Re: Indo-US Navy buildup in Indian Ocean
We are diverting from the original topic i.e. Indo-US Navy buildup in Indian Ocean but since questions have been addressed to me so I would not like to miss the opportunity.
I'm merely trying to address your assertions.
Firstly I appreciate the manner in which each of my point has been contested. This is the first time I had ever been to any forum. I have realized that one needs a full day to answer these questions coming from all directions, for which I am afraid I don't have sufficient time.
Don't worry, there are only few folks here who'd take the time to address you point for point. Many others would be more than happy to indulge in pointless mudslinging.
Before I start off, I must confess I believe telling cent percent truth but sometimes the propaganda is so powerful that you cannot reach the truth. Since we are all students here in this world and learn from each other so I would request all of you not to dub my genuine efforts as "Conspiracy Theories."
Bushra, anyone who holds certain beliefs holds them because they deem them to be the "truth". I can very easily tell you that Jinnah and Nehru were freemasons, tools of the Illuminati, and India-Pakistan partition was some ulterior twisted social experiment! Than let me also tell you to believe me at face value and do not call my views as "conspiracies". Would you believe me?
You have to back up your points with proper sources if you want to convince others towards your views. Otherwise, you are erasing the line between
facts and
opinions.
Now coming straight to some of the points (I would answer them generally). First of all Quaid-e-Azam death occurred in September 1948 and not in 1952 as given by you.
I never said Jinnah died in 1952. It was King George who died in 1952, not Jinnah. Maybe I did not articulate my sentence properly.
There is popular view that "Jinnah was pro USA and pro Britain. The entire Muslim League supported the British war effort while the INC (Indian National Congress) refused."
You have to address the person who said that statement. It was not me. I merely stated that Jinnah was the one who kept the British in the subcontinent even after partition.
This is totally misleading. We Indians and Pakistanis have a disease that we love to quote western sources and don't bother to rely on our own people.
Because our people have blood of millions of people on their hands on either side of the border during partition. There is no way that you can tell me with a straight face that "our people" are not biased.
For an incident taking place in Indian city of Kanpur or Pakistani city of Lahore, how many of us would go and bother to find the truth themsewlves or rely on local sources. Some one has quoted Life Magazine but I would not grade it reliable because when I have original documents relating to Quaid-e-Azam in my library, why I should rely on Life Magazine. It is on record that Quaid-e-Azam reversed the British policy in the North-West Frontier (now Khyber PK). We have also the address of Quaid-e-Azam to the Tribal Jirga at Government House, Peshawar on 17th April, 1948 when he said, "Keeping in view your loyalty, help, assurances and declarations we ordered, as you know, the withdrawal of troops from Waziristan as a concrete and definite gesture on our part," It is also on record that Quaid-e-Azam was persuaded by The American and British not to reverse British Frontier policy as Russians have eye on Gilgit and Northern Areas but Quaid-e-Azam did not listen to them. What life Magazine has reported cannot be true. We have also the cable sent by US Ambassador at New Delhi after his meeting with Quaid-e-Azam, in which he criticized Quaid-e-Azam and passed sarcastic remarks that Pakistan cannot survive for more than few months. We have also Quaid-e-Azam refusal to take over Pakistan unless only Muslim units of Indian Army are allocated.
I cannot comment on that since I do not know that part of history. I will dig into it and have a look.
All this is besides the point I have raised.
Your observation is partially correct but since we no access to the original documents so we are taking the help of western propaganda, which is not fair. However, we can safely say that as per the Partition Plan, both India and Pakistan were to remain under the British Commonwealth. Pakistan declined to accept Governor Generalship of Lord Mountbatten and Quaid-e-Azam become the country's first Governorship whereas India accepted Mountbatten as Governor General who remained on the position till June 1948, when he was succeeded by C. Rajagopalachari.
This is the biased history I am talking about.
Mountbatten remained in India as governor general for only
10 months after independence. The English monarchy were accorded the rulers of Pakistan for
9 years after independence! Stark difference there, no?
Moreover, the
Dominion of Pakistan existed for 9 years, till 1956. The
Dominion of India lasted only 3 years, until 1950!
Regarding the migration of Indian population in a number of major cities in Pakistan, I have already mentioned the exact location of at least two localities. Same could be checked on ground.
No you have not. You have thrown a
wild accusation without providing a single credible proof or evidence! I can also very easily say, come to Delhi, we have a locality where millions of Pakistani refugees live, and don't call it a wild assertion!
Pakistan was established in August 1947 not in 1951. You have rightly accepted that in the initial years Pakistan did not receive any foreign aid.
I was contesting your fallacious assertion that Pakistan was on the economic upswing during Jinnah's time. He ruled for barely a year, a time when Pakistan had no economic set up and no economic figures! The economic plans of Pakistan were established only in 1950. And by 1951, Pakistan had already started to import American aid!
More so, data provided on this forum is not correct. US did not start their aid from US $ 700 million.
You're right, they started with $2.89 million in 1951, which went upto $700 million by 1953, in less than 2 years!
You can get full data here:
Sixty years of US aid to Pakistan: Get the data | Global development | guardian.co.uk
Ofcourse, it's Western and "twisted"!
This is what I am telling you. In the initial years of Independence the Public schools run by the British government were one of the best the best but as a pre-planned plot private schools have been encouraged in India and Pakistan. Today Indian public schools have been taken over by foreign sponsored private schools in the name of private-public partnership. Syllabus and test books are designed suit manpower requirement in the western countries. Why cannot we have our own market? We are a sea of human resources but unable to utilize them in our own country. Sorry I am running short of time so would not be able to furnish details at this stage.
You have no idea what you are talking about. British Indian schools were simply privately run Convent schools, not run by the British government! Indian syllabus and text books are decided by subsequent school boards, i.e. Central Board of Secondary Education, Punjab Board of Secondary Education, Haryana Board of Secondary Education, etc, etc. Syllabus is decided by the education ministry, not by private institutions!
So innocent of India that in the hour on need your sacrificed Iran but now for economic and political benefit you are claiming to be having cordial relations. You have sacrificed your sovereignty by inking 123 Treaty (Indo-US nuclear deal) and also lost your friend. US will one day play dirty and leak you deal to create hatred between Indians and Iranians. We need to be cautious of every step we take in this contemporary world.
US cannot "leak" the deal, since whatever India did, it did so openly, not secretly behind curtains! As for Iran's "hour of need", even Iran knows that there is no way India could've swung that vote in favour of Iran, as India is not a veto power. India has stood by Iran, with money as well as goods trade, and they continue to build a corridor to Afghanistan through Iran's Chah Bahar port! So Indian-Iranian relations are just fine.
In fact, India's geo-strategic location is such that no country would be interested to have bases there.
Nevermind the small fact that the busiest maritime trade route in the world, which feeds not only China but the whole of East Asia runs right beneath India.
However, Indian Navy has totally become a mercenary Navy.
Bushra, it is
your country which is getting paid to fight wars, not India!
I don't know whether you are a civilian or an armed forces officer but it seems there is a communication gap. You have quoted the scenario that existed some eight years back. Today, India has inked Memorandums of Understandings and agreements with several countries.
MoUs are mutual agreements, not one way. Indian Navy jointly trains with navies from all over the world. India
pays its due for these exercises, it does not
get paid by others for this. So, who is mercenary?
Indian Intelligence agencies including RAW, DIA and MI are working on assignments given by US, UK, Israel, Italy and Russian Federation. What do you think RICs are doing in remote locations of India as well as Afghanistan and Indian base in Tajikistan? Why Afghan Armed Forces and Police are being trained in at least 36 schools in India. What do you think; Afghanistan is not a foreign country which is sharing Indian bases as well as infrastructure, camps etc in India.
You mean NIA, not DIA.
And RAW, NIA and MI are looking after India's national interests by helping Afghanistan, not America's. I think you forgot the Flight 814 hijacking and the role Taliban played in helping the terrorists get away. India is making sure that never happens again. Cheers!
Washington claims that New Delhi is not doing this due to their love for Afghans but they are paid for it.
Evidence? Links? Sources?
Can you deny that India has sub-let bases in foreign countries to western forces?
Makes no sense. How can India "sublet" bases in foreign countries? It is up to that "foreign country" to allow US in. And in all this, I hope you don't miss the fact that forget India, Pakistan had been lending its own bases, uptill recently,
inside Pakistan to the US to launch drones!
What do you think for whom Lieutenant Colonel Shrikant Prasad Purohit along with other Indian senior Army and Intelligence officers were working.
What "other Indian senior Army and Intelligence officers"?? Again, elaborate with links and sources, not baseless accusations again!
Purohit was either rogue, or an undercover agent for Military intelligence. Let the courts decide the truth. He's an internal Indian issue.
Can India deny visit of American and Israeli teams in Glacier area.
If you mean Siachen, than yes, I can! You have come here with nothing but baseless allegations with nothing to back up your words.
It is no more a secret that there is Indo-US-Israeli cooperation in Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Maldives. It would be misleading to link these developments with Chinese threats in Arunachal Pradesh and Pakistani threat to Indian held Jammu and Kashmir state. After all these facts, if you still say that "India has defended itself from foreign interference quite well," I would not stress on the point.
Sri Lanka, Nepal and Maldives are India's backyard. Mayanmar is both China and India's turf. Don't know where and how Americans and Israelis come in here. Come up with some substance rather than baseless accusations.