Akhand Bharat - United India : Should it happen ?

[legendster]

So after reading about some of the appalling views and perception of my country from this thread; I decided to make this new thread much more fun and engaging.


Express your perception of INDIA in ONE WORD.

[bryant.coleman]

If we consider UK, my friend said that there is a terrible discrimination with regards to the color and Indians are mostly treated badly in London (where my friend lives).

Native inhabitants of England might disagree with you. Some of the British friends of mine have complained that in some parts of the cities such as Oldham, Burnley, and Bradford, there are "No go" areas for whites. And regarding London, the Inner boroughs are around two-thirds non-white. I don't think that the minority race group will discriminate the majority there.

[legendster]

Reviving this.

Please watch this video of Ex Cricketer and current Pakistani politician; Imran khan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJwyCuDqv58

[aizzaku]

An idea of union or being united is easy to think but hard to follow through.

U see, when there is internal peace and stability, one can look forward to grow.

check the news... these internal politics at the capital of India ... how can we think of getting that formal united India back when we are divinded among ourselves..

[legendster]

An idea of union or being united is easy to think but hard to follow through.

U see, when there is internal peace and stability, one can look forward to grow.

check the news... these internal politics at the capital of India ... how can we think of getting that formal united India back when we are divinded among ourselves..

Like I said watch the video. Mr Khan talks about these pesky issues. To quote him 'A man does not become great with just his talents or qualifications, he becomes great when he has a great vision'.

I completely agree with Mr Khan's viewpoint here, he clearly says that if India and Pakistan are to move forward and have sustained peace then there needs to be a leader that has a great vision for both these countries. Obviously there will be a vested interest in keeping the things as they are currently and there will be opposition and challenges to overcome if one is to go up against the status-quo.
But to overcome these small pesky hurdles and look beyond what our countries can achieve in the future if they work together is beyond anything that anyone of us can comprehend.

He talks about open borders and letting India access Central Asia through Pakistan and that is a HUGE statement coming from a pakistani politician.

In my opinion, free trade and open borders and joint policing and administration of Kashmir would be a huge leap forward. Keep in mind Mr Khan did NOT talk about this joint administration thing its just my thought.

[bryant.coleman]

Lol... a Union state consisting of India (1,300 million), Pakistan (190 million) and Bangladesh (160 million) will be the most populous nation in the earth, with 1.65 billion residents. Surprisingly, the Hindus will still be the majority, with a population of 1,032 million (62.34% of the population), followed by Muslims at 520 million (31.38%) and Christians at 35.5 million (2.14%).

[legendster]

Lol... a Union state consisting of India (1,300 million), Pakistan (190 million) and Bangladesh (160 million) will be the most populous nation in the earth, with 1.65 billion residents. Surprisingly, the Hindus will still be the majority, with a population of 1,032 million (62.34% of the population), followed by Muslims at 520 million (31.38%) and Christians at 35.5 million (2.14%).

Why do you keep categorizing India as a Hindu country? That in itself shows how much (or less) you know about the ground reality here.

[Snail2]

Like I said watch the video. Mr Khan talks about these pesky issues. To quote him 'A man does not become great with just his talents or qualifications, he becomes great when he has a great vision'.

I completely agree with Mr Khan's viewpoint here, he clearly says that if India and Pakistan are to move forward and have sustained peace then there needs to be a leader that has a great vision for both these countries. Obviously there will be a vested interest in keeping the things as they are currently and there will be opposition and challenges to overcome if one is to go up against the status-quo.
But to overcome these small pesky hurdles and look beyond what our countries can achieve in the future if they work together is beyond anything that anyone of us can comprehend.

He talks about open borders and letting India access Central Asia through Pakistan and that is a HUGE statement coming from a pakistani politician.

In my opinion, free trade and open borders and joint policing and administration of Kashmir would be a huge leap forward. Keep in mind Mr Khan did NOT talk about this joint administration thing its just my thought.

That won't happen. At least not in the foreseeable future. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (+Burma and Sri Lanka) are not just accidentally broke up. There are too deep religious, cultural, historic and ethnic rifts between these people. The only way to keep such a huge and diverse mass of people together is an external coercive factor.

[bryant.coleman]

Why do you keep categorizing India as a Hindu country? That in itself shows how much (or less) you know about the ground reality here.

India is a Hindu country, since 80% of the population adheres to that religion. By the same logic, Malaysia is a Muslim country, since 60% of the population there is Muslim, and Russia is a Christian country since around three-fifth of the population there is Christian. And don't teach me about the ground reality in India. I am a regular visitor to India, and I have family connections.

[panju1]

That won't happen. At least not in the foreseeable future. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (+Burma and Sri Lanka) are not just accidentally broke up. There are too deep religious, cultural, historic and ethnic rifts between these people. The only way to keep such a huge and diverse mass of people together is an external coercive factor.

If Pakistan and Bangladesh couldn't stay together in spite of being bound by the same religion, then there is no way such diverse countries could unite. 

[legendster]

Why do you keep categorizing India as a Hindu country? That in itself shows how much (or less) you know about the ground reality here.

India is a Hindu country, since 80% of the population adheres to that religion. By the same logic, Malaysia is a Muslim country, since 60% of the population there is Muslim, and Russia is a Christian country since around three-fifth of the population there is Christian. And don't teach me about the ground reality in India. I am a regular visitor to India, and I have family connections.

Well looks like you have some deep engraved confusion about the difference between demographics and how a country like India ticks. Yes we have a predominant hindu population but you are over looking the fundamental fact which is the cornerstone of our constitution. India is secular which is the separation of state and religion. This is not England where the states used to be run by some brothel building churches.

[legendster]

That won't happen. At least not in the foreseeable future. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (+Burma and Sri Lanka) are not just accidentally broke up. There are too deep religious, cultural, historic and ethnic rifts between these people. The only way to keep such a huge and diverse mass of people together is an external coercive factor.

If Pakistan and Bangladesh couldn't stay together in spite of being bound by the same religion, then there is no way such diverse countries could unite.  

Let me give you a brief history of why Bangladesh did not stay united with Pakistan, before the partition of Bengal (not India) there were many hindus living in Bangladesh, so much that the ratio between the hindus and muslims was 3:2 that is for every 2 Hindus there were 3 Muslims. This was a very poor choice by - yet another Englishman playing boss over the native population.

After independence the Pakistani elites were trying to enforce once language all over their country which really started the friction between the poor bengalis and the elite pakistanis. This was followed by very violent ethnic cleansing of the Hindus. Someone had to pay for these atrocities, and if not Pakistan then who?

The fact that despite having a religious majority pakistanis could not keep their country united is the case and point. Religious majority plays a very insignificant role if at all when it comes to keeping a country united.

[Snail2]

If Pakistan and Bangladesh couldn't stay together in spite of being bound by the same religion, then there is no way such diverse countries could unite. 

Pakistan and Bangladesh are pretty far from each other with no common border, also different ethnic groups and different culture, so a split between the two wasn't a big surprise, I guess.

More interesting and worrying thing is that Pakistan itself seems to have problems with keeping itself together as the Taliban and now IS establishing themselves on the western part of the country.

[legendster]

If Pakistan and Bangladesh couldn't stay together in spite of being bound by the same religion, then there is no way such diverse countries could unite. 

Pakistan and Bangladesh are pretty far from each other with no common border, also different ethnic groups and different culture, so a split between the two wasn't a big surprise, I guess.

More interesting and worrying thing is that Pakistan itself seems to have problems with keeping itself together as the Taliban and now IS establishing themselves on the western part of the country.

They've always been there, large parts of north eastern areas have always been unadministered barren lands which have been sporadically occupied by pashton nomads. It only became a "problem" when Pakistani government declared war against terror in the early 2000's. Which had to happen at some point eventually.

[bryant.coleman]

Pakistan and Bangladesh are pretty far from each other with no common border, also different ethnic groups and different culture, so a split between the two wasn't a big surprise, I guess.

More interesting and worrying thing is that Pakistan itself seems to have problems with keeping itself together as the Taliban and now IS establishing themselves on the western part of the country.

Ever since Pakistan became an independent nation, the political power has remained with the ethnic Punjabi community, who contitute for a little over 50% of the population. The other ethnic groups (Pashtuns, Mohajirs, Saraikis, Sindhis, Baloches, Brahuis, Kohistanis.etc) have been living under the Punjabi dominance, and they are not very happy about it.

[legendster]

Merry Christmas.

A very recent investigative approach from CNN IBN a news channel in India reported and recorded these angry crowd.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvsi-yPmmwo

Whoever says people in POK are safe and that India is the reason for the people's dismay, make them watch this video.

THIS is the ground reality, people yelling and wanting to be reunited with India.


Inka baap bhi dega AZADI!!

#HellinPOK!

[legendster]

Pakistan and Bangladesh are pretty far from each other with no common border, also different ethnic groups and different culture, so a split between the two wasn't a big surprise, I guess.

More interesting and worrying thing is that Pakistan itself seems to have problems with keeping itself together as the Taliban and now IS establishing themselves on the western part of the country.

Ever since Pakistan became an independent nation, the political power has remained with the ethnic Punjabi community, who contitute for a little over 50% of the population. The other ethnic groups (Pashtuns, Mohajirs, Saraikis, Sindhis, Baloches, Brahuis, Kohistanis.etc) have been living under the Punjabi dominance, and they are not very happy about it.

Political power ? Here is Hina Rabbani saying how little the political powers in Pakistan really are.
She admits how weak their democratic government really is and how Pakistan has not even enjoyed a decade in a proper democratically elected political body since it's independence!

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/headtohead/2015/12/rules-pakistan-151201112941549.html

Yes she is hot. Yes I will consider marrying her.

[bryant.coleman]

Political power ? Here is Hina Rabbani saying how little the political powers in Pakistan really are.

It is true. Pakistan is a democratic country only on the outside. In reality, it is a military dictatorship. The Prime Minister and President does not have much control over sectors such as Defense and foreign affairs. All these are under the control of the military chiefs. And when the elected officials cross the red line, the army disposes them, just like what happened to Nawaz Sharif.

[panju1]

Political power ? Here is Hina Rabbani saying how little the political powers in Pakistan really are.

It is true. Pakistan is a democratic country only on the outside. In reality, it is a military dictatorship. The Prime Minister and President does not have much control over sectors such as Defense and foreign affairs. All these are under the control of the military chiefs. And when the elected officials cross the red line, the army disposes them, just like what happened to Nawaz Sharif.

Very rarely do you see Pakistani PMs completing their terms.
They either get deposed or executed. 

[legendster]

Political power ? Here is Hina Rabbani saying how little the political powers in Pakistan really are.

It is true. Pakistan is a democratic country only on the outside. In reality, it is a military dictatorship. The Prime Minister and President does not have much control over sectors such as Defense and foreign affairs. All these are under the control of the military chiefs. And when the elected officials cross the red line, the army disposes them, just like what happened to Nawaz Sharif.

There is no outside they ARE a military dictatorship. There have been recent changes in the way that military power translates into laws but in the end it's just US that has constantly USED the pakistany army to do their dirty work.

And sitting from your chair somewhere not IN the region you are free to speculate it doesn't change the ground realities.

Military dictatorship needs to go. The democratically elected bodies may have a hostile stance when it comes to Kashmir but other than that they are ready to work towards peace. It's like Mr Imran Khan said.. "there are enormous dividends of peace." If they dont adhere to the peace then look at that last video link which I posted people are OUT on the streets wanting to return to a state of peace and they are wanting the borders to be diluted.