India should support Balochistan people but not with a motive to teach lesson to Pakistan rather with a vision to give freedom to one more country and add a new friend. Also support should be only given if its going to be a democratic non-religion based country we dont want to create another Bangladesh which can cause us headache in future.
Thanks to malik Siraj Akbar and rediff for this excellent article. The Baloch people have been suffering for a long time and sooner they are successful against the anarchy called pakistan the better.
Because we have a spineless PM, just like another very ugly PM Narasimha Rao in 1992 who refused to help Dr.Najjubullah of Afghanistan. As a result Pakistan occuopied Afghanistan for nearly ten years from 1992 to 2001 and now again is about to occupy it. Also Gandhi was responsible. Asad Khan, as the representative of Khan of Kalat came to Gandhi in 1947 and wanted to join India, but Gandhi refused both Balochistan and NWFP. That was a shame. It is a shame India dod nothing when Pakistan invaded Balochistan in 1948.
RE:Because
by someone on Jan 31, 2008 10:54 PM
Bandhu Dipak, By this age of information U probably figured out that Mohammed Gandhi always looked after his Master i.e British, and gave India his ashes. Created the Pak problem to punish India for ever. Only one good thing that coward was done in 1948, otherwise he would have demanded another Mughalsthan inside divided and weak India. Nathuramji saved us from that disaster.
RE:Because
by Sriram R on Feb 01, 2008 09:07 AM
Bunch of idiots like Dipak and Shaibol can only pass armchair comments. Have you done even 0.1 % of the good that Gandhi has done for our country. You people will run at the first sign of trouble in your sorrounding and you call Mahatma a coward. Indians and the world know better about Gandhi then your expert comments
RE:RE:Because
by Indian Citizen on Feb 01, 2008 11:08 AM
I am sure Deepak and Saibal have done a lot better. They paid their taxes unlike........you know who
RE:Because
by Shaibal Bose on Feb 02, 2008 04:15 AM
Idiot Sriram R. Stop talking nonsense. You are another Coward like Gandhi. Indians and the world know what they have been tutored.
RE:Because
by Ajit Birdi on Feb 05, 2008 04:45 AM
Gandi had only one motif to get his name in history books Sriram R. He found the situation ideal when he came to know that there are to rivals Jinah and Nehru, being a Hindu he joined Nehru. That was an opportunity not to be missed., remember it was not Gandhi who initiated India's freedom fighting. He was just an opportunists thats all, Nothing mahatma about him.
RE:Because
by apurva singh on Feb 18, 2008 09:08 AM
you need psychiatric assistance. gandhi was the greatest indian hero along with rana pratap. he was a one man army who took on the empire and destroyed it. responsibility for division of india is of mohammad nehru's. it is a well documented fact.
RE:Because
by on Feb 01, 2008 08:49 AM
YOUR LACK OF RESEARCH IN THE SUBJECT,SHOWS IN THE REPLIES,SIND AND HIND HAVE BEEN TWO DISTINCT,ENTITIES,OUR LANGUAGE,CUSTOMS,ETHNIC RACES,TOO,TRUE URDU WAS IMPOSED ON US IN 1854,BUT HOPEFULLY THIS TOO WILL BE HANDLED,AS TO BALUCHISTAN,THE CORRECT SPELLING,IT WAS ,AND IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF OUR SIND VALLEY,AS IS KASHMIR,OUR HISTORIC LINE OF DIVIDE HAS BEEN THE SARSAWATI,RIVER AS IT FLOWED,AS WELL THE JUMANA IN THE RUNN OF KUTCH,AFGANISTAN,SINKIANG,OLD TURKESTAN,TIBET,AS WELL AS STATED EASTERN PRESENT PUNJAB TILL SAR-HIND,IS OURS.AS GO THE CLAIMS,WE ARE MUSLIMS TODAY,BUT IN OUR PAST,WE WERE BUDDHIST,YOU FELLOWS HAVE READ,A,WRONG HISTORY,FIRST BUDDHA WAS A ,'SAKA'A TURK,AS WERE THE NEXT 18 OR 22,A DEBATABLE ISSUE,ALL ARE BURRIED IN OUR LANDS IN DIFFERENT SITES,THEIR LOCATIONS ARE IN RIDDLES,AS IS THE CASE OF LHASA,IT TOO WAS ESTABLISHED BY OUR BUDDHIST MONK,FROM SWAT REGION,YOU ARE WELCOME FOR A DISCUSSION ON MY E MAIL SUBJECT TO FACTS AND NOT RHETORIC.INDUSPERSON12@YAHOO.COM
RE:Because
by Dipak Bose on Feb 01, 2008 12:01 PM
What that research got to do with the current problem of Balochistan ( this is the right spelling according to the Balochs)??? Yes, I have certainly done more than Gandhi for India. Gandhi has not send any money from his earnings in Soth Africa, in India he used to depend on Birla and Bajaj for his living cost. I have earned my own money and send a lot during the last 20 years to India continuously. I do not depend on any Marwari busnessman to reserve a whole train so that I can travel on a third class. I do not take money from the Congress party to do airconditioning a slum so that I can spend a few days for show in a slum.
What Gandhi has done for India: 1) He had destroyed the Swaraj movement that had started in 1905 and replaced it by Khilafat Movement. 2) He had insulted the revoluttionaries when they were about to be hanged. 3) He was determined to partition India even in 1940 to share India among his two real sons, Nehru and Jinnah. 4) He has refused anti-Jinnah Muslim leaders like Fazlul Haque of Bengal, Allah Bux of Sindh, Khan Abdul Gaffer Khan of NWFP and Khan of Kalat of Balochistan. If Gandhi could not fail in his legal practice in South Africa and had stayed there India would be a lot better off. in 1919 India had a large number of very able leaders ( Tilak, Lajpat Rai, Chittaranjan Das, Bipin Pal, Surendranath Banerjee). There was no need for Gandhi, an Empire loyalist, to come to India to destroy the Freedom Movement. India is being ruled by coward
RE:RE:Because
by Raghu on Feb 02, 2008 09:52 AM
3. Partition of india was iminent. Though gandhi did not want it, it was benefitial to india. Think anout all the muslims in india now with out partition. Partition occured on population basis. If it had occured today we would have lost half of india.
RE:RE:Because
by ram mas on Feb 04, 2008 04:25 PM
I fully aggred with Dipak Bose , Mohandas gandhi was British agent , British brought him in india in 1916 as their mole in congress as it was going in the hands of nationalists like Bal,Pal & lal.Gandhi promise hindus in Napak areas their will be no partion , if it happen it will be on his dead body. But when partion was announced desperate hindus tried to contact him but he went unreachable. British cleanined their tracks by getting him killed in 1948.
RE:Because
by sunny on Feb 01, 2008 05:58 PM
weldone dear Dipika on your rigt and truth thinking . gandhian want destroy our glorius culture and civil socity and they want to make mughalistan . thanks azadsk
RE:Because
by Raghu on Feb 02, 2008 09:48 AM
1.In 1907, the Congress was split into two. Tilak advocated what was deemed as extremism. He wanted a direct assault by the people upon the British Raj, and the abandonment of all things British. He was backed by rising public leaders like Bipin Chandra Pal and Lala Lajpat Rai, who held the same point of view. Under them, India's three great states - Maharashtra, Bengal and Punjab shaped the demand of the people and India's nationalism. The moderates, led by Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Pherozeshah Mehta and Dadabhai Naoroji held firm to calls for negotiations and political dialogue. Gokhale criticized Tilak for encouraging acts of violence and disorder. But the Congress of 1906 did not have public membership, and thus Tilak and his supporters were forced to leave the party.
RE:RE:Because
by Raghu on Feb 02, 2008 09:54 AM
1. Tilak, Lajpat Rai, Chittaranjan Das, Bipin Pal, Surendranath Banerjee were all divided and congress had no membership to counter british then. Gandhi came to congress and their membershio increased.
PLEASE DONT MISLEAD PEOPLE WITH OUT ENOUGH KNOWLEGE AND UNDESTANDING OF THE SITUATION THEN
India should openly support the liberation of Baluchistan and Waziristan from Pakistan. This is of strategic importance to India in two ways. 1. Cutting to size Pakistan's size 2. Solving our energy problem If we are succesful then all our problems are solved including insurgency in Kashmir. For this we need a strong govt.not the one one at present which is neither a male nor a female.
RE:RE:INDIAN STAND?
by Mallikarjuna Rao on Jan 31, 2008 05:10 PM
No friend:
We should not inject venom. Look at the state of Pakistan for injecting venom (etremism) and now its fate. Even in Bangladesh India intervened only after Bangladesis flooded into India. But we can definitely help Baloch's by supporting them financially, morally and diplomatically.
I am not surprised. Pakis in general are brainless creatures, just a bunch of morons. They have absolutely no idea what the heck they are talking about. Wish they reach the 'stone age' soon.
RE:Is this Paki off his head?
by A K Singh on Jan 31, 2008 10:59 AM
It is generally considered good for health to consider onself a genious, and others; of lower IQ, but calling someone like General Musharraf; a brainless creature, is definitely an exercise in self-praise. This guy, outwitted our polititicians and diplomats so many times, and not to mention the outfoxing of Americans to get countless Dollars for himself and his cronies, that he can be compared to Bismarc, when it comes to intelligence and opportunism. Pakistanis, may be fanatics, but being the descendants of the same Aryan race, are not brainless.
RE:Is this Paki off his head?
by someone on Jan 31, 2008 11:02 PM
Their brain usually work in the negative way i.e they like to destroy things as per the Koranic mandates. Koran doesn't accept progress they like to remain standstill at the 625 AD time period, when the Prophet Mo heard his God's voice and told to his followers to write down as he himself didn't know how to write. And he also said that he is the last Prophet. So if a country is born with this base it can only prosper in the negative direction. End is coming, my prediction is by 2120-2150 Islam would become history, U can count on that....
RE:Is this Paki off his head?
by Mahendra Patel on Feb 05, 2008 10:19 AM
Swami Ramtirtha said the word"LAST" before PROPHET was added by ZEALOT FOLLOWER.
and REST IS HISTORY, WHY THEY MISS SPIRITUALITY IN THEIR RELIGION
RE:India should support
by Ram on Feb 01, 2008 10:28 AM
New Delhi is proving itself to be incapable of sorting out its own regional disparity issues, in this light what and how can you expect Indian Government to intervene in similar affairs of other countries.
The best bet for the people & their representatives of the oppressed regions within Pakistan is to make a case and present it to the Western Governments - perhaps to the British Parliament or to a Turkish Parliament (as a counter weight), and NOT to the United States by the way! - so immeture to solve any problem seriously.
The other thing to do is probably cooperate with the newcomers - why are the Punjabis so powerful, because they lived in Punjab - in a rich land of 5 rivers! if the unfortunate party can win their hearts - probably they can share the wealth and move toward prosperity. The world is moving toward a faster, and better communications systems day by day. So it will be unthinkable in future to expect the people separated by a few hundred miles to be culturally as different as they were a 50 years ago. Also, it is extremely difficult to stop the influx of people in general, and if they are rich and powerful - your only weapon is to cooperate with them! (with utmost humility - without expecting even a sweeper job in their enterprise!). Assimilation is a long and arduous process.
RE:pakistan must quit kashmir
by Nanchil on Jan 31, 2008 11:27 AM
Your mindset is not different from that of islamic terrorists. Only religion differs.
India should do all to support the just cause of Baluchistan. they never wanted to be a prt of pakistan and for the last 50 years they have been only bombed and killed by the punjabi army.They are the richest area of paksiatn with lots of natural resources but very poor as pakistan does nto pay them royalty
