"Did we do the right thing?"

[Alien]

Originally Posted by Arnab
Absolutely right. And India, despite being a regional military superpower (and being backed by teh Soviet Union, a global superpower), purposefully chose the path of peace instead of occupying Bangladesh and initiating ANOTHER war. That has to be commended. I am sure you agree.

India had no reason to occupy us. Our independence and their ambition to break up Pakistan went hand in hand. Its more of a partnership to get rid of a common enemy.

Even if they did occupy us, all India will have is 140 million more people to burden its population. No one would want that.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Do u even hear yourself talking. Millions of Bangladesh took refuge in kolkata. The Government of India paid for the refugees till independence. The number of refugees were in millions and even if the government spend 1 Rupee on each of them for over 7 months than imagine the kind of money they spend for BDeshis. Would you allow that many people of india coming inside our border let alone feed them (even if it is once a day). Please be a little respectful. And obviously ur comparison of US IRAQ with PAK and BD is completely ridiculuos to say the least. No offence intended.

Plus the country helped us raise money. If only minority supported than that kind of money could have never been raised. And again u keep on mentioning hindu and muslim, i don get it why. How does it even matter? Pls love humanity...love people for who they are not what they are.

first off, religion always matters, whether you want it to or not. ppl will always see things in a religious manner, they might not admit it, but they do if their religion differs.

again, i don't think you read my post. i said "to the extent that they acted genuinely, we should be thankful"

now if i help you out, in your time need, and few weeks later come and say "you know the only reason your still breathing is because of me, so i think you should empty your pockets." would that cast doubt on why you helped me to begin with??? or at least what kind of 'help' that was?

i understand, that WB kept, housed and fed millions of our refugees (are you sure it was millions kinda hard to envision an impoverished nation taking on millions more). so say that it cost them 100 billion US dollars to do that. lots of money you say. lots of reasons to be grateful. maybe, perhaps so.

but whats the benefit of not having to deal with an enemy on 2 fronts. a 2 front war would cost roughly at least 2 times as many casualties. how much are those civilian lives worth? i tad bit more than 100 billion US dollars, i'd guess.

whats your estimate?

[al Furqaan]

also the US-iraq analogy was not mine...i didn't even allude to it since it is sooooo not relevent to this topic

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by Alien
India had no reason to occupy us. Our independence and their ambition to break up Pakistan went hand in hand. Its more of a partnership to get rid of a common enemy.

Even if they did occupy us, all India will have is 140 million more people to burden its population. No one would want that.

Mutual benefit cannot be a reason for not being thankful for what they have done. Accept it...we owe them a lot of our lives.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Mutual benefit cannot be a reason for not being thankful for what they have done. Accept it...we owe them a lot of our lives.

well, i am thanful to god, fate, karma, whatever you wanna call it. we were extremely luck that our interests coincided with india's. and i reserve a much smaller level of gratitude to their gov, and their country and people. but measured.

lemme give you some unsolicted but much needed advice.

never indebt yourself with gratitude to another person. the moment you do, you are enslaved. and my mother did not go thru the pains of labor to give birth to slave. no ones mother did.

borrowwing money is fine. you borrow 10K, pay it back and an extra sum as interest, etc.

but you owe someone gratefulness...especially fallible human beings, then how will you pay back? what amount is fair? no one knows. your better off not asking for ppl's help. if you can do for someone else, do out of the goodness of your heart. but don't ask, because 99% if those who are indebted to, will seek to exploit you.

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
first off, religion always matters, whether you want it to or not. ppl will always see things in a religious manner, they might not admit it, but they do if their religion differs.

again, i don't think you read my post. i said "to the extent that they acted genuinely, we should be thankful"

now if i help you out, in your time need, and few weeks later come and say "you know the only reason your still breathing is because of me, so i think you should empty your pockets." would that cast doubt on why you helped me to begin with??? or at least what kind of 'help' that was?

i understand, that WB kept, housed and fed millions of our refugees (are you sure it was millions kinda hard to envision an impoverished nation taking on millions more). so say that it cost them 100 billion US dollars to do that. lots of money you say. lots of reasons to be grateful. maybe, perhaps so.

but whats the benefit of not having to deal with an enemy on 2 fronts. a 2 front war would cost roughly at least 2 times as many casualties. how much are those civilian lives worth? i tad bit more than 100 billion US dollars, i'd guess.

whats your estimate?

Religion doesnt matter, never mattered and never will matter and never should matter. Dont sound like a racist. Pakistanis were muslims too... they killed us raped us and slaugtered us. And all muslims are supposed to be brothers right? So don give me this BShit. Honestly Indians never came to us and forced us to empty our pockets. If Our so called bangladeshi nari cannot live without Indian saree than no one can help it. We are forced to export from them if we cant even produce enough food to feed our own people. That is not the case with Indians, they don need our goods, they produce it themselves. "maybe" "perhaps" sounds extremely vague and shows that u are not really willing to accept facts and u cant deny it either.

Again One narayan Modi Don represent the whole Hindu community and similarly nor Bin laden nor Delwar hossain saidee represents the muslim people. Let people see things the way they want to. Although i know that i can never change ur views towards facts but I really cant care less . I was taught to love all religion and respect all religion and I will do that forever.

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
well, i am thanful to god, fate, karma, whatever you wanna call it. we were extremely luck that our interests coincided with india's. and i reserve a much smaller level of gratitude to their gov, and their country and people. but measured.

lemme give you some unsolicted but much needed advice.

never indebt yourself with gratitude to another person. the moment you do, you are enslaved. and my mother did not go thru the pains of labor to give birth to slave. no ones mother did.

borrowwing money is fine. you borrow 10K, pay it back and an extra sum as interest, etc.

but you owe someone gratefulness...especially fallible human beings, then how will you pay back? what amount is fair? no one knows. your better off not asking for ppl's help. if you can do for someone else, do out of the goodness of your heart. but don't ask, because 99% if those who are indebted to, will seek to exploit you.

Cant help asking? Name me the amount of money that u will be willing to pay for freedom for ur country? I will pay with my life for it. Since i don have to do that, let alone pay interest the least i can do is be a lil grateful. I am not a slave to the indians, they gifted me with the freedom from the slavery of the pakistanis. If they wanted me to be their slave they would have occupied us. I respect them for that. Does that make me their slaves.. no it doesnt.

[thebest]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Do u even hear yourself talking. Millions of Bangladesh took refuge in kolkata. The Government of India paid for the refugees till independence. The number of refugees were in millions and even if the government spend 1 Rupee on each of them for over 7 months than imagine the kind of money they spend for BDeshis. Would you allow that many people of india coming inside our border let alone feed them (even if it is once a day).

Do you know, how many Rohingas we are feeding evryday in Cox'sbazar. This rohingas now even taking our job (at the lower level). That is call altruism. We did not want anything in return.
Our liberation war were a shadow battlefield of USSR - USA. India and Pakistan were fighting for them. But do you know how much things India took to India after the victory. Major Jalil protested that and in return he was handed a forced retirement. Why we did not get anything for 93000 POW? Why so called Mujib Bahini was created? Why General Osmany was not present during surrender ceremony?
Indira Ghandhi was a clever politician. So once Sheik Mujibor Rahaman requested she withdraw the force. Rajiv was not. In Sri-lanka did not happened. Indian army were forced to withdraw.
India had two objectives to assist us
1. Divide arch enemy Pakistan in two parts thus avoiding war in two fronts
2. Make a satelite state
India just took the credit of winning the war. By the time Indian army came into field a good chunk of land already liberated. In fact Indian paratrooper landed in the area freed by qader siddiquie.
Yes I am grateful to them for their assistance. But if someone say it is altruism from India or we should not protest againest any Indian activity because they help us, I am not going to take that.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Cant help asking? Name me the amount of money that u will be willing to pay for freedom for ur country? I will pay with my life for it. Since i don have to do that, let alone pay interest the least i can do is be a lil grateful. I am not a slave to the indians, they gifted me with the freedom from the slavery of the pakistanis. If they wanted me to be their slave they would have occupied us. I respect them for that. Does that make me their slaves.. no it doesnt.

what price would pay? theoretically, i would pay with my life as well...but i'll admit, i am too much of a coward for that at least right now, so i would not do anything.

i admit, you are correct about the BS of muslim unity. but lets not forget the bigger BS of people helping you out when they stand to gain everything, out of the goodness of their heart. sorry it doesn't happen. it should but it doesn't. ideal situations are not always reality.

bhaira neejeder ke exploit korbe (pakis vs us), are onno manush eshey bhalo manushi dakhabe...sorry but that idealistic inanity just doesn't happen.

[Bancan]

chinaman ailo re.....

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by thebest
Do you know, how many Rohingas we are feeding evryday in Cox'sbazar. This rohingas now even taking our job (at the lower level). That is call altruism. We did not want anything in return.
Our liberation war were a shadow battlefield of USSR - USA. India and Pakistan were fighting for them. But do you know how much things India took to India after the victory. Major Jalil protested that and in return he was handed a forced retirement. Why we did not get anything for 93000 POW? Why so called Mujib Bahini was created? Why General Osmany was not present during surrender ceremony?
Indira Ghandhi was a clever politician. So once Sheik Mujibor Rahaman requested she withdraw the force. Rajiv was not. In Sri-lanka did not happened. Indian army were forced to withdraw.
India had two objectives to assist us
1. Divide arch enemy Pakistan in two parts thus avoiding war in two fronts
2. Make a satelite state
India just took the credit of winning the war. By the time Indian army came into field a good chunk of land already liberated. In fact Indian paratrooper landed in the area freed by qader siddiquie.
Yes I am grateful to them for their assistance. But if someone say it is altruism from India or we should not protest againest any Indian activity because they help us, I am not going to take that.

No i dont..
How many rohinga's are we feeding everyday?

Ok so now imagine this Rohinga's telling you that Bangladesh did give us refuge and **** but we will never be thankful to them. How wud that make u feel.

"As of 2005, the UNHCR has been assisting with the repatriation of Rohingya from Bangladesh, but allegations of human rights abuses in the refugee camps have threatened this repatriation effort. " just a fact i thought u shud know.

"But do you know how much things India took to India after the victory" Again i don, y don u tell me and give me a source.

Finally i am happy for u being grateful, I never asked for nething more. always protest for wat is wrong? let it be Indians or neone for that matter. Indians are not saints, I am not suggesting they are either.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
Religion doesnt matter, never mattered and never will matter and never should matter. Dont sound like a racist. Pakistanis were muslims too... they killed us raped us and slaugtered us. And all muslims are supposed to be brothers right? So don give me this BShit. Honestly Indians never came to us and forced us to empty our pockets. If Our so called bangladeshi nari cannot live without Indian saree than no one can help it. We are forced to export from them if we cant even produce enough food to feed our own people. That is not the case with Indians, they don need our goods, they produce it themselves. "maybe" "perhaps" sounds extremely vague and shows that u are not really willing to accept facts and u cant deny it either.

Again One narayan Modi Don represent the whole Hindu community and similarly nor Bin laden nor Delwar hossain saidee represents the muslim people. Let people see things the way they want to. Although i know that i can never change ur views towards facts but I really cant care less . I was taught to love all religion and respect all religion and I will do that forever.

1) the real debate has nothing to do with religion. it has everything to do with the current understanding of the international politcal arena. why isn't bangladesh helping the people of darfur? simply, we don't have an interest, and neither does anyone else in the world. if we did act, we would prolly due so for some real gain.

why does Bangladesh put so many of its soldiers into harms way as UN peacekeepers? so that our otherwise "arm pit of the world" (kissingers words, not mine) nation, has some positive image. we aren't really there to help the tutsis, or the bosnians, or whoever.

2) and just because i mentioned as an example taking coins out of your pocket doesn't mean thats what i was literally talking about (i cannot believe i am actually clarifying myself).

what i was taking about was the border disputes, access to bodies of water, dumping of pollution into rivers that flow thru our territory and other "altruistic" behavior. i am not grateful for that.

3) and my point is further proved by the very title of this thread and the rediff article. "did we do the right thing?"

you and some others go on praising someone for their "altruistic" action...and the benefactors themselves aren't even sure if saving us from genocide was the right thing to do?

do you understand that that article is debating whether, in hindsight, saving us was the right thing to do.

i have always been taught to respect religious diversity, but i was also taught that when u do something, you shouldn't measure its rightness or wrongness, after the fact, and analyze the costs/benefits you recieved or incurred. right is right no matter what happens, similarily wrong is wrong no matter what happens. i hope you understand this.

the rediff article is talking about it from a strategic point of view, not a moral one. i am arguing that it was in all likelyhood, based on all the blatant evidence, a strategic decision to "help the bengalis (read: weaken pakistan)" and not a moral one of "oh lets stop this genocide"

[HereWeGo]

Rediff article?...Read some of the Fundamentalist newspaper in Bangladesh. You will find hatred in pure form for the indians. Rediff sux. As does the fundamentalist newspeprs in bangladesh. Are we supposed to be aggravated by it. No we are not, cuz it is not how government view things, if it did i am sure we would have seen some kind of diplomatic move from the two countries.

Secondly i never mentioned nething abt taking coins out of ur pocket...

I agree with ur last part abt right is right and wrong is wrong. just don bring religion into it. No religion supports violence unless absolutely necessary.

If India does something wrong, protest it but still that shud not stiop u from being grateful of the fact that they did help us in 1971. thats all..

[Alien]

chinaman will be here any second.....

[al Furqaan]

i don't have anything more to say that i haven't already said...if you wish, you can keep reading my posts again till they make sense.

but i will add this, you mentioned anti indian articles in bangladesh.

they are anti-indian because of either religious reasons or because of policy issues. the policies anger bangladesh because they generally are overly favoring india. the reason is because india is the regional power and can enforce it. it is acting in its self interest, as bangladesh is (or tries to). is there anything wrong with india pursuing her self interest? of course not. but we need not be grateful for that.

thats all i am saying. to the extent that their aid was sincere, i am grateful.

i have repeated this at least 2 times prior...and if you tell me there actions were 100% pure and noble, i can't accept it because that smacks against political and logical theory.

with that being said, let us accept our difference in opinion.

[layperson]

Originally Posted by Bancan
chinaman ailo re.....

LMAO. I was reading all those serious posts and then suddenly this little one liner comes out of nowhere and cracked me up !!!!

This thread is providing me with a lot of information I did not know. So please go on with your debates. Maybe I will learn more.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
i agree that it was easier for us, the bangladeshi people, and also the indian people, military, and gov.





in that sense the indian gov exercised its common sense (only a fool would invite a guerilla war, no matter how robust ur military; just ask the pakis), and it should be commended as much as you would commend a 4 year for not touching the red-hot stove. so some miniscule commendations are on order, no doubt.

Sure. As long as you acknowledge it. Needed a lot of coaxing though.

Like I said, what India did under Indira Gandhi in 1971-1972 re: the Bangladesh situation was right on the money.

The only big time loser (apart from Bangladesh herself with hundereds of thousands of lives lost and her whole infrastructure tattered) was Pakistan.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Alien
India had no reason to occupy us. Our independence and their ambition to break up Pakistan went hand in hand. Its more of a partnership to get rid of a common enemy.

Even if they did occupy us, all India will have is 140 million more people to burden its population. No one would want that.

We were talking 1972, not 2006. You lost track there.

[Bancan]

Originally Posted by shahriyar
LMAO. I was reading all those serious posts and then suddenly this little one liner comes out of nowhere and cracked me up !!!!

This thread is providing me with a lot of information I did not know. So please go on with your debates. Maybe I will learn more.

thank you shahriyar . i try

[Arnab]

What I don't get is the implicit sympathy for Pakistan shown here by some, with the mentioning of Pakistanis losing out because India somehow stood to gain from the emergence of Bangladesh.

Dudes, if Bangldesh were to emerge as an independent state, West Pakistan HAD to be the loser, regardless of India's benefit from the whole situation.

When Pakistanis started massacaring our people in a calculated manner, it was time for them to go, and if Indians helped us in doing that, that was the best possible thing. The "right"-est thing. If Bangladesh were to win, Pakistan had to be the loser.

Some you are sounding as if you'd rather not have an indpendent Bangladesh lest India somehow benefits from our very existence. I am not sure if you mean that, but a sympathetic tone for, or a lack of denunciation against, the 1971 Pakistan atrocities is certainly discernible.

That kind of implication is just repulsive. It goes against the very spirit of why Bangladesh emerged and exists as an independent state.

[Alien]

Originally Posted by Arnab
We were talking 1972, not 2006. You lost track there.

I was refering to 1971-2. Ok maybe the population then wasn't 140 million but atleast 100 million or so. But thats more than the burden India can cope. Occupying Bangladesh would be nothing but a big liability for any nation.

We aren't much of a developed nation now and neither were we were 30 years ago. Not all countries are good for invading. And BD tops that list.

[Alien]

Originally Posted by Arnab
What I don't get is the implicit sympathy for Pakistan shown here by some, with the mentioning of Pakistanis losing out because India somehow stood to gain from the emergence of Bangladesh.

Dudes, if Bangldesh were to emerge as an independent state, West Pakistan HAD to be the loser, regardless of India's benefit from the whole situation.

When Pakistanis started massacaring our people in a calculated manner, it was time for them to go, and if Indians helped us in doing that, that was the best possible thing. The "right"-est thing. If Bangladesh were to win, Pakistan had to be the loser.

Some you are sounding as if you'd rather not have an indpendent Bangladesh lest India somehow benefits from our very existence. I am not sure if you mean that, but a sympathetic tone for, or a lack of denunciation against, the 1971 Pakistan atrocities is certainly discernible.

That kind of implication is just repulsive. It goes against the very spirit of why Bangladesh emerged and exists as an independent state.

People aren't taking pro-pakistani stance here. We all understand the brutality of Pakistan and there is no excuse for it. The topic is whether India did it out of geniune feeling for our independence or whether there was something in it for them. Even though I strongly feel it went through all that trouble to break up Pakistan for security reasons, it was no doubt a positive thing for us.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Alien
I was refering to 1971-2. Ok maybe the population then wasn't 140 million but atleast 100 million or so. But thats more than the burden India can cope. Occupying Bangladesh would be nothing but a big liability for any nation.

We aren't much of a developed nation now and neither were we were 30 years ago. Not all countries are good for invading. And BD tops that list.

Yeah, right.

Bangladesh had ~70 million people back in 1971.

The whole Indian subcontinent was a pile of developing nations, India included.

Occupying/annexing Bangladesh would have given India huge benefits. It would have given her precious territorial continuity, seamless transport of resources from its eastern states, the world's most fertile alluvial plain (Bengal was the richest region in India before the Brits took over and was the seat of British Raj), etc etc.

You know, the same arguments given by those who feel India is always threatening Bangladesh and will attack her soon.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Alien
People aren't taking pro-pakistani stance here. We all understand the brutality of Pakistan and there is no excuse for it. The topic is whether India did it out of geniune feeling for our independence or whether there was something in it for them. Even though I strongly feel it went through all that trouble to break up Pakistan for security reasons, it was no doubt a positive thing for us.

It was not a mere "positive" thing for us. Helping a kid on the street is a "positive" thing.

Helping a nation gain independece has infinitely larger significance. It was an absolutely ESSENTIAL thing for us.

You really do not understand the momentous nature of what happened in 1971, do you? Nitpicking about India's genuine intentions during 1971 is probably the last thing a history-aware Bangladeshi should do.

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by Arnab
It was not a mere "positive" thing for us. Helping a kid on the street is a "positive" thing.

Helping a nation gain independece has infinitely larger significance. It was an absolutely ESSENTIAL thing for us.

You really do not understand the momentous nature of what happened in 1971, do you? Nitpicking about India's genuine intentions during 1971 is probably the last thing a history-aware Bangladeshi should do.

U spoke my mind....Thanks for putting it in nice words. I failed in my attempts .. so i gave up..