Global.Baba Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 3 minutes ago, zen said: Kashmir conflict exists because of Pakistan's decision to attack Kashmir (sent its soldiers disguised as Kabalis), forcing Kashmir to take the decision to join India .... If Pak had not attacked Kashmir, it probably had the option to become an independent country too If you go a layer above it exists because of the rabid ideology that doesn’t believe in co existing. Even the so called liberal Muslims would pick India becoming a Islamic nation in a heartbeat. Atleast most of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Singh bling said: Without Kashmir conflict India had not interfer in BD? Whether BD existed or not is different story but surely India would not be in war without any conflict with Pakistan. BD liberation had to happen at some point, not like there wasn't resentment in East Pakistan, and what about the refugee crisis? Kashmir had very little to do with what happened in 1971. Starting from '47->Racism, geography, indifference, economic exploitation, political sidelining, Urdu vs Bengali, Bengali Muslims not Muslim enough, genocide......chronology samajh lijiye. Edited February 16, 2020 by Gollum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Global.Baba said: If you go a layer above it exists because of the rabid ideology that doesn’t believe in co existing. Even the so called liberal Muslims would pick India becoming a Islamic nation in a heartbeat. Atleast most of them. I agree that there are multiple layers. Which is why the thread question, which assumes that the conflict is only because of Kashmir, is not straight forward to answer as Kashmir itself would have had options. Other factors could determine the direction as well. For e.g. if the the king is overthrown and killing of Hindus becomes a policy in Kashmir, Ind would have to get involved anyways. On the other hand, if Kashmir remained under the Maharaja, it would enjoy great relationships with India PS not to forget the issues in BD/East Pakistan Edited February 16, 2020 by zen Global.Baba 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stradlater Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 9 minutes ago, javier26 said: Guess that boils down to being Bengalis under the Muslim identity, a culture that doesn't celebrate Wars, Conquets or aspires domination . Bengali Culture is very feminine unlike the Punjabi, Pashtun, Haryanvi or Maratha cultures which are too toxic and hyper masculine. Bangaldeshis are content in celebrating Poila Boisakh, listening to Rabindra Sangeet and do not worship Invaders or fantasize about the glorious Islamic past of India unlike Pakistani or even Indian Muslims. If we consider Hindu Bengalis and Pakistani ( Punjabi/Pashtun ) Muslims as two ends of the extreme then the Bangaldeshis would be in the middle. Their Muslimness prohibits them from being full overblown liberals like Bengali Hindus and their Bengaliness prohibits them from becoming religious zealots like the Pakistanis. Hahah what an absolute piece of drivel. Here's a list of prominent revolutionaries from Bengal: Bagha Jatin, Surya Sen, Khudiram Bose, Ghosh Brothers, Jatin Das, Prafulla Chaki, Pulin Das, Sachin Sanyal etc. Both Subhash Bose and Ras behari Bose , two stalwarts behind Indian National Army were from Bengal. So much for effeminate Bengalis, eh? Remind me again what has Haryana contributed to deserve this Hyper Masculine tag? Vickydev and abc 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh bling Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 1 minute ago, Gollum said: BD liberation had to happen at some point, not like there wasn't resentment in East Pakistan, and what about the refugee crisis? Kashmir had very little to do with what happened in 1971. Racism, indifference, exploitation, Urdu vs Bengali, Bengali Muslims not Muslim enough, genocide...... If India and Pakistan had no war in 1965 and friendly relations then there was no chance of India interfering in Bangladesh. India hardly interfere in other countries dispute. Yes refugee crissis was an issue but I doubt India would had gone to war to solve that. Also because of enemity over Kashmir India and Pakistan gone to side of Soviet and USA without that it would had been different story. And without Soviet not supporting that war India would not had gone to war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
First class Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 India-Pak , would have been like USA-Canada. SecondSlip 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Global.Baba Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 1 minute ago, First class said: India-Pak , would have been like USA-Canada. Usa- Canada are 2 secular democratic countries. While India is,Pak is not. Ind-Pak Split shouldn’t have happened to begin with but it has happened and you cannot Undo that however the foundation of Pakistan is on the premise that co existing with other religions and cultures is impossible so yeah it’s one of those romantic ideas that are not practical. Let Pak declare itself a secular state then maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 24 minutes ago, Singh bling said: Yes refugee crissis was an issue but I doubt India would had gone to war to solve that. Yeah 10 million refugees over a few weeks is problem for any country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 (edited) At one point in my life, I was an idealist who dreamt about the subcon becoming a EU like zone (no troops on borders, free movement of ppl and trade, common currency, etc) As a cricket fan, I even speculated on how strong a united subcon team be I am glad to have overcome this period Edited February 16, 2020 by zen Alam_dar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panther Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 No there can never be peace with polytheist. SecondSlip 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stradlater Posted February 16, 2020 Share Posted February 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, panther said: No there can never be peace with polytheist. At least you are honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
First class Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 16 hours ago, Global.Baba said: Usa- Canada are 2 secular democratic countries. While India is,Pak is not. Ind-Pak Split shouldn’t have happened to begin with but it has happened and you cannot Undo that however the foundation of Pakistan is on the premise that co existing with other religions and cultures is impossible so yeah it’s one of those romantic ideas that are not practical. Let Pak declare itself a secular state then maybe India was, not anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Global.Baba Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, First class said: India was, not anymore. You mean like how the dictatorship at BJP has Overruled the public verdict or constitutional framework in state elections in Maharashtra and Delhi recently? Edited February 17, 2020 by Global.Baba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Global.Baba Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 ^ By the way that was sarcasm for Pakistani folk, not sure if that is halaal or haraam but don’t quote that as actual news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
First class Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 2 hours ago, Global.Baba said: You mean like how the dictatorship at BJP has Overruled the public verdict or constitutional framework in state elections in Maharashtra and Delhi recently? Prime examples of India being a secular country was displayed during Modi's tenure as Gujrat's CM and democracy at its best is event in Kasmir, otherwise everything is Kosher. You can talk many other things about India and can be proud of but not these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MechEng Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Then there would have been real Aman ki Asha and Sankalp ki Sultana. SecondSlip 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MechEng Posted February 17, 2020 Share Posted February 17, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Realist Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Autonomous Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 30 minutes ago, The Realist said: So with this you automatically accept that india is persecuting in Kashmir. By the way, there is alot of coverage for India's involvement in Balochistan unrest and peace. No one is innocent in this bloody thing. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted February 18, 2020 Share Posted February 18, 2020 Only confused Hindus can ask such questions, so far away from ground reality. We are talking about a community or a country which was based on “Pak” whereas we represent the “non-Pak” for them. They hate their own ancestry, their Hindu forefathers. Stradlater, sergio04, Gollum and 1 other 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts