Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Do you think it was right to split India?

Announcements Posted on
Post on TSR and win a prize! Find out more... 10-04-2014
    • 38 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arnoob)
    I never said that every country has apologised for war crimes, I was just saying that some countries have done so because you claimed that there would be no country that would apologise for past war crimes.
    Maybe i should've said "no country likes to apologise..."

    There is no way that the Nazi government would have apologised but then again the Pakistani government which was in charge in 1971 wouldn't have done so either but the current Pakistani government could do so.
    Any political part in any country seen "apologising" is political suicide and ammunition for an opposing part at the next election. So yeah.
    If the German government was so retarded then it wouldn't be Europe's economic superpower atm...
    I never said it was retarded in terms of having brains to control the economy. Its retarded because it has already payed off the reparations to Israel, long ago! In 1950, 1K pounds is like 100K pounds in todays currency (i made that up, but you get the gist, i hope). Inflation and all that.
    The British government would never apologise for imperialism , there'd be too many countries to apologise to
    Yeah, thats true. They'd have to apologise to 1/4 of the world Talk about political suicide
    Oh and yes that's fine :cool:
    2 days late, happy independence day :cool:

    *bro hug*
    • 18 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    India was not split up enough, now we must contend with a massive state as a future rival. Should of been cut up into 20-30 million people segments.
    What a remarkable signature. It would have been excellent had that been the recognized signature of the official flag.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ak137)
    Maybe i should've said "no country likes to apologise..."


    Any political part in any country seen "apologising" is political suicide and ammunition for an opposing part at the next election. So yeah.

    I never said it was retarded in terms of having brains to control the economy. Its retarded because it has already payed off the reparations to Israel, long ago! In 1950, 1K pounds is like 100K pounds in todays currency (i made that up, but you get the gist, i hope). Inflation and all that.

    Yeah, thats true. They'd have to apologise to 1/4 of the world Talk about political suicide

    2 days late, happy independence day :cool:

    *bro hug*
    That's true but I am sure there are some exceptions where countries or individuals representing a country are genuinely sorry due to guilt. Yea, money was worth more than it is now, personally I think that victims should have been paid off and not the state of Israel itself especially considering the what they are doing now. Fair enough :bl:
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ALII)
    You said to Politricks "Just because you come up with statistical analysis doesn't mean your theory is correct. By criticising what the west pakistan did back then. I think you should have mentioned the huge number of muslims that were murdered during the separation."

    I'm pointing out that he did mention the huge number of Muslims that were murdered as he said in his comment that Bengalis were murdered
    *YAWN* your pathetic attempts to criticise my case, isn't making much sense. So why don't you just take it easy, go and make your self a cuppa tea. And stop wasting my time.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinnah

    Blame this guy. He refused to live under a Hindu-dominated India and since he was the most influential Muslim leader, his point of view was followed by Britain, I think he has a good argument. I'm really not sure what the alternative would work out like, but the violence of partition might have been only a small taste of it. Perhaps a gradual disintegration of a united India as Muslims and Hindus squabble. The Christians and Sikhs left stuck between the two. India simply wouldn't be stable without a separate Muslim homeland. Either way bloodshed was inevitable ever since the Mughals conquered India in the 16th century and two rival religions came to dominate the sub continent.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by snehame)
    Not all muslims face discrimination and poverty in India. Discrimination and poverty is faced by people of all religious backgrounds. Many government officials and Supreme court judges are muslims. Muslims are treated equally. Those who discriminate are orthodox and believe in an all Hindu India, they belong to certain political parties and believe me every sensible, educated person is against those who discriminate on the basis of religion.
    Well i hope that is true, peaceful cohesion is good for all, but the discrimination is there:

    'The disparities between Muslims, who make up 13.4% of the population, and India's Hindus, who hover at around 80%, are striking. There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, Muslim Indians have shorter life spans, worse health, lower literacy levels and lower-paying jobs. Add to that toxic brew the lingering resentment over 2002's anti-Muslim riots in the state of Gujarat. The riots, instigated by Hindu nationalists, killed some 2,000 people, most of them Muslims. To this day, few of the perpetrators have been convicted.

    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...#ixzz1qS6yTBld'

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10718243

    There are also concerns over muslim discrimination when it comes to housing.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The thing is, India was never a country until the british empire came and called the entire landmass "India" There are so many differences between areas of India and pakistan that it could easily be split into several countries
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Patriot Rich)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinnah

    Blame this guy. He refused to live under a Hindu-dominated India and since he was the most influential Muslim leader, his point of view was followed by Britain, I think he has a good argument. I'm really not sure what the alternative would work out like, but the violence of partition might have been only a small taste of it. Perhaps a gradual disintegration of a united India as Muslims and Hindus squabble. The Christians and Sikhs left stuck between the two. India simply wouldn't be stable without a separate Muslim homeland. Either way bloodshed was inevitable ever since the Mughals conquered India in the 16th century and two rival religions came to dominate the sub continent.
    This :yy:.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    India was not split up enough, now we must contend with a massive state as a future rival. Should of been cut up into 20-30 million people segments.
    Were you born in 1800?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Golden_Boy786)
    *YAWN* your pathetic attempts to criticise my case, isn't making much sense. So why don't you just take it easy, go and make your self a cuppa tea. And stop wasting my time.
    It's not my fault you didn't know that majority of Bengalis are Muslims you idiot. I corrected you, you should be happy.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ALII)
    It's not my fault you didn't know that majority of Bengalis are Muslims you idiot. I corrected you, you should be happy.
    Thank you Thank you!!

    Im an idiot!! Brillant know i don't need to read anymore of your comments, glad thats the end of the thread now. You win. I surrender.:withstupid:
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Golden_Boy786)
    Thank you Thank you!!

    Im an idiot!! Brillant know i don't need to read anymore of your comments, glad thats the end of the thread now. You win. I surrender.:withstupid:
    :2euk48l:
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    If India was not segregated, what an empire it would be today. Never mind a super power, If at all it was kept glued together, The world would heavily rely on India in a good way
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ManPowa)
    If India was not segregated, what an empire it would be today. Never mind a super power, If at all it was kept glued together, The world would heavily rely on India in a good way
    I agree, all of this division in the subcontinent based on religion seems so silly, I also fantasize a united India, an India where there's no such thing as 'Bangladesh' or 'Pakistan'. If Bangladesh and Pakistan were to join up with India now, India would have 320,000,000 more people in man power, unfortunately, that's only an Utopian dream.
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Politricks)
    I agree, all of this division in the subcontinent based on religion seems so silly, I also fantasize a united India, an India where there's no such thing as 'Bangladesh' or 'Pakistan'. If Bangladesh and Pakistan were to join up with India now, India would have 320,000,000 more people in man power, unfortunately, that's only an Utopian dream.
    It shouldn't be called India then. Its should be something like "Hindustan II" lol.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Golden_Boy786)
    It shouldn't be called India then. Its should be something like "Hindustan II" lol.
    haha, Hindustan II :lol:
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by longman240)
    As a Pakistani, I feel sickened by the crimes that we committed against Bangladesh, it should never have happened and the Pakistani media have tried their best to make people forget it ever happened and paint Bhutto as some sort of massive hero. The fact that they still haven't issued an official apology is a sign that we simply refuse cohesion with Bangladesh and an apology is long overdue.

    Personally, I think India could not have sustained itself without splitting apart, Muslims were being brutally murdered and endlessly persecuted in India and all the events had to come to a head somewhere and that "somewhere" was Pakistan.
    Hindus and Sikhs also got brutally murdered in the partition not just in India but also in the Bangladesh war. I don't want to be sectarian but it's nice to acknowledge the other side as well. There are some Hindus and Christians in Pakistan not many left but still. They are being treated as second class citizens and they are not allowed to vote for Muslim candidates in higher elections and they are barred from reaching top electoral positions. They are discriminated by blasphemy law and Hudood ordiances. Their religious holidays are not made holidays unlike in India where all religions have days off for their religious festivals. Their religious places are not cared for as much, even if they could become tourist places, and in India, Muslims have their own separate laws and are allowed to have their own marriage laws, have quotas, are given money for doing Hajj have 4 wives etc but not sure what law governs minorities in Pakistan.


    I love my Pakistani friends but if something bad is happening then one should admit and change it. I'm not saying situation for Muslims in India is ideal but is far better than minorities in Pakistan even during partition and now. They are in a poorer situation than Muslims in India today and all Indian Muslims i know are happy to be in India.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Politricks)
    haha, Hindustan II :lol:
    I think all 3 countries have unique and fascinating culture and traditions. It would be beautiful if all were able to live together in harmony but if there is unrest and suspicion then who are we to deny people living sepately. I don't think the British are to blame completely. Perhaps if they stayed for the transition period then there would be less bloodshed and less loss of life.

    Hindustan 2 would be a cool name. The word Hindu itself originates from Pakistan. Persian, Turkish and Arabs visiting the subcontient named the people living there Hindus after the Indus River running through Pakistan. Hindu was never a religious connotation till recently. Yet not many know that. The religion of Hinduism was known as sanatana dharma.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by brownchocolateice)
    I think all 3 countries have unique and fascinating culture and traditions. It would be beautiful if all were able to live together in harmony but if there is unrest and suspicion then who are we to deny people living sepately. I don't think the British are to blame completely. Perhaps if they stayed for the transition period then there would be less bloodshed and less loss of life.

    Hindustan 2 would be a cool name. The word Hindu itself originates from Pakistan. Persian, Turkish and Arabs visiting the subcontient named the people living there Hindus after the Indus River running through Pakistan. Hindu was never a religious connotation till recently. Yet not many know that. The religion of Hinduism was known as sanatana dharma.
    I think the British are to blame to an extent. If the EIC and British Empire not interfered and taken over India, then who's to say it wouldn't be stable? I'd go as far to say that It would be a superpower to rival the United States. It would probably have developed of its own accord; people often credit Britain with introducing a decent infrastructure to India, but honestly I think it would've done it itself, like any other developed nation.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatPerson)
    I think the British are to blame to an extent. If the EIC and British Empire not interfered and taken over India, then who's to say it wouldn't be stable? I'd go as far to say that It would be a superpower to rival the United States. It would probably have developed of its own accord; people often credit Britain with introducing a decent infrastructure to India, but honestly I think it would've done it itself, like any other developed nation.
    Did "India" really exist before the British got there? What I mean is that it wasn't one country, there were lots of separate kingdoms in that area. India's a very big, diverse place. Who's to say that if the British never took over it would be one country now?

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By completing the slider below you agree to The Student Room's terms & conditions and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

    You don't slide that way? No problem.

Updated: March 31, 2012
Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.