pracs
i wasted my whole weekend doing things u dont want to know...
u know i cant do hanky panky on this topic, cant write in bits....guess u will have to wait till next weekend.
regards
azeem
I am all ears.......and patiently....awaiting for a reply,, as long as you reply in the end.
Edited by - pracs on Sep 28 2004 73329 PM
sorry pracs, work wise having terrible time last 10 days.
by no means i have forgotten this subject and will come back and come back strongly )
cant see much motion from u, guybrush, smraza and goodman......is everyone having the same pressure.
azeem
Azeem dear, You were to come back to me on this topic a year and a half ago !! )
After division of Pakistan, do you still think two nation theory exist?
Which is the largest country in terms of Muslim population?
Do you know a school of thought exists in Pakistan who claims that Quaid-e-Azam with drew the demand of Pakistan in 1946?
The Division of Pakistan though a sad chapter in the history of our nation, has actually fortified the two nation theory, remember that the Lahore Resolution demanded 'muslim states'The Bengal Chief Minister who tabled the resolution had in mind a muslim state in the East and one in the West.
Well, Jinnah agreed on the Lahore Resolution of 1940 because he saw it a bargaining chip with the Congress, lets not forget that he was the biggest advocate of Indian Unity and had Congress not been as stubborn and short sighted as they were we would have been stuck with Indians. Following 1945 things begin to clear up and by 1946 Jinnah was more than convinced that the destiny of the Muslims of South Asia rested in a seperate identity,, if that was not possible within the Indian Union he prepared to go and carve out a seperate nation ! There was no turning back there after.
Ofcourse this does not mean that he is of any lesser stature, no one in their right mind believed that Pakistan would actually become a reality, Iqbal (who did not live to witness it ofcourse) the Unionists, Congress, Jamat Ulemae Hind, the new Muslim Leaguers... Even the British !were not sure if Pakistan would ever become a reality. It did, because of people like Jinnah.
I didn't get your question about the largest country in terms of population,, which ofcourse is Indonesia followed by Pakistan.
Sir, coming to your answer first, you did not get my question. I did not ask about largest Muslim country.
Sir, the country having largest Muslim population is India, followed by Pakistan, then comes Indonesia and Bangladesh is at No. 4.
The reason of asking this question was never to test your knowledge, I just tried to relate this with the topic. I hope you do understand. Having more than 20 million Muslims in India leaves much questions about two nations theory.
Pracs, what you wrote is exactly what we are taught in Pakistan Studies. Calling Congress stubborn and short sighted and considering that Muslim League was the best party, you are justified to think like that when you are a Pakistani. But in this case you can't claim to be rational. On rational grounds things have to be taken with a different approach.
Sir, I disagree at one point Pakistan becoming a reality was not such an out of this world type thing.
I had some experiences of talking with Indian Muslims when I was in KSA. They were as patriot with their country as we are with ours. And, they were absolutely convinced that partition of Sub Continent was reasonless, and according to their point of view this point was proved the day when Pakistan was divided.
In Lahore I met with some people, quite experts of political sciences, who thought that boundaries on the base of religion are not justified. Things like as I mentioned in my last post plus things like neo world order they had as their logics. I hope you have the idea that a majority in Karachi and some in my part of the country exist who doesnât agree with Quaid-e-Azam.
Pracs, I am a patriot Pakistani, and all above does not exactly depicts my thinking. Saying that two-nation theory was wrong leaves us with no reason to exist. I agree with all what you said, but only what I wanted to say is we canât believe all this with a closed mind, we need to be rational
Well.....
The division was not only on the basis that we r muslims & they r hindus. The resaons were economic & cultural protection of muslims & their culture.
Everyone knows, whts the condition of muslims in India, in education & economy, they are the poorest ones. Wht happened in Gujrat & the Babri Masjid & now recently after the Mumbai attacks, the police is arresting Muslims.....
We live in Pakistan, we can move freely, there are no hurdles in our way coz of being muslims. All of you people whose grandparents migratd from India, ask them wht is the condition of their Muslim relatives in India? With some exceptions, the difference btw you & ur indian muslim relatives will be of "Zamin & Aasman" u being on Aasman & they being on zamin!
Pakistan has given us a lot. If we wud have lived in the joined sub continent, we cudn't even think of being so prosperous..
One thing that I am trying to say that Pakistan has saved the economic destruction of 150 million muslims.
Number 2, about ur 6th grade indian friend. They are indians. They have to live with it! After division, even after mass scale killings of muslims by sikhs & hindus, they chose to live in india! When millions migrated, they chose to live in India! They chosed India over their lives & their wealth (if u know the situtaion after division, massive "loot maar", rapes & killings)
Trains coming to pak with muhafirim from india reached pakistan with no person alive, everyone dead! If you haven't seen the movie Jinnah se Quaid the you must see it. When quaid cam to welcome the first train of muhajirin from india with flowers & gifts, the train reached pakistan with no person alive! everyone was dead in it, except of a few months old child.
So those people who have CHOSEN to live in India on the price of their everything, they are Indians. They are not Pakistanis! they cud have come to pakistan, but they decided india so atleast we have nothing to do with them.. secondly, pakistan WAS made to save muslims with whatever is happening with them in india & ur 6th grade friend.
Thanks god we are safe & free to do everything.
Schuaeb, let me correct some of your facts here, without any shadow of doubt the largest Muslim population is in Indonesia and the ranking goes as following
1) Indonesia
2) Pakistan
3) India
4) Bangladesh
Now there may be some different opinions about Indian Muslims being the second largest body compared to Pakistan, but that is a very minor difference. Refer this site
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_India
Another site that is more comparative, lists India in no.2 slot but I am not sure if they have got the right statistics, since most official statistics put the percentage of Muslim population at 12%-13% and not 14% as this sites shows, the again the difference is not a lot.
http//islamicweb.com/begin/population.htm
I understand your point that the Muslims in India are a sizeable number when compared to Muslim majority countries as such.
Schuaeb I will suggest you read through this thread thoroughly, I have never said that âMuslim Leagueâ was the best party, I am not sure how you have come to the conclusion that âCongressâ was not being stubborn, my knowledge of Pakistani history is not based on âPakistan Studiesâ (as you say), I went to Indian Schools, read âtheir biased historyâ (remember each nation has its own history written to suit its ideology) and then did my own back ground reading all other versions around. I may not be able to convince you why Pakistan was not a mistake based on ideology and politics since you seemed to be over whelmed by Indian propaganda!
But my dear we Pakistan, the Indus Valley, the Indus Land has always been a separate entity compared to India. A good perspective is from the Book âThe Indus Valley Sagaâ by Aitezaz Ahsan.
Also go through the time line in the thread above, which clearly gives out âwhoâ ran Pakistan for thousands of years,.. we have always been a separate country in all of history.
Pracs, thanks for the correction. On the basis of official stats Indonesia is on No. 1, Around 89% of its population are Muslims, which means there are somewhat around 180 million Muslims there. I do not doubt your information but what I have heard at a number of places No. of Muslims in India is more than Pakistan. However, I will try to go for some confirmations regarding all this. Talking about unofficial stats, which might be more correct when applied to India and Pakistan. It is said that there are 200 million Muslims in India. However, arguments should be based upon official stats.
Pakistan is a part of my faith and no Indian propaganda is enough to overwhelm this faith of mine. But donât just call that Indian propaganda many of us think like that, and remember I am not one among them.
Now, one thing that when you say that Indus Valley has mostly been a separate place, you are to some extent contradicting with two nation theory. I donât have any doubt that two nation theory was the ideology before making of Pakistan. It seems that you are trying to say that Indus Valley being separate ever is the logic behind Pakistan. You need to compare the geography of Indus Valley with present Pakistan.
Indian history like any others is biased, and that was what I was trying to say, ours is equally biased. I didnât mean that your knowledge is restricted to what you studies in Pakistan Studies (I believe that it may be much more than mine), but most of us have their opinions based upon this history, a good example was the post before yours.
You need not at all to convince me that Pakistan was not based upon a mistake. But if we look into the details there are enough doubts regarding making of Pakistan. The subject of this thread refers to just one among them.
We both are Pakistanis, so it is obvious that our thoughts regarding Pakistan will be alike. What I want to say is only being Pakistani is the reason for us to believe that making of Pakistan is justified. And, bitterest of all, may be we think like that because we are Punjabis
Usman you need to look at things a bit more rationally regarding the mass killings during Pakistan, and those who disagree with ideology of Pakistan puts this as an argument.
Do you know that Sikhs and Muslims were present in both parts of Punjab. You wont find any Sikh here and any Muslim in Indian Punjab. What Sikhs did to Muslims there is exactly what we did to them here. So mass scale sikh killing is equally there, and these are only us who believe that they initiated this and ours was only a response, and Punjabis on the both sides were the major culprits.
Your comments about Indian Muslims are awful. I have to agree with what you said about plight of Muslims in India.
Well, Schuaeb as you do understand it does not make a difference whether there are a few hundred thousand muslims more in India or less. That is beside the point, agree with you on that.
Look at it this way, the two nation theory re created Pakistan (us and Bangladesh in 1947) and the fact is that Indus land was never part of India,. with some geographical variations (as you have pointed out). The thing to see and understand is that a United India would be a cosmetic country just as you would put England and France or France and Germany as one country. Pakistan and India were two different countries even to the outside world. So to say that the making of Pakistan was some kind of a mistake is quite incorrect. More so, is the fact that mass scale killing was simply because of Pakistan, it was because of the Redcliffe commission, and the over night changes made in the partition plan on the behest of Lady Mountabatten, Nehru and the Lord himself ! Radcliffe's diaries are now public and you can read about it in the press. Thousands upon thousands of Muslims reached Gurdaspur to think it was Pakistan and then got clubbed to death.
The question of who fired the first shot or rapped the first woman is some thing of history for now !! but I am sure it was the sikhs.. they avenged the death of the Fourth Guru Gobind,.. (who was killed by Aurungzeb along with all his opponents.) Under what was proposed under the Pakistan resolution was an undivided Punjab and Bengal, so if you want to play the blame game you have the British and the Congress.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Pracs</i>
<br />Azeem dear, You were to come back to me on this topic a year and a half ago !! )
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
AOA Pracs
Sincere apologies for this delay, I actually forgot about this topic.
This is my first post in the last 3 months, unfortunately I left too many discussions open a quarter back and in this case more than a year back. Just having a rough period time wise.....u know preparations for the big occasion and related issues. InshAllah I will be back soon. I will try to write something on this topic (after reading your posts).
Dont know what is happening on ACCA thread.....will have to do alot of reading here.
Well my speculations in the earlier posts on this thread are apparaently becoming true......I am hoping it to be a blessing in disguise.
Bye for now, inshAllah talk to you soon.
On a separate issue, I must email you guys about my availibility, apolgies for the delay. I will send you an email tomorrow.
Salaam
Azeem
ASK,.. welcome back to the forum !!! hope to see you around soon
Pracs, I have no idea where this discussion is leading. There can't be any major difference between our opinions as we belong to the same part of the world.
Just what I wanted to say is that partition of sub continent has to be seen in a rational context. Question marks are ofcourse there. You point regarding a separate Indus valley civilization is quite valid. However, partition was mainly of Punjab and Bengal. Indus Valley did not include Balochistan and East Pakistan (Bangladesh), and included some places that are in present India.
What I asked was we got to make it clear that partition of sub continent took place on this basis (separate Indus civilization) or two-nation theory was its essence.
Referring to Indus civilization never invalidates the two-nation theory, and Quaid-e-Azam at various occasions put forward this point.
Now, after writing all this I don't know what is the main point of discussion and no idea where my arguments are leading to, if you can make some sense out of this do tell me. The reason for all this is how can I think of any argument that contradicts with making or existence of Pakistan.