims and non muslims but than justice demands all the Muslims should have gone to Pakistan and left India,the land of their dreams,the paradise.Till that happens Kashmir should be part of India and also the nonmuslims who have been killed or evicted from Kashmie too should be remembered.No one ever talks of the lives of nonmuslims living in Pakistan,who are living the lives worse than animals as they are abused and treated like that.They were used to be called dogs, ther women raped in rural areas on the pretext of insulting the religion of Pakistan. This has happened many times and has always gone unreported unlike in a soft state like India.God save this world from those who take their inspiration for going to heaven by killing innocent even in this era.

The story of partition of India is a story of human failure.Both sides of the dispute are wrong .Both have been equally misguided .People on both sides are basically intolerant ,unreasonable,hypocrites,self righteous and arrogant.One side appears to have the faith which they claim is the only true merciful religion while others are just Godless and hence deserve to be killed because they donot follow what they expect others to do and what they would like them to believe in.Pakistan has no system for introspection of their faults unlike Christianity which had the guts and martyrs to question the authority of the Church.The present Western society has a liberal attitude towards religious faiths except the inherent motive of gathering profit from everywhere.One of the reasons of partition was the memory of millions of Hindus killed by Moslem invaders.One of the rulers in Delhi killed thousands of Brahmins because they refused to convert,while others did and today the same people who converted from Hinduism under duress and sword are thw worst enemies of HINDUS.Another reason for partition was existence of hateful system of despising the poor and downtrodden under the rigid caste system,existence of inherent violent madness in spreading the jehadi way of intolerant thought process.Above all the discredit for spreading the communal virus goes to than political leadership and bad luck of the people of not possesing greatmen to guide their destinies.The fate of the people was decided by halfbaked false saints on oneside and diseased mind on the other side compounded by tuberculosis affecting the brainof one separatist leader who could breathe fire and put water on fire by his call for direct action of killing nonmuslims.
The partition of India was good for both the communities, muslims and non muslims but than justice demands all the Muslims should have gone to Pakistan and left India,the land of their dreams,the paradise.Till that happens Kashmir should be part of India and also the nonmuslims who have been killed or evicted from Kashmie too should be remembered.No one ever talks of the lives of nonmuslims living in Pakistan,who are living the lives worse than animals as they are abused and treated like that.They were used to be called dogs, ther women raped in rural areas on the pretext of insulting the religion of Pakistan. This has happened many times and has always gone unreported unlike in a soft state like India.God save this world from those who take their inspiration for going to heaven by killing innocent even in this era.

Um, no "Neutral".

Mike B. is definitely not a Muslim.
However, despite your misleading name, your blatant Islamophobia is showing!
You might want to tuck that in a little so it's not so obvious.

This gentleman named MikeB is an Al Qaeda sympathiser, a propagandist for Pakistan's dangerous Islamists and probably a "Jihad" marketing agent. And this christian name MikeB is definitely not his real name, its just a pseudonym to disguise his Jihadi leanings. PERIOD.

Southern Cross Astrology horoscope chart astrology free software the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle horoscope chart astrology free software new: Daily horoscope

Southern Cross Astrology [url=http://spin.fh-bielefeld.de/view_profile.php?userid=30048"][b]horoscope chart astrology free software[/b][/url] the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle [url=http://boinc.gorlaeus.net/view_profile.php?userid=9072"][u]horoscope chart astrology free software[/u][/url] new: Daily horoscope

Southern Cross Astrology horoscope chart astrology free software the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle horoscope chart astrology free software new: Daily horoscope

Southern Cross Astrology [url=http://spin.fh-bielefeld.de/view_profile.php?userid=30048"][b]horoscope chart astrology free software[/b][/url] the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle [url=http://boinc.gorlaeus.net/view_profile.php?userid=9072"][u]horoscope chart astrology free software[/u][/url] new: Daily horoscope

Southern Cross Astrology [url=http://spin.fh-bielefeld.de/view_profile.php?userid=30048"][i]horoscope chart astrology free software[/i][/url] the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle [url=http://boinc.gorlaeus.net/view_profile.php?userid=9072"][u]horoscope chart astrology free software[/u][/url] new: Daily horoscope

Southern Cross Astrology [url=http://spin.fh-bielefeld.de/view_profile.php?userid=30048"][i]horoscope chart astrology free software[/i][/url] the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle [url=http://boinc.gorlaeus.net/view_profile.php?userid=9072"][u]horoscope chart astrology free software[/u][/url] new: Daily horoscope

Southern Cross Astrology horoscope chart astrology free software the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle horoscope chart astrology free software new: Daily horoscope

Southern Cross Astrology horoscope chart astrology free software the Daily Dose., Daily Stars - Consult the Tarot Oracle horoscope chart astrology free software new: Daily horoscope

Nivedita

Bravo to you for your efforts to refute MikeB’s propaganda on Kashmir! But as noble as your attempt to get out the facts about Kashmiri history and tell the truth are, they are ultimately futile. MikeB is a troll, a plant and is deliberately disseminating disinformation about Kashmir. Look at the tone of his writing and the things he has written. They are so out of the realm of reality that there is no point in disproving them. His writing is pure fiction. Save your sanity and let him troll.

Perhaps,yes,but its seed was sown long before and it was almost impssible to stop it at that juncture.

Perhaps,yes,but its seed was sown long before and it was almost impssible to stop it at that juncture.

Perhaps,yes,but its seed was sown long before and it was almost impssible to stop it at that juncture.

Nivedita- you are WAY too easily manipulated.
Is there any response to anyone (unless Indians of high birth) that isn't under the fire of your insults?
Do you really think calling names is an appropriate and valid rejoinder?
Dear, it is just plain bad manners to come to an american website and call americans ignorant.
In case you missed this point, this is the Washington Post blog, an american newspaper.
Really it is hopeless to expect impartial or objective dialogue with you and I suspect you will chase all reasonable voices out and end up talking with yourself.

http://www.panunkashmir.org/

This is a website of Kashmiri pandits who were subject to ethnic cleansing from their birthplace.

AGENDA DRIVEN REVISIONISM: Perhaps you could start by using your real name. And honestly, if you think an American knows more about Indian history than an Indian, you are incredibly prejudiced yourself. Talk about ignorant Americans!

AGENDA DRIVEN REVISIONISM: Perhaps you could start by using your real name. And honestly, if you think an American knows more about Indian history than an Indian, you are incredibly prejudiced yourself. Talk about ingnorant Americans!

MikeB: How about you tell a Kashmiri these WRONG reports of yours? Of course, English historians (by your account) are not trustworthy, but certainly a Kashmiri (not a Pakistani) source would be better.

http://www.kashmir-information.com/chronology.html

http://www.kashmirhub.com/history-of-kashmir/history-of-kashmir-before-1947.html

This link clearly states that Kashmir was Indian and HINDU. No biases here, just history. And Afghan invaders did invade Kashmir as did they the REST of India. But they were kicked out!Are you insinuating that the rest of India is also Afghani??

Of course, you think you know more about Indian history than a lot of historians and Indians included, so you are welcome to your prejudices.

In observing this exchange between Mike B. and Nivedita, I have to give it to Mike B.
I've learned a little history from his posts.
I've learned alot of bigotry from Nivedita's.

When ones entire viewpoint whirls out of a hatred for the "Other"- it is obvious to an impartial observer.

Nivedita, I don't know who you are, but you scare me. If you represent the average view of the man on the street in India- it is alarming.

We're here to exchange and learn, but I'm disappointed in what I'm learning here.

Nivedita - Maybe you should go back and read that "history" you cited. It has several little tidbits of information that contradict everything you say. (1) Kashmir was not a part of India, except due to British meddling (2) The Pashtuns conquered and settled Kashmir in prehistoric periods AND Kashmir was ruled by Afghan kingdoms (ethinically, the Afghans are Pashtuns) (3) the language and culture of Kasmir ARE NOT Indian, it is a mixture of Northern Pakistani and Afghan.

Deb Chatterjee - The UN never mandated a pebicite for Texas. And California, although parts were claimed by the Hapsburgs (the ruler of Mexico when Texas was fought over and conquered was Maximillion, a *GERMAN/AUSTRIAN* Hapsburg emporer, not even SPanish, much less Mexican) was claimed by the British, the Russians, and the French. Only a very small portion of Southern California was ever claimed by Spain or by the Hapsburgs. Go read history before spouting ignorant nonsense.

This newspaper is reporting today the atrocities committed by Muslims in Thailand and also an active plot of al Qaede against US.
In Thailand, Human Rights, is reporting cases of brutal ethnic cleansing of peace loving Buddhist civilians-including teachers, children, women, by Muslims to establish one more Muslim nation, adding to 54 already called Islamic nation.

Muslims here on this forum are saying Islam is a peaceful religion that has been under threat.
Give me a break for Allah's (PBUH) sake.

MikeB: The BBC is definitely more unbiased than any American media. The Pashtuns ARE NOT Kashmiris!! Please don't make sweeping statements on things you do not know. But despite giving you obvious proof, you don't seem to be accepting it. There's no point debating with you on this issue. As for the 9-11 attacks and Al-Quaida, look in your own backyard mate. Its your government's fantastic foreign policies that are responsible for the entire spectre of Islamic terrorism. Don't try and pin the blame on others. You are no different from the Pakistanis who think they are the center of the universe and suffer from a "victim" mentality in addition to schizophrenia.

Bigotry: What?

Terrorism

In the last three years and three months, about 3400 Indians have died from terrorist attacks. The identity of the terrorist is unknown in most cases, but where they have been identified, Maoist rebels, Islamic terrorist and others have been the attackers. Pakistan has lost over 1000 people from terrorism - most of the identified attackers are either Islamic radicals or a separatist terrorist organization in Balochistan (BLA). A very high percentage of the incidents, however, as in India, are unsolved. This is reported from the National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC). I find it interesting that radical Islam continues to attack India but extremist Hindus, as far as I can tell, are not conducting a war of terror against pakistan (I only did a quick search though, so maybe someone has some insight on that subject).

Harkatul Jihad Al-Islami (HuJI) is suspected to be behind the latest terror attack in southern India. They are a fundamentalist Sunni terrorist organization based in Bangladesh and are closely affiliated with al Qaeda. The organization has received training in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Reports also link Pakistan’s external intelligence services (ISI) with training the HuJI as well. “…The HuJI reportedly receives financial assistance from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan through Muslim Non-Governmental Organisations in Bangladesh…”. They are a classic radical Islamic organization that targets civilians and receives funding and training from the usual sources. There are plenty of military targets in India, but the killers choose to attack civilians. Their ultimate declared goal is a Islamist state in Bangladesh patterned after the Taliban (there is nothing like setting your goals high).

If, in fact, the Pakistan government is funding or training the HuJI or any radical Islamic terrorist organization to attack India, then Pakistan is engaging in a war by proxy in a similar fashion as Iran and their proxies Hezbollah and Hamas. That’s a very popular method of war now a days. Pakistan, of course, denies any involvement in the latest bombing, and condemned the attacks.

The HuJI is also suspected to be the perpetrator of the attack against the Mosque in May in the same city (Hyderabad). Why would an Islamist terrorist organization attack a Mosque? To foment a civil war in India between Muslims and Hindus. This tactic is not unprecedented. The al Qaeda tactic was used by their franchise in Iraq to help lead to the current bloodbath (in Iraq) between Shia and Sunni Muslims.

There is no justification for the brutal attacks conducted against civilians anywhere used for political gain.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/08/28/stories/2007082855781200.htm

In an editorial published in the Jamaat-e-Islami-affiliated Daily Jasarat’s August 19 Friday supplement, the newspaper demanded that the “slogan of jihad should reverberate in every nook and corner of Pakistan. If Pakist an allows jihadis to infiltrate into India then Kashmir could be liberated in six months.”

“Within a couple of years,” the newspaper asserted, “the rest of the territories of India could be conquered as well, and we can regain our lost glory. We can bring back the era of Mughal rule. We can once again subjugate the Hindus like our forefathers.”

---
Believe it or not, the Jamaat i Islami claims to support the movement for restoration of democracy in Pakistan and its leader Qazi Hussain Ahmed has been feted and dined in Washington DC. (He is in any case an old Afghan Jihad ally of the State Dept and CIA).

It's offensive when people try to reduce one down to a cartoonish stereotype, isn't it Nivedita?

Be careful of the epithets you project onto others.

MikeB wrote:

"India's land grab is something the U.S. is paying right up until the present day."

This is a cheap trick MikeB. India did not grab anything. Kashmir is an essential and integral part of India. Read any historical text about ancient India and you shall find the name of Kashmir in those ancient texts. The Muslim majority in Kashmir, due to forced conversions for centuries, wanted to secede and live independently of India. They wanted to live by the Shariah rules (Islamic State), and it still has not happened due to India's (feeble) resistance.

I have, however, a counter question for you. Texas, according to archives in the National Geographic, was a part of Mexico and it was "stolen" by USA from Mexico. The US President, Lyndin Johnson is on record saying something to the effect: "We (USA) stole it (Texas) from Mexico, fair and square." Today in Texas and California, the majority are Latinos, and the dominant culture is not exactly American, but Latino (Spanish).

If today the (majority) Latino population in Texas and California want to secede from USA and align with Mexico or Spain, because of the close affinity with the Spanish/Mexican culture, do you think that the US Government is just going to let these states secede because of such majority demands ? If the answer is NO, then why would India as a secular republic, regardless of its imperfections, let Kashmir secede and become an Islamic state and merge with Pakistan ?

Nivedita, Brahmin class or not?

I would like to note that the Pashtuns referred to were NOT Pakistani troops. They weren't even irregulars. Most Pashtuns, and the very ones referred to here, didn't even come from Pakistan. They came from Afghanistan *AND*, as I already noted, the Pashtuns referred were the very people who ruled Kashmir in the 13th century. Moreover, ethnically, linguisticly, and culturally, the Pashtuns you refer to are the same as the native Kashmiri people!

Something else you don't mention, the Talliban derive from the Pashtuns..so do the bulk of Al Qaida. They also composed most of Ansar Al Islam and other modern day terrorist organizations. The entire international terrorist movement began as a direct result of India's meddling with and taking control of Kashmir. In other words, you can draw very direct line from Indian interference in Kashmir to 9-11 and the World Trade Center disaster. India's land grab is something the U.S. is paying right up until the present day.

Nivedita - I hope you are joking. Do you actually expect people to believe what the BBC, the semi-official mouthpiece of the British government, has to say? Look, I can name any number of websites that has writings by British bureaucrats that whitewash their hand in this mess, the one they created in modern Iraq, etc. The fact is, the British installed the Hindhu governor of Kashmir that created the very mess we are discussing here.

Another useful link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/south_asia/02/voices_from_kashmir/html/default.stm

"In October 1947, Pashtuns from Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province invaded Kashmir in support of a rebellion against the Maharaja which had erupted in the restive Poonch district."

Precisely my point! The Pakistanis invaded Kashmir!! There was NO Indian presence in Kashmir at the point. I'm not denying that both India and Pakistan had designs on Kashmir, but it is ridiculous to assume that India is solely to blame. Try telling your perspective to the "Hindu" minority which has suffered ethnic cleansing since the Pakistani supported terrorism began.

MikeB: I don't know where you find the "proof" of Kashmiris wanting to join Pakistan due to the exigencies of the Indian army. The truth which might come as a shock to you is that Kashmiris are different from Pakistanis. They want independence from both India and Pakistan. Ironically, it was Pakistan not India which stalled the plebiscite. Neither side is without blame. There can be no smoke without fire. And, to prove that the majority of Kashmiris prefer independence, I'm giving a link to a survey that was JOINTLY conducted by the Indian and Pakistani press.

http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=90785

Nivedita -
Now, this is a direct quote from your source. It sounds pretty duplicitous to me, even though it has been whitewashed. Quite clearly, India and the Maharaja were "in kahoots" and India delet dishonestly with POakistan and with the people of Kashmir. *YOU* go read your own source!

"...Maharaja signed a "standstill" agreement with Pakistan, which ensured continuity of trade, travel, communication, and similar services between the two. India did not sign a similar agreement. Meanwhile, Indian postal services began listing Kashmir as Indian territory, causing alarm in Pakistan. In October 1947, Pashtuns from Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province invaded Kashmir in support of a rebellion against the Maharaja which had erupted in the restive Poonch district. The ostensible aim of the guerrilla campaign was to frighten Hari Singh into submission. "Instead the Maharaja appealed to Mountbatten[11] for assistance, and the Governor-General agreed on the condition that the ruler accede to India."[10] Once the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession, "Indian soldiers entered Kashmir and drove the Pakistani-sponsored irregulars from all but a small section of the state. The United Nations was then invited to mediate the quarrel. The UN mission insisted that the opinion of Kashmiris must be ascertained, while India insisted that no referandum could occur until all of the state had been cleared of irregulars."[10]

The Pakistani government immediately contested the accession, suggesting that it was fraudulent, that the Maharaja acted under duress, and that he had no right to sign an agreement with India when the standstill agreement with Pakistan was still in force."

Nivedita - I see where we both reference the dumbed down version of the history of this conflict. There are also a number of excellent histories written by English historians. In particular, Alastair Lamb’s Incomplete Partition: The Genesis of the Kashmir Dispute 1947-1948, is an invaluable resource. Unfortunately for you, the article referenced by both of us and this hostory all point out that the Kashmir conflict is a direct result of Indian dishonesty and double dealing. To this very day, even with the forced relocations, the butchering of tens of thousands of native Kashmir people by Indian troops, and the denial of basic human rights, a vast majority of the population of Kashmir would still vote to join Pakistan if India would permit the UN mandated pebiscite.

MikeB: Perhaps you could do well to actually "read" the information in the link you provided. Also refer to the link in my previous post. It outlines the entire history and surprise surprise shows the fallacy of your arguments! Thanks for contradicting yourself! I could also "selectively" choose a quote from the same source and copy paste it you know:

""The Tarikh-i-Firishta records that Sikandar persecuted the Hindus and issued orders proscribing the residence of any other than Muslims in Kashmir. He also ordered the breaking of all "golden and silver images". The Tarikh-i-Firishta further states: "Many of the Brahmins, rather than abandon their religion or their country, poisoned themselves; some emigrated from their native homes, while a few escaped the evil of banishment by becoming Mohammedans.""

Thanks again for showing who is the one with the parochial mindset.

Nivedita - A bigot? This is nothing more than the sort of immature sqwaking of children caught with their hands in the cookie jar everywhere. So, a bigot is anyone merely pointing out the facts that anyone can read in a non-Indian history book? The bigots are the Indian's that took over Kashmir, in opposition to the wishes of the population there, the bigots are the Indian government that sent troops in Kashmir and forcibly put down a popular revolt when their puppet was in danger of being overthrown and killed thousands of people, the bigots are the Indian's that denied Muslim children places in schools, denied Muslim's from even holding jobs in the civil service, the bigots are the Indian government that settled Brahmins in Kashmir to reign over the Muslim people there, the bigots are the Indian's, right up to the present, that dealt with the people of Kashmir and the state of Pakistan in the duplicitous and underhanded way they done. This is no different than what Hitler attepted to do with his conquests, what the Ottoman's did in Turkey, what the Soviet Union did in Eastern Europe. A synopsis of the history I have presented can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Kashmir
However, it is documented elsewhere

For those who wish to know the entire sequence of historical events in Kashmir, please refer to this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jammu_and_Kashmir

This gives the whole picture, not just "selective" history as has been copy pasted by MikeB.

MikeB: I wonder where you obtained all this "historical" information from? Its a load of rubbish at best. As is obvious from your post anyone can figure out who the bigot is. Thanks for proving my point.

Nivedita - Your knowledge of history is abysmal and reflects the bigotry of India, which has led to the current mess. Historically, Kashmir has been independent of the fiefdoms of classic India with distinct cultural, trial, and religious beliefs. The religious beliefs during the classic period were Buddist. The capital city, Kashmir, was a Buddist center of scholarship and missionary work. China, in fact, was introduced to Buddism via missionaries from Kashmir during the 4th century. History documents a whole series of wars, fought between the Buddists of Kashmir and the Hindu’s of classic “India”. Since the 13th Century, the dominant religion of Kashmir has been Islam. Kashmir has been ruled by a series sultans or been a part of various Afghan kingdoms since that time.

Fast foreward to 1925. In 1925 Hari Singh, a detested Indian Maharajah, was placed upon the throne of the principality of Kashmir by the British. This, in spite of the fact that 80% or more of the population were Muslims. Under Hari Singh, Muslims were forbidden from schools, from entering the civil service and other branches of government, were forbidden from entering the armed services, and were forced to pay special and quite heavy taxes. In 1947, when Britain, partitioned its Indian Empire into “The Dominion Of Pakistan” and “The Union of India”, both major parties, eventually to become Pakistan and India, agreed that the *populations* of these states, via a U.N. held referendum, could opt for Pakistan. Since, at that time, nearly 80% of the population was Muslim, it was anticipated that Kashmir would align itself with Pakistan. The Maharajah, however, with the agreement of Pakistan, signed a standstill agreement, pending a popular vote, under the assurance (mistaken, as it turned out) that India had also signed this agreement.

Almost immediately, India began issuing postage stamps, calling Kashmir an Indian territory. This caused alarm in Pakistan, but that government was assured that a popular vote would be held still. Pakistan, thus, waited. While this was going on, Hari Signh, was carrying on secret negotiations with India to circumvent that vote and turn Kashmir over to India. When word of this got out, there were riots in cities all over Kashmir and a popular revolt against the Maharajah began. Hari Singh appealed to India for aid in putting down the revolt and signed an instrument of accession with that government, whereupon Indian troops invaded Kashmir and brutally suppressed the revolt. Pakistan protested this to the U.N., claiming that Hari Singh had no standing for issuing the instrument of accession, that he had acted fraudulently with India in the “standstill agreement”, and that the popular referendum called for under the terms of the partition agreement were being ignored. In spite of repeated call by the U.N. for the promised referendum, it has never been held. Kashmir is essentially one of the largest land grabs in all of history. It is a result of duplicitous acts on the part of India and Britain’s pet Maharajah and utter failure of the world to back up its promises to the people of Kashmir.

As far as I can determine, based on the facts of the matter, India is guilty of invading and illegally occupying, land that is part of Pakistan. India does so and has been doing so and did so from the beginning, in opposition to the wishes of the population of Kashmir. This is nothing more than a naked land grab that has been condemned by every country in the world. That the world seems to have accepted it since 1947, does not affect the illegality nor the immorality, nor the brutality of it. It is no different than the old Soviet Union's occupation of Poland or any one of a number of other countries and peoples.

But still unanswered.
It goes to intention.

Are you a brahmin?

brahmins vs others: perhaps this link makes more sense, though its completely unrelated to the question asked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_Inquisition

brahmins vs others: perhaps this link makes more sense, though its completely unrelated to the question asked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_Inquisition

brahmins vs others: perhaps this link makes more sense, though its completely unrelated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_Inquisition

April 14,2007 4:17 What does Islam say about violence..Pamela Taylor blog

Nivedita:
Soja:

I apologise since I did misunderstand a lot of what you wrote. Thanks for the clarification. My ancestors were from Goa and during the Portuguese inquisition all the Hindus in Goa were either forcibly converted or had to flee. Mine chose to flee holding close to them their precious kuldevatas who were derrided as devils by the Portuguese. The community I belong to was forced out from its homeland by these very same Christians. The situation is not very different from the plight of the Kashmiri pandits who have been forced out by Pakistan sponsored terrorists.
----------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraswat_Brahmins

This is an Editorial from a Pakistani newspaper. Makes interesting reading!

Pakistan: a wasted childhood

By Tasneem Noorani

MEN and women retire at 60, while nations enter their adolescence at that age. The future of the nation after another 60 years would, however, depend on the quality of experience during childhood. In the case of Pakistan, the childhood stage (first 60 years) has generally not been good, even though there have been some happy moments.

Our ‘childhood’ has been spent coming to terms with our ‘sibling’, India. Most of this time has been spent in trying to grab back a piece of asset wrongly allocated to the Indians. This asset has determined our macro policies, which have been mainly India-centric.

We started our journey with a fight in 1948, the only one out of the many we would have, in which we had partial success as we took back a part of our lost territory. Since then we made two serious attempts, 1965 and 1999, by staking our all, to take back the territory by force, with no success. In between, India hit back (1971) and chopped us into two.

While our efforts to take back the territory by frontal attacks failed, we continued to plan constantly, brainwashing the nation to take the task of taking back our territory as priority number one, even above the priority of building on the territory that we had.

Having lost hope of getting our due through frontal force, we devised a strategy of using our Islamists by playing on their religious beliefs and convincing them that it was not just a territorial dispute but a holy war — a war in the way of Islam, a jihad.

We smirked, while these jihadis kept the Kashmir issue on the boil, not knowing that all this while our ‘sibling’ was making itself economically strong, and educating its workforce and following a sustainable method of managing itself through democracy and making friends in the world.

When our strategy of keeping Kashmir on a ‘slow boil’ got irritating for our ‘siblings’, it got its friend, the chief power of the world, who also happened to be our benefactor, to come down on us like a ton of bricks, forcing us to close the tap on our ‘slow boil’ strategy.

The jihadis trained to take on our ‘sibling’, not knowing what to do with themselves, turned on us.

In our fervour, to get back our share of inheritance due to us at Partition, which has coloured our vision about everything else in life, we had no option but to maintain a large, energetic and well-trained strike force, paying for it through our nose. This strike force engaged itself in what it was trained for, for only six weeks (three in 1965 and three in 1971) of the 60 years since it came into being.

All these 60 years, the strike force kept getting bigger, because each commander wanted to immortalise himself as the one who would get back the due family inheritance.

In this pursuit, he kept exaggerating the dangers created by the ‘sibling’ by upping the ante and convincing us that the ‘sibling’ would gobble us up if we did not have a deterrent, and, as a result, frightened us into diverting more and more of our resources to the strike force.

Since the energetic and well-trained strike force had nothing to do for 59 years, 46 weeks out of the 60 years of its existence, it turned its attention to managing us. It used its well-protected and well-funded institutional tradition and a well-trained officer cadre to subdue all other institutions, by branding them as inefficient and corrupt, in the hope that people would have no option but to depend on them and in the process keep them very fruitfully occupied.

Amongst the few happy moments of our ‘childhood’ is the achievement of our scientists to sneak technology from the West to make the atomic bomb, earning us the awestruck respect of the Muslim world and some poor downtrodden countries, and the suspicion of the powers that be.

It also brought with it its downside, as the powers that be now want to play a part in micromanaging us, in order to thwart any chance of someone coming to power here who does not toe their line completely. So it keeps the carrot and the stick hanging over us to make sure we stay in line, without regard to what is good for us internally. The deterrence of the bomb, its main justification, could not, however, convince the strike force to reduce its conventional size.

Are there any other good memories of ‘childhood’ that we can recall with a glow of happiness, as we move into adolescence?

Education: Yes, our private schooling system has become better than it used to be. Resultantly, the gap between the education levels of our elite and the masses has widened.

The government secondary and higher school level has collapsed. There has been much publicity about the government doing great things for the elementary education system, but the main beneficiaries have been the contractors who built the new schools and supplied

‘bastas’.

No attention was paid to recruit, retain, motivate or discipline the teacher who is the lifeline of any education system, because it required focused dedication and no monetary gains for the planners.

All this while, our ‘sibling’, despite its poverty and internal political squabbling, concentrated on education as its top priority, at the elementary, secondary and higher education level. It used its inherited advantage of having a significant English-speaking population to convert its huge population into an asset rather than a liability. We, on the other hand, lost the opportunity of taking advantage of the same inheritance of English-speaking traditions.

Health: Yes, there are far more doctors than used to be, because of the increase in medical colleges, even though the quality of the product is questionable. The large numbers of doctors have, however, not helped the masses, because we have not been able to induce them to work in the countryside, to provide the much-needed help to the majority of our population which is in the rural areas, The quacks have, through the indiscriminate use of unhygienic injections and drips for material gains, given us the gift of the erstwhile unknown epidemic Hepatitis B/C.

Yes, we have more sophisticated tertiary healthcare, in the form of sophisticated heart and kidney hospitals, but then, we have not devised a system where a poor man can also benefit as easily as one who can pay. All this while our ‘sibling’ has also been working on its health system.

While its primary healthcare may be the same as ours, its tertiary health system has developed so much that it is marketing itself as a healthcare destination for citizens of the richest countries. Resultantly, more and more people from the regional and western countries are heading towards our ‘sibling’ for complicated medical treatment, because it is efficient, reliable and less expensive.

Economy: Yes, our per capita may have gone up, if we discount the sceptics’ allegations that it is a juggling of figures. But it has resulted in a greater gap between the rich and the poor. A tea boy in a company would be grateful to get Rs5,000 per month while the boss of the company could be making Rs1,000,000 per month, a gap of 200 times in the same organisation.

Has anyone paid attention to the income of the landless peasant or a rural immigrant living on the outskirts of cities, while we continue to squabble over the percentage of people living below the poverty line (less than a dollar a day), with the government claiming victory, while everyone else is crying foul? All this while the poor remain a statistic.

The phenomenon of there being economic growth when a strongman comes to and stays in power for long is repeating itself, the last distinct example being in the 1960s.

The problem is that each time growth is so warped (while we are advised to wait for the trickle-down effect) that it leads to a strong backlash from the poor who get ignored in this big industry-driven growth and we go back to square one.

Our worst memory of our ‘childhood’ years is that we have not been able to learn to manage our ‘household’. At the end of 60 years, we are behind the starting line.

We are still talking of declaring emergencies to sort out internal strife; debating the option of declaring martial law; denying ourselves the right to vote for whoever we want to; changing the rules of the game as the match proceeds; and making attempts to change the referee if the match is not going our way. If we have not learned how to coexist and do no have a system based on the rule of law, who will manage our affairs for us and how can we begin to improve matters?

Unless we can sort out or overcome inheritance issues with our ‘sibling’, restrict our strike force to the professional role stipulated for such professional forces, let other institutions rediscover their stipulated role, I am afraid we will be talking in similar, or even worse terms, at the end of the adolescence period, and our father, who said to the first parliament, “I am sure with your support and cooperation I can look forward to Pakistan becoming one of the greatest nations of the world” will continue to turn in his grave.

MIKEB:

Kashmir was independent before PAKISTANI tribesmen attacked it. If Pakistanis wanted to "allow" Kashmiris independence, they should perhaps never have invaded it. Besides, would they then also cede 5180 sq km of Kashmir illegally to China? Perhaps you could do well to actually read history before ranting about how Indians and more specifically Hindus are evil. Half knowledge is always dangerous.

APARNA, AVI - Either the two of you are being delussional or you are "upper caste/upper class" members of Indian society that has no comprehension of the harm you and your country has wrought. India occupies Kashmir, a regon that was supposed to be attached to Pakistan under the partian. India was directly responsible for the splitting of Pakistan from Bangledesh and Indian agents were reponsible directly for the "independence movement" in Bangledesh in order to weaken Pakistan. The poverty and human suffering that is a consequence of that is something India has never taken responsibility for nor done anything to alleviate. India built atomic weapons first and threatedn Pakistan with them. Tens of thousands of Muslim minority people have been murdered in cold blood by Hindhu racicals. Hundreds were pulled off a train and shot recently. Indian society and culture treats the poor there worse than dogs. Indeed, many outside observers believe that mst, if not all, of the Islamic radicalism in Pakistan is directly due to, and in reaction to, Indian policies towards their Muslim minority and Pakistan. That would place the blame for Al Qaida and ot's predissessor, Ansar Al Islam, squarely on India. Don't go painting India as some grand democratic and egalitarian society to us, we know better. It is racist and mean and has all of the cultural norms of an ancient Macedoian oligarchy.

Its Very interesting to note that Two nations: One based and established on the policy of HATE while the other based on tolerance lead such diverse fortunes.

If there ever was a failed state Pakistan would be its definition.

Its was extremely fortunate for India that the partition happened!

Its Very interesting to note that Two nations: One based and established on the policy of HATE while the other based on tolerance lead such diverse fortunes.

If there ever was a failed state Pakistan would be its definition.

Its was extremely fortunate for India that the partition happened!

Its Very interesting to note that Two nations: One based and established on the policy of HATE while the other based on tolerance lead such diverse fortunes.

If there ever was a failed state Pakistan would be its definition.

Its was extremely fortunate for India that the partition happened!

Aparna

From The Times of India (today):

"HuJI behind blasts in Hyderabad:

NEW DELHI: Central security agencies on Saturday night said that banned Harkat-ul-Jehadi Islami militant outfit of Bangladesh was possibly behind the twin blast in Hyderabad in which 30 people were killed.

Sources in New Delhi said that there could be similarities between the explosives used in Mecca Masjid blast in Hyderabad in May this year and tonight's explosion.

It was suspected that Shahid and Bilal, who were the masterminds of the Meacca Masjid blast, were also behind tonight's explosion.

Shahid is reported to be in Karachi and is instrumental in bringing people for arms training from Hyderabad.

CBI has already procured a red-corner notice from Interpol against Shahid."

Aparna

While the intentional targeting of civilians has the mark of radical Islam in the India bombings, no one has claimed responsibility according to news sources like the LAT and the NYT.

Indian police have not pointed fingers at anyone yet, again, according to US newspapers. Hindu and Islamic terrorist have been implicated in the past. Maybe you have some different sources.

I hear Muslims, with the help of Pakistan massacred innocent civilians in India yesterday. Pakistan also test fired a nuclear capable missile to reach India.
Even after India was divided, Hindus can not live in peace from the terror of Islam

To be frank, I think the current generation of Indians and Pakistanis do not care about the Partition. This in my view is good because we need to move on. We are living in a different world now and the only way we can progress is by looking at the challenges ahead rather than harking back to the supposedly golden days of undivided India.

I suppose analyzing this question serves some intellectual purpose; otherwise it does not matter anymore (I must exclude the excellent rationale given by Sadhana from my dismissive tone. I haven't heard anyone else articulate that view before). Pakistan is a sovereign nation and I have never heard anyone even within the Indian security apparatus talk about undoing partition.
Four years ago I attended a program with a few Pakistani officials and I was amused (initially) and nonplussed (later) when I heard them repeatedly say that Indians have not come to accept the reality of the existence of Pakistan. I first thought that they were playing to a gallery of officials from Asia-Pacific region and US to appear the injured party. But later I realized that they believed what they were saying. Their own propaganda had successfully ended up seducing them into holding a view that is unexamined and unsupported by facts on ground.
I think this debate is no longer needed because the need of the hour is to continue cooling fervors and no one - especially the radical fringe on either side of the divide - should be provided with a stick to stoke the dying embers.

I suppose analyzing this question serves some intellectual purpose; otherwise it does not matter anymore (I must exclude the excellent rationale given by Sadhana from my dismissive tone. I haven't heard anyone else articulate that view before). Pakistan is a sovereign nation and I have never heard anyone even within the Indian security apparatus talk about undoing partition.
Four years ago I attended a program with a few Pakistani officials and I was amused (initially) and nonplussed (later) when I heard them repeatedly say that Indians have not come to accept the reality of the existence of Pakistan. I first thought that they were playing to a gallery of officials from Asia-Pacific region and US to appear the injured party. But later I realized that they believed what they were saying. Their own propaganda had successfully ended up seducing them into holding a view that is unexamined and unsupported by facts on ground.
I think this debate is no longer needed because the need of the hour is to continue cooling fervors and no one - especially the radical fringe on either side of the divide - should be provided with a stick to stoke the dying embers.

I suppose analyzing this question serves some intellectual purpose; otherwise it does not matter anymore (I must exclude the excellent rationale given by Sadhana from my dismissive tone. I haven't heard anyone else articulate that view before). Pakistan is a sovereign nation and I have never heard anyone even within the Indian security apparatus talk about undoing partition.
Four years ago I attended a program with a few Pakistani officials and I was amused (initially) and nonplussed (later) when I heard them repeatedly say that Indians have not come to accept the reality of the existence of Pakistan. I first thought that they were playing to a gallery of officials from Asia-Pacific region and US to appear the injured party. But later I realized that they believed what they were saying. Their own propaganda had successfully ended up seducing them into holding a view that is unexamined and unsupported by facts on ground.
I think this debate is no longer needed because the need of the hour is to continue cooling fervors and no one - especially the radical fringe on either side of the divide - should be provided with a stick to stoke the dying embers.

I also wanted to take a minute to thank Sadhana for an excellent post... I truly learned a lot from it. That is exactly the kind of contribution that makes wading through the stench of hate-laced rhetoric worthwhile.

The hatred and malice towards Muslims present in many of the posts here is so sad, and so disappointing. It will never cease to amaze me how proud people can be of there own ignorance.

To some extent, that hatred answers the question. After all, Muslims deserve to live free from prejudice, bigotry, and hate. We all do. If the partition can be said to have offered Muslims sanctuary from those things, then perhaps it has also contributed to many more Muslims being able to overcome their own prejudices, bigotry, and hate then would have been able to otherwise.

Unfortunately, there are very obviously people from all walks, faiths, and nationalities who could benefit from a strong dose of tolerance and empathy. All that I can say is that it can't come soon enough.

In my opinion, Partition was not a mistake. While I rue the loss of power to present-day Indian Muslims(and perhaps matrimonial choices)due to the split in the Muslim population, Partition in fact enabled independent India to become a pluralist sovereign democratic state for which its nationalist freedom movement fought a long struggle. An undivided India would have suffered foreign powers seeking military support of the Pakistan regions for their strategic ends in return for propping up Pakistani leaders at the expense of political rights of the rest of the country. This has after all, been happening at regular intervals for the last 150 years since the 1857 Indian Mutiny.

After the 1857 Mutiny of Indian soldiers against British authority, the British clamped down on the mutinous populations of U.P-Bihar-Bengal in the Indian heartland and began to raise a majority of the British Indian Army from the northwest and the Punjab, mainly from among Punjabi Muslims. The British tilt was undoubtedly good for Punjab’s development but skewed its relations with the rest of India. By the 1920s, the majority Muslims of Punjab began to speak of a future separate from the rest of India. In this period, the British granted to Punjabi Muslims, on the strength of being the 'sword-arm' of India, their demand for a permanent Muslim legislative majority over other communities in their province, disregarding previous compromises with Hindus, such as the Lucknow Pact, involving enhanced legislative shares for minority Muslims in India's other provinces.

The British colonial power, meanwhile, had held democratic self-rule at bay by ensuring that the nationalist majority were permanently outnumbered in India’s central legislatures via British officials' alliances with feudals, loyalists, princely state representatives and other special franchise groups in those bodies. For example, in 1919, despite being only 25% of the population, elected Muslims had the same number of seats in India's Central Assembly as elected Hindus who constituted approximately 70% of the population.

Later, when passing the 1935 Government of India Act granting greater self-rule, British officials extolled the 'autocracy of traditional India' and reserved one-third seats for unelected nominees of Indian princely states, an arrangement which would reduce nationalist Hindus to a one-third elected minority in the future federal center. Under that Act, in the late 1930s, elected Muslims held 80% of number of elected Hindu seats in India's Central Assembly.

In 1939, to further stave off the Indian National Congress's demand for a democratic pluralist central government as a pre-condition for Indian cooperation in war efforts, the British granted Muslim League leader M.A.Jinnah a veto over India's future constitution in exchange for Muslim cooperation in World War II.

By population proportion, Muslims were due about a one-fourth share of power at center. However, on the strength of the British-granted veto, the 'two-nation-theory' and British dependence on the Muslim-dominated British Indian Army, from 1940 onwards, Jinnah now completely disowned parliamentary democracy as a viable solution for Indian self-rule.

As the price for Muslims remaining within the Indian Union until the ultimate creation of a separate state Pakistan, Jinnah demanded the enforcement of a 'parity' principle. He defined this principle variously as parity in state power between 25% Muslim Indians and the remaining 75% nonMuslims, between his Muslim League party and the nationalist Congress party (though Congress held a 3:1 legislative majority over the League at the time) and between Muslim majority provinces and Hindu majority provinces, despite their grossly unequal populations.

Had Partition not happened in 1947, his Muslim League successors would have continued Jinnah's quest for parity between unequal populations on religious basis WITHIN an undivided independent India. Like the World War II, the Cold War too would have presented the perfect excuse for foreign support of Pakistani leaders seeking parity against their domestic Indian contenders for state power, in exchange for the services of the predominantly Muslim undivided Indian Army. This would have been dangerously destabilizing since artificial parities between unequal populations or vetoes of smaller populations over larger ones could only have been enforced by military means as was testified by the 1971 civil war between West Pakistan and East Pakistan.

In the event, the Muslim League veto over India's constitution thankfully ended with Partition in 1947 and independent India became free to become the sovereign pluralist one-man one-vote-based parliamentary democracy for which the Indian freedom movement had fought assiduously and arduously for the previous 50 years and for which the British had confined Indian nationalist leaders to jail for several years.

Today Pakistan seeks foreign alliances to maintain parity with India not inside but outside the Indian Union. Pakistan’s Army runs amok inside Pakistan not inside an undivided India. Partition has thus created a much healthier situation for the sovereignty, pluralism and democracy of independent India.

In 1947 the British veto on India ended too, given independent India's determination to be a sovereign republic answerable only to its own citizens. In contrast, the successor power to the British, the United States has banked on the Pakistani ruling class and its Army to stave off democracy in the Pakistani regions when its strategic needs so dictate. In 1971, those regions got depleted when East Pakistan became an independent Bangladeshi nation whose political rights were no longer vulnerable to a West Pakistani veto.

For decades before independence and after, the ruling class of Pakistan regions and its Western allies have repeated the same self-serving specious mantra that either in defense of some "higher" principle or for the prosecution of some critical great war, democracy cannot be ushered in for a number of more years. But the region where this anti-democratic argument could be actually enforced by them got steadily smaller and smaller, beginning with the whole of undivided India, reducing to undivided Pakistan in 1947, and reducing further in 1971 to the current geographical limits of the Pakistani state.

Today, the West and the predominantly Punjabi ruling class have probably overplayed their hand yet again. The Frontier Tribal Areas, which in the pre-independence era the British and Muslim League radicalized to drive out Indian nationalists, are slipping out of state control. In the rest of Pakistan, an authoritarian religious regime may be voted into power by a public fed up with their ruling class's anti-democratic internal expediencies and external alliances.

While Pakistan’s ideological-religious strategic agenda runs amok inside Pakistan and not inside an undivided India, today’s post-independence India is free to be pluralist, democratic and sovereign. This Indian is thus deeply thankful for Partition.

Partition was good thing. A diseased part of the Indian body, the one with the Muslim majority was lopped off. Otherwise the whole body would have died.

Now India is prospering, The diseased limb, the Muhammadan republic of PakShaytan, is sinking deeper into the morass that Islam makes inevitable.

The British were fools to partition the subcontinent. And for that we can thank them for putting into place a situation that gives rise the the mostly likely exchange of nuclear weapons, the ISI which led to the Taliban, and Afgahnistan as an Al-Queda sanctuary. Well done Brits.

Rather, if the two countries had not been split, we could have hoped to see a very messy, pluralist democracy that would have balanced the rights of religious minorities (Nehru, was afterall, quite the humanist) rather than an increasingly radicalized Islamic state that peddles nuclear technology under the nose of its leadership. Certainly it would have been messy, but the rhetoric coming from Islamabad over Kashmir and other disputes surely has as much to do with the continguing animosity between Hindus and Muslims as past disagreements and inherent sectarianism .

At least India has prospects now that it has abandoned its socialist policies and embraced a realistic view of its role in the region and the world. By contrast, what are Pakistan's prospects? How much would they suffer if the good general is deposed?

Indeed much of India's socialism can, perhaps, be traced to U.S. support for Pakistan and India's reaction to it. Without partition and the competition between the superpowers during the Cold War - perhaps India could have been drawn out and into a productive role in the wider world at a much earlier date. Imagine how much better it would be for the U.S. to have a democratic, capitalistic, multiethnic partner instead of the authoritarian PRC.

The British took the easy way out because, at the time, their leadership didn't care a whit about the brown folk on the far side of the world. The came, they took and they left. Thankfully, Indians retained enough of the Britian's valuable cultural goods - such as parliamentary democracy, common law legal systems and English to eventually make a go of it. But their task was made horribly more complicated by creating such a poor excuse for a state. What's more, in creating Pakistan for explicitly communal reasons - the British set a precedent in the post WWII world for others to make similar demands. And what has followed? That's just rhetorical question...

Are Muslims worse than Nazis? My Opinion: Yes.
Reason: Nazis, at the very least, valued their own life.

After reading so many blogs still I find not a single justification that partition was a mistake.

For a moment we visualize the India on 1st week of August 1947.

British empire which was on the last days leaving United India. In hundred years of their rule they did lot of good things established communication and brought justice. But for governace they have another system for the colonies.

It was let the people fight among themselves and rule peacefully.( In Indo Pak we call it Larao and Hukoomat Karo ). Britishers very well know that they are out number in India and they know that if the peoples of India are united then they have no chance of survival.

This system of governace is still popular in sub continent and can be witnessed from the top most political forces to medium size office and factories.

Once the lid of British empire lifted then India bound to enter in civil war.

Partition therefore was eminent. If India is not divided in two states then it can end up at least twenty states. In british Raj so many states were virtually independent and all of them eventually continue to do so.

Therefoe partition between two states was much more logical solution, and for that we must remember that all the leaders of India and the London agreed.

The fear of dis integration in fact is the only glue which is keeping the India and Pakistan intact.

This is the only reason why still they do not solve the issue of Kashmir. because if any day Kashmir gets freedom to choose its own destiny then all other states will follow the course.

we have seen same conditions in Europe. Poland was the one country which spin off the soviet empire. It was just few years when all their states move out and become independent.

I think this is the only reason why the politicians of both countries love to have confrontation. they are casting a dangerous enemy to keep the real enemy hidden.

And now the most important question. Why the partition of India is a question being asked from washington. Do the people wants to get some food of thought for Iraq solution

PG

If you examine the countries today then answering the PostGlobal question is not that difficult. Muslim separatist pushed for the creation of Pakistan, and the British complied. I did a little research and found that something like one million people died as a result of the formation of the two countries and an additional ten million people pulled up stakes and moved either to Pakistan or India depending on if they were non Muslim living within Pakistan’s borders or a Muslim living in India. In addition, the creation of two separate countries led to three wars over Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim territory situated between Pakistan and India. Kashmir is still disputed today. However, this is one case where the British got it right even though they created a messy situation at the time. Pakistan and India are completely different countries and have gone in different directions since their split.

1. India is a culturally diverse democracy (largest in the world), while Pakistan is 96% Muslim. Many Muslims chose to stay in India (13% of India’s population) while most Hindus (and other minorities) left Pakistan. Pakistan was created based on their common religion (Islamic state).

2. Pakistan incorporated Sharia law into their judiciary system relegating non Muslims to a status of second class citizens, while India’s laws are related to British common law (as was Pakistan’s). India’s constitution (at least on paper) guarantees equal rights.

3. Pakistan has always been dominated by the military, and has been under military rule for half of their existence. India has remained a democracy since their independence.

4. Islamic terrorist are fighting a war on two fronts from Pakistan. They are fighting for Kashmir (which has a majority Muslim population and therefore, they believe, should belong to Pakistan) and they are fighting to return the seventh century Taliban to power in Afghanistan. In addition, northwest Pakistan is a fundamentalist Islamic stronghold that probably host Bin Laden and his terrorist training camps.

If the British didn’t partition the land, this certainly would have created a violent Muslim separatist movement within India. This movement would have been successful in the long run (in my opinion) with a tremendous cost in lives, and possibly, could have unraveled India‘s democracy. The British unloaded a potentially huge problem by creating Pakistan. India should set aside a national holiday to thank the British for their insight (well, luck anyway).

...still no winners! No one has guessed what the forum moderators expect for an answer. Check back often and keep those comments coming!

Was it a mistake to partition India and Pakistan?

I suppose this question is asked because of current problems, nuclear stand-off, religious issues. I suppose it would be nice to believe that there would be no division if partition had not occurred. But the best that could have been achieved probably if no partition had occurred is a country perpetually on the brink of civil war--probably a succession of dictatorships...Of course from the Western standpoint no partition would probably have meant no nuclear weapons (not enough stability to make the application toward such possible?) but still that entire part of the world would be a disaster. It seems regardless of partition lines are being drawn in the sand in the Middle East--sometimes conforming to the lines on the map, sometimes not. We like to think that by moving this line or that--or if no lines at all are drawn--peace will occur, but the choice seems to be clear bounderies leading to nations acquiring more and more dangerous weaponry or divided states without weaponry (except those used internally) and in chaos. All lines drawn leading to increasingly powerful and dangerous states and no lines drawn leading to chaos. This is the opposite from our hope of lines drawn leading to stable and moderate states or lines erased and peace and harmony between different people in a single nation.

The Partition is the only thing that may have secured India's future. It's hard to avoid the obvious truth that majority-Muslim nations sink like stones. Putting aside its wild-eyed propensity for violence and terror, Islam cripples scientific thought and human rights while simultaneously trying to convince people that a complete lack of health care and atrocious standards of living is "Allah's Will". It's hardly a coincidence that places like Bangladesh are referred to, often completely without sarcasm, as "Islamic paradises".

India is a vibrant, functioning democracy that will leap into the upper tier of super powers this century if it can overcome its caste system and, of course, the violence of its Muslims. Unfortunately the latter is a problem afflicting (what were the odds) every single nation that has Muslims in it.

In the sense that the intentions of those that orchestrated the division have not materialized, it would be easy label it a mistake.

When one considers that an undivided India would most likely not have felt it neccesary to pursue nuclear weapons, one might be tempted to conclude it was a mistake.

So much of the troubles and conflicts of the world, though, for individuals and for nations, are caused by an all-too-human urge to cling to the past. It hardly matters anymore, whether it was a mistake, or not. It was what it was, it is what it is.

What is important now, is to handle the resulting conflicts diplomatically and inclusively. So while the posters to this blog are busy pointing fingers and casting aspersions at one another, I, for one, will be praying that the people who are parties to the conflicts can muster more maturity than we see displayed here.

The partition of india and pakistan is a tragic song of history which was sung by the master race of empire building in whose mind the defeat of crusade and islamic empire was hunting.In term of south asian prosperity the partition was parmanant division line between two communities which dominant the asia.the plan for indo pak partition was a pre -palnned story of western imperilaism.every where where it ruled always created the division among the indiginious people on the basis of language,culture,religion,race and region.and the division result was the the partition.This partition led the migration of large number of people in the modern history of world.this partition was good for all those who came to india as ruler and remained a ruler but there was no scope for them to be ruler in future so they danced a dance of destruction which led the creation of pakistan.there was good for pakistani people and those who migrated but what for the 13 million of indian muslim who remained there.for them it was tragic event of life.the partitiotn led the hatred and which led the wars and what happened after partition.the same people killed each other in three wars once who were beloved to each other.
what this partition serevd that is debatable .and these may be use for some and harmfull to other.but it is fact that humanity suffered lot on the question of partition.and so this mistake .if there would be no partition this south east portion would be a power house of the world.

Partition can't be a mistake at all. We have to look for the facts pre-partition and post partition. Pre partition Muslims were struggling to establish in any part of India. They were the most deprived, suppressed community in India, may be due to their participation in 1857 bid for independence. But I want to quote a story told by one of the radio broadcaster which can elaborate the importance of partition, " I became ill at pre-partition time I was the only student in the village who was going for Matriculation, wanted to study further, went to doctor in Peshawar, there were only 100 doctors none was a Muslims in predominately Muslim city, after checkup doctor asked my parents is he the only son you have....they replied ...yes...don't send him to school otherwise he will die. Doctor...a Muslim kid die because he wanted to study...it is a bid of keeping the community deprived. How could a minority prosper when you have such an attitude for one community?
Lets look at the Muslims in now India they are 13% -15% of the total population, there total proportionate to the civil services is less then 5%. Is this equality? I think Muslims always are treated as foreigners and not a part of masses. Just look at the incidents of Babri mosque, Gujarat violence where thousands of Muslims were killed, raped and hundreds and thousands have to leave their home. I am sure this doesn't happen on day to day basis but you are always in a siege, which is a killer in itself. If you are going to be border lined because of your religion then how you can prosper and be a viable part of community?
If this is the treatment of now India then I am happy to be in Pakistan and happy to be part of an independent nation. Yes there are a lot of challenges in Pakistan: lack of educational opportunities; lack of resources; lack of job opportunities. But it is not because of partition it is because of mismanagement, but as far as the Muslims are concern they are happier and better off in Pakistan then in India. Moreover, prosperity comes with the investments, weather it is national or international, which we lacked. We had been in the war zone for last 50 years; international investor can't get motivated to a small country that is in the war zone. If that would have been the case in any other third world country they would have been the history but Pakistan is still there and will be. We are making strides in every field; IT is getting better; education has improved; general business environment has improved that may lead to prosperous and democratic Pakistan.

Partition can't be a mistake at all. We have to look for the facts pre-partition and post partition. Pre partition Muslims were struggling to establish in any part of India. They were the most deprived, suppressed community in India, may be due to their participation in 1857 bid for independence. But I want to quote a story told by one of the radio broadcaster which can elaborate the importance of partition, " I became ill at pre-partition time I was the only student in the village who was going for Matriculation, wanted to study further, went to doctor in Peshawar, there were only 100 doctors none was a Muslims in predominately Muslim city, after checkup doctor asked my parents is he the only son you have....they replied ...yes...don't send him to school otherwise he will die. Doctor...a Muslim kid die because he wanted to study...it is a bid of keeping the community deprived. How could a minority prosper when you have such an attitude for one community?
Lets look at the Muslims in now India they are 13% -15% of the total population, there total proportionate to the civil services is less then 5%. Is this equality? I think Muslims always are treated as foreigners and not a part of masses. Just look at the incidents of Babri mosque, Gujarat violence where thousands of Muslims were killed, raped and hundreds and thousands have to leave their home. I am sure this doesn't happen on day to day basis but you are always in a seigh, which is a killer in itself. If you are going to be border lined because of your religion then how you can prosper and be a viable part of community?
If this is the treatment of now India then I am happy to be in Pakistan and happy to be part of an independent nation. Yes there are a lot of challenges in Pakistan: lack of educational opportunities; lack of resources; lack of job opportunities. But it is not because of partition it is because of mismanagement, but as far as the Muslims are concern they are happier and better off in Pakistan then in India. Moreover, prosperity comes with the investments, weather it is national or international, which we lacked. We had been in the war zone for last 50 years; international investor can't get motivated to a small country that is in the war zone. If that would have been the case in any other third world country they would have been the history but Pakistan is still there and will be. We are making strides in every feild; IT is getting better; education has improved; general business environment has improved that may lead to prosperous and democratic Pakistan.

Partition can't be a mistake at all. We have to look for the facts pre-partition and post partition. Pre partition Muslims were struggling to establish in any part of India. They were the most deprived, suppressed community in India, may be due to their participation in 1857 bid for independence. But I want to quote a story told by one of the radio broadcaster which can elaborate the importance of partition, " I became ill at pre-partition time I was the only student in the village who was going for Matriculation, wanted to study further, went to doctor in Peshawar, there were only 100 doctors none was a Muslims in predominately Muslim city, after checkup doctor asked my parents is he the only son you have....they replied ...yes...don't send him to school otherwise he will die. Doctor...a Muslim kid die because he wanted to study...it is a bid of keeping the community deprived. How could a minority prosper when you have such an attitude for one community?
Lets look at the Muslims in now India they are 13% -15% of the total population, there total proportionate to the civil services is less then 5%. Is this equality? I think Muslims always are treated as foreigners and not a part of masses. Just look at the incidents of Babri mosque, Gujarat violence where thousands of Muslims were killed, raped and hundreds and thousands have to leave their home. I am sure this doesn't happen on day to day basis but you are always in a seigh, which is a killer in itself. If you are going to be border lined because of your religion then how you can prosper and be a viable part of community?
If this is the treatment of now India then I am happy to be in Pakistan and happy to be part of an independent nation. Yes there are a lot of challenges in Pakistan: lack of educational opportunities; lack of resources; lack of job opportunities. But it is not because of partition it is because of mismanagement, but as far as the Muslims are concern they are happier and better off in Pakistan then in India. Moreover, prosperity comes with the investments, weather it is national or international, which we lacked. We had been in the war zone for last 50 years; international investor can't get motivated to a small country that is in the war zone. If that would have been the case in any other third world country they would have been the history but Pakistan is still there and will be. We are making strides in every feild; IT is getting better; education has improved; general business environment has improved that may lead to prosperous and democratic Pakistan.

Partition can't be a mistake at all. We have to look for the facts pre-partition and post partition. Pre partition Muslims were struggling to establish in any part of India. They were the most deprived, suppressed community in India, may be due to their participation in 1857 bid for independence. But I want to quote a story told by one of the radio broadcaster which can elaborate the importance of partition, " I became ill at pre-partition time I was the only student in the village who was going for Matriculation, wanted to study further, went to doctor in Peshawar, there were only 100 doctors none was a Muslims in predominately Muslim city, after checkup doctor asked my parents is he the only son you have....they replied ...yes...don't send him to school otherwise he will die. Doctor...a Muslim kid die because he wanted to study...it is a bid of keeping the community deprived. How could a minority prosper when you have such an attitude for one community?
Lets look at the Muslims in now India they are 13% -15% of the total population, there total proportionate to the civil services is less then 5%. Is this equality? I think Muslims always are treated as foreigners and not a part of masses. Just look at the incidents of Babri mosque, Gujarat violence where thousands of Muslims were killed, raped and hundreds and thousands have to leave their home. I am sure this doesn't happen on day to day basis but you are always in a seigh, which is a killer in itself. If you are going to be border lined because of your religion then how you can prosper and be a viable part of community?
If this is the treatment of now India then I am happy to be in Pakistan and happy to be part of an independent nation. Yes there are a lot of challenges in Pakistan: lack of educational opportunities; lack of resources; lack of job opportunities. But it is not because of partition it is because of mismanagement, but as far as the Muslims are concern they are happier and better off in Pakistan then in India. Moreover, prosperity comes with the investments, weather it is national or international, which we lacked. We had been in the war zone for last 50 years; international investor can't get motivated to a small country that is in the war zone. If that would have been the case in any other third world country they would have been the history but Pakistan is still there and will be. We are making strides in every feild; IT is getting better; education has improved; general business environment has improved that may lead to prosperous and democratic Pakistan.

Partition can't be a mistake at all. We have to look for the facts pre-partition and post partition. Pre partition Muslims were struggling to establish in any part of India. They were the most deprived, suppressed community in India, may be due to their participation in 1857 bid for independence. But I want to quote a story told by one of the radio broadcaster which can elaborate the importance of partition, " I became ill at pre-partition time I was the only student in the village who was going for Matriculation, wanted to study further, went to doctor in Peshawar, there were only 100 doctors none was a Muslims in predominately Muslim city, after checkup doctor asked my parents is he the only son you have....they replied ...yes...don't send him to school otherwise he will die. Doctor...a Muslim kid die because he wanted to study...it is a bid of keeping the community deprived. How could a minority prosper when you have such an attitude for one community?
Lets look at the Muslims in now India they are 13% -15% of the total population, there total proportionate to the civil services is less then 5%. Is this equality? I think Muslims always are treated as foreigners and not a part of masses. Just look at the incidents of Babri mosque, Gujarat violence where thousands of Muslims were killed, raped and hundreds and thousands have to leave their home. I am sure this doesn't happen on day to day basis but you are always in a seigh, which is a killer in itself. If you are going to be border lined because of your religion then how you can prosper and be a viable part of community?
If this is the treatment of now India then I am happy to be in Pakistan and happy to be part of an independent nation. Yes there are a lot of challenges in Pakistan: lack of educational opportunities; lack of resources; lack of job opportunities. But it is not because of partition it is because of mismanagement, but as far as the Muslims are concern they are happier and better off in Pakistan then in India. Moreover, prosperity comes with the investments, weather it is national or international, which we lacked. We had been in the war zone for last 50 years; international investor can't get motivated to a small country that is in the war zone. If that would have been the case in any other third world country they would have been the history but Pakistan is still there and will be. We are making strides in every feild; IT is getting better; education has improved; general business environment has improved that may lead to prosperous and democratic Pakistan.

Partition can't be a mistake at all. We have to look for the facts pre-partition and post partition. Pre partition Muslims were struggling to establish in any part of India. They were the most deprived, suppressed community in India, may be due to their participation in 1857 bid for independence. But I want to quote a story told by one of the radio broadcaster which can elaborate the importance of partition, " I became ill at pre-partition time I was the only student in the village who was going for Matriculation, wanted to study further, went to doctor in Peshawar, there were only 100 doctors none was a Muslims in predominately Muslim city, after checkup doctor asked my parents is he the only son you have....they replied ...yes...don't send him to school otherwise he will die. Doctor...a Muslim kid die because he wanted to study...it is a bid of keeping the community deprived. How could a minority prosper when you have such an attitude for one community?
Lets look at the Muslims in now India they are 13% -15% of the total population, there total proportionate to the civil services is less then 5%. Is this equality? I think Muslims always are treated as foreigners and not a part of masses. Just look at the incidents of Babri mosque, Gujarat violence where thousands of Muslims were killed, raped and hundreds and thousands have to leave their home. I am sure this doesn't happen on day to day basis but you are always in a seigh, which is a killer in itself. If you are going to be border lined because of your religion then how you can prosper and be a viable part of community?
If this is the treatment of now India then I am happy to be in Pakistan and happy to be part of an independent nation. Yes there are a lot of challenges in Pakistan: lack of educational opportunities; lack of resources; lack of job opportunities. But it is not because of partition it is because of mismanagement, but as far as the Muslims are concern they are happier and better off in Pakistan then in India. Moreover, prosperity comes with the investments, weather it is national or international, which we lacked. We had been in the war zone for last 50 years; international investor can't get motivated to a small country that is in the war zone. If that would have been the case in any other third world country they would have been the history but Pakistan is still there and will be. We are making strides in every feild; IT is getting better; education has improved; general business environment has improved that may lead to prosperous and democratic Pakistan.

Partition can't be a mistake at all. We have to look for the facts pre-partition and post partition. Pre partition Muslims were struggling to establish in any part of India. They were the most deprived, suppressed community in India, may be due to their participation in 1857 bid for independence. But I want to quote a story told by one of the radio broadcaster which can elaborate the importance of partition, " I became ill at pre-partition time I was the only student in the village who was going for Matriculation, wanted to study further, went to doctor in Peshawar, there were only 100 doctors none was a Muslims in predominately Muslim city, after checkup doctor asked my parents is he the only son you have....they replied ...yes...don't send him to school otherwise he will die. Doctor...a Muslim kid die because he wanted to study...it is a bid of keeping the community deprived. How could a minority prosper when you have such an attitude for one community?
Lets look at the Muslims in now India they are 13% -15% of the total population, there total proportionate to the civil services is less then 5%. Is this equality? I think Muslims always are treated as foreigners and not a part of masses. Just look at the incidents of Babri mosque, Gujarat violence where thousands of Muslims were killed, raped and hundreds and thousands have to leave their home. I am sure this doesn't happen on day to day basis but you are always in a seigh, which is a killer in itself. If you are going to be border lined because of your religion then how you can prosper and be a viable part of community?
If this is the treatment of now India then I am happy to be in Pakistan and happy to be part of an independent nation. Yes there are a lot of challenges in Pakistan: lack of educational opportunities; lack of resources; lack of job opportunities. But it is not because of partition it is because of mismanagement, but as far as the Muslims are concern they are happier and better off in Pakistan then in India. Moreover, prosperity comes with the investments, weather it is national or international, which we lacked. We had been in the war zone for last 50 years; international investor can't get motivated to a small country that is in the war zone. If that would have been the case in any other third world country they would have been the history but Pakistan is still there and will be.

is it mistake or not now it is reality now what they only do is to live harmonly, is partition of india is mistake than partition of ottoman empire is also a mistake, creation of east tymur is also same, disintigration of russia is also a mistake, than every thing happening in the world is a mistake, is separation of afghanistan myamar(burma) is also a mistake

is it mistake or not now it is reality now what they only do is to live harmonly, is partition of india is mistake than partition of ottoman empire is also a mistake, creation of east tymur is also same, disintigration of russia is also a mistake, than every thing happening in the world is a mistake, is separation of afghanistan myamar(burma) is also a mistake

No the partition of India was not a mistake.

This statement I am not giving just due to patriotic reason but based on my personel observation.

First we have to look for the history. Who were the people demanding a seperate nation. Was their intentions were genuine and honest. Is it true that they were really afraid that after hundred years of British rule they will be economically deprived of their basic rights. Was India in most of the time of its history ruled by one capital or it was more divided on basis of cast, race and small kingdoms.

Pkistan unfortunately went to many set backs. The vision was derailed due to ruling class. And Bangla Desh was seperated after just 24 years of its existence.

India on other hand overcome its diffrences and casted a more united country.

I belong the generation which saw the Bangladesh emerging from horizon. But note one basic fact that inspite all greivences, Bangla Desh did not become part of India.

Many times I ask myself what is the basic strength of Pakistan. The turmoil it faces in sixty years was enough to wash out any stable country.

I had an opportunity to visit every corner of the world. And when I compared Pakistan with these countries I was astonished.

Pakistan is a country which is self sufficiant in grains. It does not import any poulty and meat product. It is exporting fruits vegetables and sea food. It is major exporting country for textile and cement products.

These are the basic requirement for a nation . food, cloth and cement to build houses. Now I do not understand how we can remain poor.

India I have visited several times. Few months before one Danish Managing Director who is stationed in bombay visited my work place.He told me about Indian industrial growth in all sectors On the lucnch I asked him one question, that when last I visited bombay I saw thousands of people sleeping on the foot path in downtown Bombay. Are they still there.

He replied yes and they will continue to live like that for decades.

compared to that when I see my family and my parents who migrated to Pakistan for a better and secure future.

Definately we are well established now. Although my parents came almost empty hand. even when I compare myself with my those freinds which migrated to west I see myself better off economically. I have a large house one hundred percent paid. I have 4 cars all with out any financing. My children are going to top most Universities. This life style was not possible if my parents choose to stay in India.

India and Pakistan are unfortunately running in a circle of love/hate relationship. Both sides are suspecious of each other. And both sides are expanding huge amount of money on war arsenal.

Pakistan being smaller country is suffering more to stay in race. This is one reason that pakistan army become so powerful that now no political dialogue can be initiated with out its participation.

One thing is clear. If India wants to have an ambition to become super power of the region then it has to keep its border peaceful. India and Paksitan can not prosper with continous conflict going on their borders.

The leaders of India and Pakistan has to follow the EU model. They also went to a bitter war. They also faced seperation between different identities and races.Their family structure tornished. Eventually they learnt to live together.

This is not a Raj time where every thing should be controlled from Delhi. They have to empower local communities to decide their own future. And work for education and health sector. This will be the future of next generation

I believe it was a mistake. Dividing a region or a country simply along religious lines is a source of constant conflict(s) as we are witnessing today. Such division, based on the largest groupings leaves minorities i.e. Christians in Pakistan and other minority religions in India as pawns. It also provide an ideal opportunity for dangerious politicians to run amok.

Wherever Islam is there..there can be no peace..only terror..plain and simple

Now, THIS is interesting. I surf'd back here and happened to look at the face page for this site...no quotes from readers! So, I surfed on in and found everyone here seems to think Pakistan and India are wrecks, not so much "countries" as assemblages of parts that don't make anything. Not what the forum "masters" wanted to hear...so no quotes! Look for some lame brain to spout some nonsense that appeals to their politically correct and delussional world view and they will tout it up! It's rather like the media frency surrounding the Clinton campaign...or, similarly, Paris Hilton or Rudy Gulianni! What a joke. I'm going out for a beer and the real world. Join me!

India before 1947 was a geographic entity, held together by force. It was NOT a country.

Partition is regarded as a mistake by some Indians and westerners. Pakistanis are quite happy with their independence.

India before 1947 was a geographic entity, held together by force. It was NOT a country.

Partition is regarded as a mistake by some Indians and westerners. Pakistanis are quite happy with their independence.

Both are failed states. India with its largest number of people living in wretched poverty, the uncleanliness, caste/dowry system, femaled infanticide...
Pakistan with its extermination of non-Muslims, creation of Taliban, KSM (mastermind of 9/11),export of terror....

Pakistan:

A-llah !!!!

A-merica !!!

A-rmy !!!!1

The mistake was Great Britain's ever having had dealings with the differing factions on the Indian subcontinent to begin with. Nothing has changed there in hundred's of years. Your question seems to indicate that you think even "India" is somehow unified. It isn't and it never will be. Pakistan, likewise, is a disseparate collection of uncontroled and uncontrollable parts. Warlords rule the Northern region and largely ignore what goes on in the South.