44 personnel martyred in terror attack on CRPF convoy in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama

[Ranvir]

What a disaster the partition was. India is still suffering despite Muslims getting their own countries. There should have been a complete population exchange.

 

This is due to the liberal policies of Nehru, Gandhi and a rush job by the British.

[gattaca]

RIP who needs enemies when we have our own forum people posting on Pakistani forum.

Edited February 15, 2019 by gattaca

[MechEng]

14 minutes ago, Ranvir said:

What a disaster the partition was. India is still suffering despite Muslims getting their own countries. There should have been a complete population exchange.

 

This is due to the liberal policies of Nehru, Gandhi and a rush job by the British.

Those times were very different. 1940s was the time when Nazis were the most feared lot. The overall political and moral climate was such that people wanted state and religion to be separated from each other, isliye secularism ka bhoot chadha sab pe...

There were enough evidences for this concern as well, the fall of Ottoman Empire after which Mappila riots happened is one of them.

The 2 nation theory was created keeping secularism in mind. Jinnah although demanded for Pakistan was a hardcore liberal, after his death is where the real mess began. Modern Islamic terrorism as we know it now didn't begin until Soviet Afghanistan war where US manufactured Jihadis.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend the Gandhi-Nehru liberal actions but they (including Jinnah) would have not even expected in their wildest dreams to see such things happening as we are seeing it today. Life has it's own ways to give rude shocks.

[sergio04]

Suedo Secularism will be cause of destruction of hindus.

[Stradlater]

19 minutes ago, MechEng said:

Those times were very different. 1940s was the time when Nazis were the most feared lot. The overall political and moral climate was such that people wanted state and religion to be separated from each other, isliye secularism ka bhoot chadha sab pe...

There were enough evidences for this concern as well, the fall of Ottoman Empire after which Mappila riots happened is one of them.

The 2 nation theory was created keeping secularism in mind. Jinnah although demanded for Pakistan was a hardcore liberal, after his death is where the real mess began. Modern Islamic terrorism as we know it now didn't begin until Soviet Afghanistan war where US manufactured Jihadis.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend the Gandhi-Nehru liberal actions but they (including Jinnah) would have not even expected in their wildest dreams to see such things happening as we are seeing it today. Life has it's own ways to give rude shocks.

Sure they would have. These incidents are nothing compared to the riots that preceded partition when that pig Jinnah gave the call for Direct Action day.

[Gollum]

1 hour ago, MechEng said:

Those times were very different. 1940s was the time when Nazis were the most feared lot. The overall political and moral climate was such that people wanted state and religion to be separated from each other, isliye secularism ka bhoot chadha sab pe...

There were enough evidences for this concern as well, the fall of Ottoman Empire after which Mappila riots happened is one of them.

The 2 nation theory was created keeping secularism in mind. Jinnah although demanded for Pakistan was a hardcore liberal, after his death is where the real mess began. Modern Islamic terrorism as we know it now didn't begin until Soviet Afghanistan war where US manufactured Jihadis.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to defend the Gandhi-Nehru liberal actions but they (including Jinnah) would have not even expected in their wildest dreams to see such things happening as we are seeing it today. Life has it's own ways to give rude shocks.

Sorry bro, have to burst your bubble. I don't doubt your intentions, but I am surely not the only one who feels you are misguided here. Secularism ka bhoot humari qaum pe sadiyon se chadha hai....earlier times it wasn't known as secularism per se. Our greatest/oldest enemies, the Mohameddans  hardly ever believed in so called secularism in any form, there may be rare exceptions but that is like finding a grain of sand in the beach.

 

Our qaum is servile, we knew what we were in for in 1947 and still persisted because of lack of foresight and our dhimmitude. While the temples were demolished in Pakistan and minorities were being butchered/raped, our 'father of the nation' was on hunger strikes making absurd statements to shame Hindus and propagate more cowardice. While Hindu brethren were being persecuted at a rate hardly seen before in history, our Hindu forefathers on the orders of Gandhi were spending time/money in repairing the Nizamuddin Auliya Dargah in Delhi, for the Urs...priorities!!!!  I know families who migrated from Bangladesh in 1947 and 60s-70s.....I know what Islamic extremism is from the mouths of the eye-witnesses. 

 

Jinnah was no liberal, I thank him for many things but he still was a fundamentalist momin. Real mess began in circa 600 AD throughout the world, it wasn't known as terrorism back then, just different terminologies. Easy to blame Americans or Soviets but Islamic extremism is as natural as the sunrise or sunset, doesn't need an external trigger. 

Edited February 15, 2019 by Gollum

[maniac]

11 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Sorry bro, have to burst your bubble. I don't doubt your intentions, but I am surely not the only one who feels you are misguided here. Secularism ka bhoot humari qaum pe sadiyon se chadha hai....earlier times it wasn't known as secularism per se. Our greatest/oldest enemies, the Muslims hardly ever believed in so called secularism, there may be rare exceptions but that is like finding a grain of sand in the beach.

 

Our qaum is servile, we knew what we were in for in 1947 and still persisted because of lack of foresight and our dhimmitude. While the temples were demolished in Pakistan and minorities were being butchered/raped, our 'father of the nation' was on hunger strikes making absurd statements to shame Hindus and propagate more cowardice. While Hindu brethren were being persecuted at a rate hardly seen before in history, our Hindu forefathers on the orders of Gandhi were spending time/money in repairing the Nizamuddin Auliya Dargah in Delhi, for the Urs...priorities!!!!  I know families who migrated from Bangladesh in 1947 and 60s-70s.....I know what Islamic extremism is.

 

Jinnah was no liberal, I thank him for many things but he still was a fundamentalist momin. Real mess began in circa 600 AD throughout the world, it wasn't known as terrorism back then, just different terminologies. Easy to blame Americans or Soviets but Islamic extremism is as natural as the sunrise or sunset, don't need an external trigger. 

I partly disagree. more damage has been done to Hindus post partition and independence . We have been  propagated pseudo history and sold a bill of goods about peace,ahimsa,secularism  and other crap.

 

Hindus have been the most resilient people since time immemorial. It comes back to  looking at glass half-full or half- empty. You may look at East India company,Islamic invasions or go even further back to Buddhism vs Hinduism. There are even stories of Alexander and his men beheading Brahmins and other community leaders en route to try and conquer India.  You might say Hindus invited this mess but at the same time we can say hindus survived these massacres too.

 

We have never been told the brave stories of Indian resilience like the Assam queen who fought against the Mughals or the King in Kerala who fought against  Portuguese. All we hear is stories of about invasions where we kept getting screwed.

 

We have been told that we got freedom due to this stupid ahimsa ideology while forgetting the impact of the  Azad Hind Fauj. It has been relegated to a footnote while it was a major player in hastening the British decision as well.

 

Its our politicians who have tried to keep the Hindu meek and rub it in him that he is a coward. It is far from the truth. 

Edited February 15, 2019 by maniac

[Stradlater]

7 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Sorry bro, have to burst your bubble. I don't doubt your intentions, but I am surely not the only one who feels you are misguided here. Secularism ka bhoot humari qaum pe sadiyon se chadha hai....earlier times it wasn't known as secularism per se. Our greatest/oldest enemies, the Mohameddans  hardly ever believed in so called secularism in any form, there may be rare exceptions but that is like finding a grain of sand in the beach.

 

Our qaum is servile, we knew what we were in for in 1947 and still persisted because of lack of foresight and our dhimmitude. While the temples were demolished in Pakistan and minorities were being butchered/raped, our 'father of the nation' was on hunger strikes making absurd statements to shame Hindus and propagate more cowardice. While Hindu brethren were being persecuted at a rate hardly seen before in history, our Hindu forefathers on the orders of Gandhi were spending time/money in repairing the Nizamuddin Auliya Dargah in Delhi, for the Urs...priorities!!!!  I know families who migrated from Bangladesh in 1947 and 60s-70s.....I know what Islamic extremism is from the mouths of the eye-witnesses. 

 

Jinnah was no liberal, I thank him for many things but he still was a fundamentalist momin. Real mess began in circa 600 AD throughout the world, it wasn't known as terrorism back then, just different terminologies. Easy to blame Americans or Soviets but Islamic extremism is as natural as the sunrise or sunset, doesn't need an external trigger. 

Wholeheartedly agreed. We have been secular going as far back as the Rajput age(6th to 12th century) when we easily absorbed the foreigner Muslim merchants and newly converts within our midst without so much as any opposition from any section of the society.

Ibn Asir writes about a flourishing Muslim population in Benaras in 8th century.

Even the grand Rajput coalition of Nagbhatta and others who stopped the Arab Juggernaut from expanding it into Indian heartland were very liberal in their policies and outlook and actively provided patronage to Arab merchants living in their kingdoms.

 

Similarly Vijaynagar kings were quite open minded as well and even had a Turkish batallion as part of their armed forces.

 

We have always been secular and paid the price.

[Stradlater]

Jinnah was a son of a swine who alone was responsible for millions of innocents getting massacred.

His liberalism was only limited to smoking cigars and drinking expensive whiskies. When it came to religion fundamentalism , he was baap of all these JeMs and Al Qaedas.

[maniac]

3 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Wholeheartedly agreed. We have been secular going as far back as the Rajput age(6th to 12th century) when we easily absorbed the foreigner Muslim merchants and newly converts within our midst without so much as any opposition from any section of the society.

Ibn Asir writes about a flourishing Muslim population in Benaras in 8th century.

Even the grand Rajput coalition of Nagbhatta and others who stopped the Arab Juggernaut from expanding it into Indian heartland were very liberal in their policies and outlook and actively provided patronage to Arab merchants living in their kingdoms.

 

Similarly Vijaynagar kings were quite open minded as well and even had a Turkish batallion as part of their armed forces.

 

We have always been secular and paid the price.

We have given refuge to Jews and Parsis. Did we have a problem. Didn’t they coexist?

 

Various schools of thought like Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism were born in this land and flourished. Was there ever a problem?

 

Yes Islam and Christianity have wrecked havoc but that has got nothing to do with Hindus being secular. These are less of religions and political ideologies and political ideologies get caught up with corrupt politicians, that leads to disaster.

 

It has nothing with Hindu culture or identity 

[motomaverick]

Such is the mindset of even educated and influential Pakistani chewts.

 

 

[maniac]

Anyway back to the main topic, I know that you can’t hurry or rush things just to satisfy the masses and put soldiers lives at risk.

 

However it’s a thin line.  the hysteria dies down and everything is forgotten and it is back to business as usual.

[maniac]

2 minutes ago, motomaverick said:

Such is the mindset of even educated and influential Pakistani chewts.

 

 

Pakistani intellectuals are bigger bastards. The Pakistani common man and average joe seems more reasonable.

[maniac]

1 hour ago, gattaca said:

RIP who needs enemies when we have our own forum people posting on Pakistani forum.

There are a few boot lockers and then there are some  who suffer from vigilante syndrome. They think they are making a point to those idiots and defending India’s honor not realizing that the website is revenue based and Indian members help them regardless of showing jingoism. I have seen these guys get so addicted to being vigilantes that even they suck up to the admins when they think they are in trouble of getting locked out. 

[Gollum]

9 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Similarly Vijaynagar kings were quite open minded as well and even had a Turkish batallion as part of their armed forces.

We have always been secular and paid the price.

Unsurprisingly Vijaynagar fell in the Battle of Talikota when 2 Muslim generals and their units switched sides and joined the Deccan Sultans. And this after Vijaynagar being so secular and tolerant towards its Muslim subjects. You are an avid history fan, sure you would have read about it....truly heartbreaking what followed post that battle. 

[MechEng]

26 minutes ago, maniac said:

I partly disagree. more damage has been done to Hindus post partition and independence . We have been  propagated pseudo history and sold a bill of goods about peace,ahimsa,secularism  and other crap.

 

Hindus have been the most resilient people since time immemorial. It comes back to  looking at glass half-full or half- empty. You may look at East India company,Islamic invasions or go even further back to Buddhism vs Hinduism. There are even stories of Alexander and his men beheading Brahmins and other community leaders en route to try and conquer India.  You might say Hindus invited this mess but at the same time we can say hindus survived these massacres too.

 

We have never been told the brave stories of Indian resilience like the Assam queen who fought against the Mughals or the King in Kerala who fought against  Portuguese. All we hear is stories of about invasions where we kept getting screwed.

 

We have been told that we got freedom due to this stupid ahimsa ideology while forgetting the impact of the  Azad Hind Fauj. It has been relegated to a footnote while it was a major player in hastening the British decision as well.

 

Its our politicians who have tried to keep the Hindu meek and rub it in him that he is a coward. It is far from the truth. 

Our understanding of ahimsa is completely wrong too. Ahimsa not only means not to harm others but also not to allow harm on yourselves. The balance is what ahimsa is. There were Jain and Buddhist Kings too who defended their empires.

[LordPrabhzy]

20 minutes ago, motomaverick said:

Such is the mindset of even educated and influential Pakistani chewts.

 

 

Atleast he's more eloquent in his admission of treachery. Hamid Zaid is on another level!

[Stradlater]

8 minutes ago, maniac said:

We have given refuge to Jews and Parsis. Did we have a problem. Didn’t they coexist?

 

Various schools of thought like Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism were born in this land and flourished. Was there ever a problem?

 

Yes Islam and Christianity have wrecked havoc but that has got nothing to do with Hindus being secular. These are less of religions and political ideologies and political ideologies get caught up with corrupt politicians, that leads to disaster.

 

It has nothing with Hindu culture or identity 

Parsis were fleeing persecution and were never in a position to impose their might on the local populace.

Similarly most Jews who made India home were traders and businessmen and assimilated very quickly in our superior culture.

Islam otoh came with a bang with a sword in hand(except in few places such as Kerala). From Bin Qasim to Ghaznavi , Hindus had plenty of time to reflect and take appropriate measures to stem the tide of Islamic expansion but failed to do so due to their divisive , isolationist tendencies and secular mindset.

Indian society on the eve of Muslim invasion was plagued, particularly by self destructive characteristics- the neglect of a sound political cum military machinery for collective self defense , the lack of a feeling of overall National consciousness and mutual Warfare.

 

The Rajput rulers inspite of their perpetual warfare with the muslim armies of aggression , adopted by and large a very liberal policy towards a Muslim settlers within their dominions.

Barani refers to a mausoleum of Salar Ghazi at Bahraich. He was said to be a soldier in the army of Mehmood who had fallen fighting 'the infidels'.

The fact that his name and grave survived through the long period between the Ghaznavid invasions and Ghurid occupation of northern India , shows that there was some Muslim population to look after the grave to preserve for posterity the tradition of Salar's martyrdom.

 

Thus , it's our secular mindset which allowed these people to deepen their roots within our society and flourish freely. Prithvi raj chauhan of all people allowed Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti to set up his Khanqah(hospice) at his second capital in Ajmer . The Khawaja was also allowed to make converts to Islam.

 

I can go on and on but I'm sure you get the gist.

[DHONI_FANN]

22 minutes ago, maniac said:

Pakistani intellectuals are bigger bastards. The Pakistani common man and average joe seems more reasonable.

Indian intellectuals are even bigger bastards. I have no hesitation calling them madrachods

[Stradlater]

12 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Unsurprisingly Vijaynagar fell in the Battle of Talikota when 2 Muslim generals and their units switched sides and joined the Deccan Sultans. And this after Vijaynagar being so secular and tolerant towards its Muslim subjects. You are an avid history fan, sure you would have read about it....truly heartbreaking what followed post that battle. 

Vijaynagar was treacherously surrounded by Bijapur ,Golkonda , Berar and Ahmednagar. These were remnants of erstwhile Bahamni state. They managed to turn this struggle against Vijaynagar into Jehad and thus easily bought into the loyalties of Muslims in the enemy camp.

Battle of Talikota utterly destroyed the entire kingdom. It is said that lakhs of women were raped and killed and the city kept on burning for months.