Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Austin 3:!6

Is Mamta Banerjee's West Bengal becoming a mini Pakistan?

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Ranvir said:

I am a realist. The Muslims wanted partition and they got it, they were responsible for the carnage since they demanded a seperate country. They killed a lot of Sikhs in places like Rawalpindi and Lahore and Sikhs retaliated and gave as good as they got otherwise East Punjab would have a large Muslim population and would be facing the same situation as West Bengal today. Pakistan is 97% Muslim and prospects for minorities are far worse than they are in India. What the creation of Pakistan showed was that when Muslims form a majority in an area they will demand independence and make life extremely difficult for minorities, we've already seen that in Kashmir.

 

But hey, you keep listening to Sufi songs from Hans Raj Hans and Gurdas Khan and think they are peaceful people.

What are your views on how the future will be like? For example, in the day and age of smartphone, internet and literacy (literacy rate at 13 years for India is  arms 99%, meaning almost every young boy n girl be grow up as literate) , would religion be a such an relevant thing in say next 30-50 years ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ranvir said:

I am a realist. The Muslims wanted partition and they got it, they were responsible for the carnage since they demanded a seperate country. They killed a lot of Sikhs in places like Rawalpindi and Lahore and Sikhs retaliated and gave as good as they got otherwise East Punjab would have a large Muslim population and would be facing the same situation as West Bengal today. Pakistan is 97% Muslim and prospects for minorities are far worse than they are in India. What the creation of Pakistan showed was that when Muslims form a majority in an area they will demand independence and make life extremely difficult for minorities, we've already seen that in Kashmir.

 

But hey, you keep listening to Sufi songs from Hans Raj Hans and Gurdas Khan and think they are peaceful people.

Exactly, Onus is on Islam to prove it can co-exists with other religion. Till date, whether Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Chechanya, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq,Nigeria, Somalia. Even in modern day and age, It is only proving otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, mishra said:

Exactly, Onus is on Islam to prove it can co-exists with other religion. Till date, whether Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Chechanya, Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq,Nigeria, Somalia. Even in modern day and age, It is only proving otherwise.

Even where you would think Islam doesn't even exist (just Google)...places like Thailand, Philippines, china etc. There are local islamic terrorist organisations active in the name of freedom etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, randomGuy said:

Even where you would think Islam doesn't even exist (just Google)...places like Thailand, Philippines, china etc. There are local islamic terrorist organisations active in the name of freedom etc.

Thailand,Philipines are the only places which hasnt been weaponised. There have been previous attempts like Bali bombing but AK-47 is still not accessible because of Strong Communist Chinese interest in that region. It should not last long though. They themselves have built a Road and brokered deal with Taliban.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/12/2016 at 8:34 PM, Muloghonto said:

Saying law and order needs to be stronger, isn't going to make it stronger.

We need to spend more on law & order : we need to raise police & judge salaries (makes them less suspect to bribery), we need to train more police, have more courts & judges. 

The Modi government has been slow on this- just like every other Indian government. But we are of the mindset that national security is through bombs & planes and missiles and curbing crime is a matter of 'morality'. We are hopelessly wrong on both counts- modern warfare isn't fought on the battlefield, not between nuclear nations- but via networks of proxy criminal enterprises. 

I agree with this. 

 

Major reforms needed with regards to Police. Too many times I have heard young men wanting to join police force to make "side" money (mainly from relatives in Rajasthan, Gujarat and MP). I know one specifically wanting to be join the Police and be posted near truck checkpoints near Gujarat-Rajasthan border for obvious reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, mishra said:

Thailand,Philipines are the only places which hasnt been weaponised. There have been previous attempts like Bali bombing but AK-47 is still not accessible because of Strong Communist Chinese interest in that region. It should not last long though. They themselves have built a Road and brokered deal with Taliban.

What do you mean by hasn't been weaponised -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Thailand_insurgency

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moro_conflict

 

In Thailand 6000 lives have been lost and in Philippines more than 100,000 since 60s

Edited by randomGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, chewy said:

I agree with this. 

 

Major reforms needed with regards to Police. Too many times I have heard young men wanting to join police force to make "side" money (mainly from relatives in Rajasthan, Gujarat and MP). I know one specifically wanting to be join the Police and be posted near truck checkpoints near Gujarat-Rajasthan border for obvious reasons. 

The big difference between the west & india, re: police, is that every officer has to make log entries to account for their time on duty. Nobody keeps a hawkish eye on it anyways- not unless you are high level RCMP. They are also always partnered up. Like, if you EVER respond to a call or make any interaction with civilian without partner nearby, you better explain yourself well. This regime of log-keeping is what keeps most officers straight as well (not to mention, really good salaries) - its always a risk to make false entries & get busted and it always acts as a damper for the careless ones/not brave enough to be corrupt ones atleast.

 

But all this requires money. If we cannot increase budget significantly for law & order + police (and i am talking about 2x + expansions, given the scale and scope of India), then take it from the military. Indian military definitely needs upgrading for the long-term future, but right now, we need to first match China/west in law & order + infrastructure before we can effectively match them on the battlefield posturing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

What do you mean by hasn't been weaponised -

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Thailand_insurgency

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moro_conflict

 

In Thailand 6000 lives have been lost and in Philippines more than 100,000 since 60s

I think I was ignorant about above Thai/philippino angleand always understood them at China/US angle.

 

Benchmark of weaponisation is like

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/town-ak-47-sells-less-8602081

 

After that you can have it all the way to ISIS level

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, randomGuy said:

What are your views on how the future will be like? For example, in the day and age of smartphone, internet and literacy (literacy rate at 13 years for India is  arms 99%, meaning almost every young boy n girl be grow up as literate) , would religion be a such an relevant thing in say next 30-50 years ?

Maybe Hindus and Sikhs might get less religious but Muslims are different. Saudi has a high literacy rate and look at the behaviour of some its citizens. Muslims have gone further backwards with time and more 'religious'. 15-20 years ago in England there were hardly any girls wearing headscarves but now there are lots and you can even see women in full face covered Burqas. Iran and Afghanistan used to be fairly liberal until they became heavily islamicized. 

 

Don't bury your head in the sand and be optimistic about Muslims sorting themselves out with rising literacy rates, they want to become more Islamic, 40% of them want Shariah law in England.

 

It seems the only way to control them is using heavy handed tactics like in China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Ranvir said:

Maybe Hindus and Sikhs might get less religious but Muslims are different. Saudi has a high literacy rate and look at the behaviour of some its citizens. Muslims have gone further backwards with time and more 'religious'. 15-20 years ago in England there were hardly any girls wearing headscarves but now there are lots and you can even see women in full face covered Burqas. Iran and Afghanistan used to be fairly liberal until they became heavily islamicized. 

 

Don't bury your head in the sand and be optimistic about Muslims sorting themselves out with rising literacy rates, they want to become more Islamic, 40% of them want Shariah law in England.

 

It seems the only way to control them is using heavy handed tactics like in China.

I like to think that I am realist...I, like everyone else, think right now Islam is a big big problem for the whole world. But I am optimistically thinking that easily available internet (through smartphones) could change it in a couple of generations (One generation = 20 years). We can say now with the advent of smartphones, 4g/broadband etc. the internet has truly become universal (maybe not even now)....So I would like a couple of generations to pass on to see the effects...A 13 yo kid would be 53 yrs in 40 years and many older Islamists would have died of old age.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ranvir said:

I am a realist. The Muslims wanted partition and they got it, they were responsible for the carnage since they demanded a seperate country. They killed a lot of Sikhs in places like Rawalpindi and Lahore and Sikhs retaliated and gave as good as they got otherwise East Punjab would have a large Muslim population and would be facing the same situation as West Bengal today. Pakistan is 97% Muslim and prospects for minorities are far worse than they are in India. What the creation of Pakistan showed was that when Muslims form a majority in an area they will demand independence and make life extremely difficult for minorities, we've already seen that in Kashmir.

 

But hey, you keep listening to Sufi songs from Hans Raj Hans and Gurdas Khan and think they are peaceful people.

My family is a from a village in Punjab and the Muslims who died in neighbouring villages did not die in retaliation ,they died defending their land and as a Jatt I can understand that.

And while I have immense respect for Gurdas Mann,my values are from my religion-leaving you with some verses to refresh your knowledge.

 

Awwal Allah Noor Upaya Qudrat Keh Sub Banday

Aik Noor Keh Sub Jag Upajiya Kaun Bhale Ko Mandhe

 

God created light of which all the beings were born

And from this light, the universe; so who is good and who is bad.

 

That said you are entitled to your views and apologies to others for derailing the thread.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

I like to think that I am realist...I, like everyone else, think right now Islam is a big big problem for the whole world. But I am optimistically thinking that easily available internet (through smartphones) could change it in a couple of generations (One generation = 20 years). We can say now with the advent of smartphones, 4g/broadband etc. the internet has truly become universal (maybe not even now)....So I would like a couple of generations to pass on to see the effects...A 13 yo kid would be 53 yrs in 40 years and many older Islamists would have died of old age.

 

If anything, the Internet has made Islamic extremism worse. More youngsters are being groomed online and being radicalised to go to places like Syria etc.

 

The internet has been available through smartphones for 10 years but we haven't seen a reduction in extremism from Muslims, it has increased. Having lived in an area with lots of Muslims I know how they are raised and indoctrinated since birth to believe that they follow the true religion and kuffars are going to burn in hell. They are hell bent on converting people to Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, kabbirann said:

My family is a from a village in Punjab and the Muslims who died in neighbouring villages did not die in retaliation ,they died defending their land and as a Jatt I can understand that.

And while I have immense respect for Gurdas Mann,my values are from my religion-leaving you with some verses to refresh your knowledge.

 

Awwal Allah Noor Upaya Qudrat Keh Sub Banday

Aik Noor Keh Sub Jag Upajiya Kaun Bhale Ko Mandhe

 

God created light of which all the beings were born

And from this light, the universe; so who is good and who is bad.

 

That said you are entitled to your views and apologies to others for derailing the thread.

 

 

 

 

Of course the Muslims in your neighbouring village died because of retaliation for what was going on in west Punjab. There were plenty of non Jatt Muslims in Punjab and they were pretty much all thrown out or killed. A Jatt has to make everything to be about land but that is not the case. 

 

The Muslims wanted their homeland and they were responsible for what happened during partition. In Pakistan muslim men routinely kidnap teenage Hindu girls and marry them, they are on another level of behaviour.

 

I've heard now that some more Muslims have come to Punjab from UP and Bihar and that they've started blasting out their prayer music from old disused mosques but if they ever start any pangas they will not be tolerated like they are in West Bengal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ranvir said:

If anything, the Internet has made Islamic extremism worse. More youngsters are being groomed online and being radicalised to go to places like Syria etc.

 

The internet has been available through smartphones for 10 years but we haven't seen a reduction in extremism from Muslims, it has increased. Having lived in an area with lots of Muslims I know how they are raised and indoctrinated since birth to believe that they follow the true religion and kuffars are going to burn in hell. They are hell bent on converting people to Islam.

Agree. Increased penetration of the internet is not going to add more rational thinking on religious subjects. In fact, on the contrary, extremism has found a new way to propagate itself via the internet. I see religious extremism increasing over the years and eventually resulting in a huge divide in society. The problem with Islamic religious extremism is that the majority of rational thinkers within that religion are incapable of reigning in the extremists. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My family is a from a village in Punjab and the Muslims who died in neighbouring villages did not die in retaliation ,they died defending their land and as a Jatt I can understand that.

And while I have immense respect for Gurdas Mann,my values are from my religion-leaving you with some verses to refresh your knowledge.

 

Awwal Allah Noor Upaya Qudrat Keh Sub Banday

Aik Noor Keh Sub Jag Upajiya Kaun Bhale Ko Mandhe

 

God created light of which all the beings were born

And from this light, the universe; so who is good and who is bad.

 

That said you are entitled to your views and apologies to others for derailing the thread.

 

   

 

Ghan..ta, you can change habits not nature, like it or not, they can't tolerate other religions, the religion of peace means submission, by words, by money or by sword the choice is yours, it's like my way or sky way, so better get ready for future, I don't want to sound like war monger, but one has to get ready for the future, I have seen all their colours, so u can trust snake for once but not them, whether one like this post or not, but one cannot change it.

Sent from my SM-N900 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is why were so many Muslims allowed to stay back in India even after  voting ( predominantly 95 %) in favor of Pakistan and Mohammed Ali Jinnah? 

 

Things should have been handled with more simplicity. Either Hindus and Muslims live together in an Undivided India with no community gaining any favors or in the event of creation of Pakistan,  every Single Muslim should leave India over a period of time. 

 

A handful of Muslims here and there could have been Ok,  but what's the point of partition if India is still left with Millions of Muslims and growing? 

 

So, Muslims get their all Exclusive Muslim Zones Pakistan and Bangladesh. 

 

But Hindus continue to share whatever is left equally with Muslims. 

 

That's some win-win situation for the Muslims. I am baffled as to how  Gandhi and Nehru could agree over such an agreement and moreover face no opposition over it.

 

Now some stupid Indian Secularists point towards the Hindu - Muslim coexistence in India and conclude how creation of Pakistan was a sham. Why are the Hindus so desperate to prove their secular credentials and that Muslims can Co-exist together in India ? 

 

Offcourse Muslims and Hindus can Co-exist together when the Muslims are outnumbered in a ratio of 10:1. Then Muslims will be the most law abiding ideal citizens of the state. If and when the ratio reaches 4:1 or 3:1 in worse situation,  there will be more anarchy,  lawlessness,  rioting,  strikes and terrorism in the state. When the ratio reaches 1:1, the state will become unfit and too unsafe for everyone except Muslims and Hindus will start migrating to other states for safety. And in a few years time,  the state will be all set for secession. 

 

Standard Islamic takeover policy. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rageaddict said:

The question is why were so many Muslims allowed to stay back in India even after  voting ( predominantly 95 %) in favor of Pakistan and Mohammed Ali Jinnah? 

 

 

Because despite what VHP/RSS/BJP might claim, India is not  a Hindu nation. It is a secular democracy. Which means it is a nation of any/all religions. 

Your query would be valid, if India was a hindu nation, like Pakistan is a muslim nation. Since we are not, your question is invalid.

 

Quote
 
Now some stupid Indian Secularists point towards the Hindu - Muslim coexistence in India and conclude how creation of Pakistan was a sham. Why are the Hindus so desperate to prove their secular credentials and that Muslims can Co-exist together in India ? 

We are not desperate to prove our credential as secular- we *are* secular. Most hindus are hindus for festivals & personal important days (naming day, weddings, etc).  Most muslims sit around, chanting the Namaz 5 times a day. Most hindus don't sit around singing bhajans all day long. We are fundamentally more secular and India has more true secular/irreligious people than it has muslims. I identify culturally as a Hindu. I am proud of my heritage/culture. But i will be the first one to laugh when someone claims Rama was a God or Vishnu wills this or that. So people like me, we fight those who try to bring religious influence into society- be it Muslim or a right wing Hinduvta. 

 

Quote
 
Offcourse Muslims and Hindus can Co-exist together when the Muslims are outnumbered in a ratio of 10:1. Then Muslims will be the most law abiding ideal citizens of the state. If and when the ratio reaches 4:1 or 3:1 in worse situation,  there will be more anarchy,  lawlessness,  rioting,  strikes and terrorism in the state. When the ratio reaches 1:1, the state will become unfit and too unsafe for everyone except Muslims and Hindus will start migrating to other states for safety. And in a few years time,  the state will be all set for secession. 

 

Theoretically true, but practically irrelevant.


Currently, there are just over 1 billion Hindus in India.  Their average growth rate over 10 year period from 2001 -2011 is 16.76%. Which means between 2001-2011, we added 144 million Hindus to the total.


Meanwhile, there are 172 million muslims in India. Their average growth rate is 24.60%. Which means in the same period, we added 34 million muslims to the total.

 

At the current rate, it would take more than a thousand years to even begin approaching 2:1, let alone 1:1

And i don't think religion- any religion- will survive another 100-150 years. So in practice, this alarmist thought has no merit.

 

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rageaddict said:

The question is why were so many Muslims allowed to stay back in India even after  voting ( predominantly 95 %) in favor of Pakistan and Mohammed Ali Jinnah? 

 

Things should have been handled with more simplicity. Either Hindus and Muslims live together in an Undivided India with no community gaining any favors or in the event of creation of Pakistan,  every Single Muslim should leave India over a period of time. 

 

A handful of Muslims here and there could have been Ok,  but what's the point of partition if India is still left with Millions of Muslims and growing? 

 

So, Muslims get their all Exclusive Muslim Zones Pakistan and Bangladesh. 

 

But Hindus continue to share whatever is left equally with Muslims. 

 

That's some win-win situation for the Muslims. I am baffled as to how  Gandhi and Nehru could agree over such an agreement and moreover face no opposition over it.

 

Now some stupid Indian Secularists point towards the Hindu - Muslim coexistence in India and conclude how creation of Pakistan was a sham. Why are the Hindus so desperate to prove their secular credentials and that Muslims can Co-exist together in India ? 

 

Offcourse Muslims and Hindus can Co-exist together when the Muslims are outnumbered in a ratio of 10:1. Then Muslims will be the most law abiding ideal citizens of the state. If and when the ratio reaches 4:1 or 3:1 in worse situation,  there will be more anarchy,  lawlessness,  rioting,  strikes and terrorism in the state. When the ratio reaches 1:1, the state will become unfit and too unsafe for everyone except Muslims and Hindus will start migrating to other states for safety. And in a few years time,  the state will be all set for secession. 

 

Standard Islamic takeover policy. 

 

You hit the nail on the head. Dharmic faiths are open minded compared to Islam. It was completely foolish to allow so many Muslims to stay behind.

 

During partition Indian Muslims had their cake and ate it. A third of their population is in Pakistan, a third in Bangladesh and a third in India.

 

Punjab being a border state meant that ethnic cleansing happened on both sides of the border. People saw violence on one side and repeated it on the other, this never happened in Uttar Pradesh and other states.

 

What happened in Bengal during partition? Was there a lot of violence and migration?

I ask because people in Punjab are apprehensive towards Muslims because of what they had done to Sikh gurus and the violence that took place during partition.

 

Gandhi and Nehru were both fools. I heard Dr Ambedkar wanted to do a full population exchange, this would have been the best solution and would've brought more peace in the subcontinent.

 

The fact is that any country that has thousands of Muslims will have some form of Islamic terrorism.

 

You can be secular when it involves Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians and people will in general accept each other's beliefs because people in these faiths are not obsessive about religion and generally only go to their place of worship on weekends and during special occasions. Islam is a different kettle of fish and everyone knows it.

 

The blame of allowing so many Muslims to stay behind in India belongs to the Hindu majority who tolerate them despite the fact that Muslims have treated Hindus like dirt when they are in the majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Because despite what VHP/RSS/BJP might claim, India is not  a Hindu nation. It is a secular democracy. Which means it is a nation of any/all religions. 

Your query would be valid, if India was a hindu nation, like Pakistan is a muslim nation. Since we are not, your question is invalid.

 

We are not desperate to prove our credential as secular- we *are* secular. Most hindus are hindus for festivals & personal important days (naming day, weddings, etc).  Most muslims sit around, chanting the Namaz 5 times a day. Most hindus don't sit around singing bhajans all day long. We are fundamentally more secular and India has more true secular/irreligious people than it has muslims. I identify culturally as a Hindu. I am proud of my heritage/culture. But i will be the first one to laugh when someone claims Rama was a God or Vishnu wills this or that. So people like me, we fight those who try to bring religious influence into society- be it Muslim or a right wing Hinduvta. 

 

 

Theoretically true, but practically irrelevant.


Currently, there are just over 1 billion Hindus in India.  Their average growth rate over 10 year period from 2001 -2011 is 16.76%. Which means between 2001-2011, we added 144 million Hindus to the total.


Meanwhile, there are 172 million muslims in India. Their average growth rate is 24.60%. Which means in the same period, we added 34 million muslims to the total.

 

At the current rate, it would take more than a thousand years to even begin approaching 2:1, let alone 1:1

And i don't think religion- any religion- will survive another 100-150 years. So in practice, this alarmist thought has no merit.

 

You've got your head buried in the sand thinking that religion won't survive more than 100-150 years. Islam especially will survive, like I said, Muslims are becoming more religious today than they were 40-50 years ago, even with scientific discoveries. It doesn't matter what their literacy rates are, there are even cases of Doctors from subcontinental backgrounds going to Syria.

 

Dont bury your head in the sand and think that time will stop Islamic extremism. You have to do something about it now.

 

It is in the interests of the governments of places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan to keep Islam alive purely for power and financial reasons. 

 

Remember in these countries you cannot leave Islam without incurring the death penalty.

 

Liberalism when it comes to Islam is the same as shooting yourself in the head.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Ranvir said:

You hit the nail on the head. Dharmic faiths are open minded compared to Islam. It was completely foolish to allow so many Muslims to stay behind.

 

During partition Indian Muslims had their cake and ate it. A third of their population is in Pakistan, a third in Bangladesh and a third in India.

 

Punjab being a border state meant that ethnic cleansing happened on both sides of the border. People saw violence on one side and repeated it on the other, this never happened in Uttar Pradesh and other states.

 

What happened in Bengal during partition? Was there a lot of violence and migration?

I ask because people in Punjab are apprehensive towards Muslims because of what they had done to Sikh gurus and the violence that took place during partition.

 

Gandhi and Nehru were both fools. I heard Dr Ambedkar wanted to do a full population exchange, this would have been the best solution and would've brought more peace in the subcontinent.

 

The fact is that any country that has thousands of Muslims will have some form of Islamic terrorism.

 

You can be secular when it involves Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Christians and people will in general accept each other's beliefs because people in these faiths are not obsessive about religion and generally only go to their place of worship on weekends and during special occasions. Islam is a different kettle of fish and everyone knows it.

 

The blame of allowing so many Muslims to stay behind in India belongs to the Hindu majority who tolerate them despite the fact that Muslims have treated Hindus like dirt when they are in the majority.

Actually Punjabi Muslims were third class citizens under Sikhs and peasant class under turk-afghan-mughal rule, they are absent from mughal nobility, so no they did not opress you guys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, panther said:

Actually Punjabi Muslims were third class citizens under Sikhs and peasant class under turk-afghan-mughal rule, they are absent from mughal nobility, so no they did not opress you guys. 

 

Mughals were central Asians initially and then within a couple of generations they were of predominately Indian blood just like the people they ruled over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Muloghonto said:


Currently, there are just over 1 billion Hindus in India.  Their average growth rate over 10 year period from 2001 -2011 is 16.76%. Which means between 2001-2011, we added 144 million Hindus to the total.


Meanwhile, there are 172 million muslims in India. Their average growth rate is 24.60%. Which means in the same period, we added 34 million muslims to the total.

 

At the current rate, it would take more than a thousand years to even begin approaching 2:1, let alone 1:1

And i don't think religion- any religion- will survive another 100-150 years. So in practice, this alarmist thought has no merit.

 

I agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with the conclusion based on the numbers calculation. The concern expressed here is not just about India as a whole having a lopsided population ratio between Hindus and Muslims that will make Hindus very uncomfortable, but more about certain regions within India having these.

 

The example sited is West Bengal, a border state that witnesses large scale Muslim migration from Bangladesh and where politicians in power have been extremely reluctant to address oppression by minorities in areas where they have a majority. As Muslim population keeps increasing and Hindu population keeps declining (as a % of total population), the areas where Muslims will start imposing their rule will keep widening to the point where they could have total domination across the state.

 

There are other states like Assam, Kerala where such a scenario could be applied as well. This scenario is not too far away from us (probably within the next 100 years).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ranvir said:

 

Mughals were central Asians initially and then within a couple of generations they were of predominately Indian blood just like the people they ruled over.

Doesn't change the fact that punjabies were pesants who had nothing to do with mughal rule, and Muslims only identify with paternal linage so no one cares if mughals had Indian blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Texan said:

I agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with the conclusion based on the numbers calculation. The concern expressed here is not just about India as a whole having a lopsided population ratio between Hindus and Muslims that will make Hindus very uncomfortable, but more about certain regions within India having these.

 

The example sited is West Bengal, a border state that witnesses large scale Muslim migration from Bangladesh and where politicians in power have been extremely reluctant to address oppression by minorities in areas where they have a majority. As Muslim population keeps increasing and Hindu population keeps declining (as a % of total population), the areas where Muslims will start imposing their rule will keep widening to the point where they could have total domination across the state.

 

There are other states like Assam, Kerala where such a scenario could be applied as well. This scenario is not too far away from us (probably within the next 100 years).

Then why isn't Modi doing something about it?

 

This is why population control would have been beneficial for India, it would have kept Muslim population under control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/31/2016 at 8:18 AM, Texan said:

I agree with the rest of your post, but disagree with the conclusion based on the numbers calculation. The concern expressed here is not just about India as a whole having a lopsided population ratio between Hindus and Muslims that will make Hindus very uncomfortable, but more about certain regions within India having these.

 

The example sited is West Bengal, a border state that witnesses large scale Muslim migration from Bangladesh and where politicians in power have been extremely reluctant to address oppression by minorities in areas where they have a majority. As Muslim population keeps increasing and Hindu population keeps declining (as a % of total population), the areas where Muslims will start imposing their rule will keep widening to the point where they could have total domination across the state.

 

There are other states like Assam, Kerala where such a scenario could be applied as well. This scenario is not too far away from us (probably within the next 100 years).

 

I agree that things will get a lot worse before it gets better, especially in localized hot spots, i am going to stand by my statement that in about a 100 years, Islam will be a tiny rump of what it is today. We have record number of people leaving Islam, especially in the west & in Arabia. 20 years ago, i never thought i'd meet an arab in arabia who'd say 'i used to be muslim but now i am not' but i've met them (in arabia) over the years frequently. 

Atheism is the fastest growing idea in the world and has been over the past 20-30 years. Just like how extremism is propagated via the internet and is exploding in numbers, so is atheism.  These days, there are almost as many muslims world-wide who are leaving Islam as non-muslims converting to Islam. And that trend will only accelerate over time, as people's beliefs get challenged. 

You have to remember, before the internet, nobody had the balls to challenge Islam in Islamic nations, now thanks to internet, we can talk to muslims in super-muslim countries and challenge their belief system. Even here, when we discussed God, not a single muslim could stand up to the challenge of proving God exits or that the definition of God in their holy book is absurd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^The thing is theism is just a belief. You don't need proof to be a theist. You don't need to rationally evaluate something to believe in it. I can believe that you live in Canada but don't need you to prove it for me to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tibarn said:

Modi needs to impose president's rule there, otherwise he needs to quit boasting about his 56 inch chest. That state needs a severe crackdown.  

Easier said than done. India is a democracy. You need just cause to declare President's rule. Saying 'muslims are running roughshod over that state' may be true, but isn't a politically viable option for it.

Remember, Modi/BJP needs atleast 2 terms coz the ruling party in Lok Sabha nominates members of Rajya Sabha and until both Rajya Sabha & Lok Sabha are BJP-majority, we cant change the constitution. Which is ultimately Modi's aim, which means, until next elections, he will put up with this kinda shyte to win the next election.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, moniker said:

^The thing is theism is just a belief. You don't need proof to be a theist. You don't need to rationally evaluate something to believe in it. I can believe that you live in Canada but don't need you to prove it for me to believe.

Yes, but most people are believers because they simply have not been exposed to other religion/non-religious thoughts. Which is why the world is getting more and more irreligious because of exposure to it via the internet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Easier said than done. India is a democracy. You need just cause to declare President's rule. Saying 'muslims are running roughshod over that state' may be true, but isn't a politically viable option for it.

Remember, Modi/BJP needs atleast 2 terms coz the ruling party in Lok Sabha nominates members of Rajya Sabha and until both Rajya Sabha & Lok Sabha are BJP-majority, we cant change the constitution. Which is ultimately Modi's aim, which means, until next elections, he will put up with this kinda shyte to win the next election.

 

Yes, Bomani vs Union of India 1994 made it much more difficult for the modern Indian governments, but even Bihar had it in 1999 before Vajpayee revoked it. If they are able to keep it for almost a month like they did in Bihar, that should be enough time to make some impact before restoring Mamata to rule.

 

BJP shot it's chance in Bengal during the last assembly elections anyway when they sold out their party workers for Rajya Sabha support from TMC.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Elections in  Punjab and UP, specifically UP will be a tell tale sign of depth of public is support to PM and his leadership. A win in both will shock opposition and embolden PM to take more just actions including presidents rule in places like West Bengal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

Yes, Bomani vs Union of India 1994 made it much more difficult for the modern Indian governments, but even Bihar had it in 1999 before Vajpayee revoked it. If they are able to keep it for almost a month like they did in Bihar, that should be enough time to make some impact before restoring Mamata to rule.

 

BJP shot it's chance in Bengal during the last assembly elections anyway when they sold out their party workers for Rajya Sabha support from TMC.  

1.  I am from Bengal and i was there just a few months ago. Let me say that 1 month won't do anything. The root of the problem are the few districts that are muslim majority. They do whatever they want and if the government/police tries to stop them, they mobilize muslims from other districts to blow up the issue to 'state level' proportions, at which the state government goes 'shit shit, its too much, coverup, coverup'. Thats the modus operandi. In 1 month, you are not going to change demographics of districts, you are barely going to go beyond registering FIR for sectarian violence. Even the court proceedings won't be done.

 

2. What West Bengal/India needs to be taught, is western style police enforcement. We don't care who you are, what religion you are, if you are on the streets past curfew, you will go to jail. If you are rioting and destroying public & private property, you will go to jail. This type of enforcement is impossible in india due to our low paying law enforcement jobs leaving everyone working in those fields vulnerable to corruption. Not to mention, India does not have the logistical setup or police capability to pull this off either. 

 

3. BJP is stupid to trust TMC. It will find out the hard way that to crack WB, it needs to get its own grass-root support in WB and the only way they are going to do that, is they ditch the 'sati-savitri/patit-pavan-sita ram' model of morality. Like i said before, West Bengal hindus are not interested in resurrecting ancient practices coz they were hindu practices, worship every aspect of hindu life, lead ultra-conservative hindu lives etc. That model works in the Hindi-Marathi-Gujju belt, it does not in Bengal. Which is why BJP has never been a force in Bengal. We see it as if BJP wins, the VHP/RSS will spread its tentacles in WB and we will be left with a hindu version of Sharia. Until BJP overcomes its own conservative Hindu mentality or atleast tweaks it for Bengal, it won't amount to squat in Bengal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many episodes of violence, Allmost everyday. Killing of Hindu minorities and burning their houses,  Media gag, Bandh, Stone pelting TMC youth wing, Burning BJP office, Stoning MoS parents flats, Mamata Di is turning into a evil bigger then CPM.

She needs to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rageaddict said:

Indoctrination from Childhood. 

 

Bengal.jpgJihadis of the future. 

 

Inshah Allah, one day these little warriors of Islam will take over Bengal and convert it into Dar -Al -Islam. 

 

Man this is scary. Future suicide bombers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, rageaddict said:

Indoctrination from Childhood. 

Jihadis of the future. 

Inshah Allah, one day these little warriors of Islam will take over Bengal and convert it into Dar -Al -Islam. 

And then they ask why world doesnt stand up for Syrian kids..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2017 at 3:02 PM, Austin 3:!6 said:

Mamata Banerjee government cancels Tarek Fatah’s Balochistan talk in West Bengal

 

http://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/mamata-banerjee-government-cancels-tarek-fatehs-balochistan-talk-in-west-bengal/497491/

 

 

 

This is pure gunda raaj now.

What happened to the intolerance brigade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/01/2017 at 4:35 AM, rageaddict said:

Indoctrination from Childhood. 

 

Bengal.jpgJihadis of the future. 

 

Inshah Allah, one day these little warriors of Islam will take over Bengal and convert it into Dar -Al -Islam. 

 

India is a great secular nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sad state of affairs. Apart from political violence the every day communal murders and flexing of muscles by the M community has made life hell for peace loving citizens. So many communal murders the past few days :((. News like THIS are so common nowadays, TMC won't even pretend to try to get justice...merely to placate the minority community. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2016 at 4:32 AM, Muloghonto said:

But all this requires money. If we cannot increase budget significantly for law & order + police (and i am talking about 2x + expansions, given the scale and scope of India), then take it from the military. Indian military definitely needs upgrading for the long-term future, but right now, we need to first match China/west in law & order + infrastructure before we can effectively match them on the battlefield posturing.

 

Indian capf is currently 1.1 million that is almost as big as Indian armed forces. State police forces are around twice as big with state armed forces making up around 10 percent of state police forces.  That's sums up to around 1.4 million armed police force. This is basically an Indian army that is with home ministry and state home ministries. There are instances of very sophisticated weaponary and dead bodies being left behind by capf when they engage militants in new theaters like Naxal hit areas.  India can not possibly grow it's armed police force further no other country outside of north Korea has such a huge 'paramilitary' force that guards internal security and borders as first respondents  ( the actual paramilitary is separate the coast guard Assam rifles etc they report to defence ministry like the armed forces)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×