Comments by "A.Biswas" (@ABO-Destiny) on "A Day In History" channel.

  1. 21
  2. 9
  3. 9
  4. 7
  5. 7
  6. 7
  7. 6
  8. 6
  9. See I was also Bengali , my parents and relatives are still Hindus and some of them are much more illogically than some of the Hindutva idiots. Even if I do not and did not follow that religion our family history is intertwined with history of Bangladesh, North East and Bengal, certain things need not be told to us as with most bengalis, even if there is no documented proof we know many things intuitively through sub conscious memory. However, in this case I had definitely gone through an article or probably an youtube video that mentioned how section of Indian political circles (and probably public too) were against independence of Bangladesh and more inclined towards having control over an independent or semi independent or fully integrated entity on the eastern side. This is not a new and isolated characteristic. Before 1971 war Hindu political leaders of Kolkata thought congress was too much lineant towards the Muslims in the name of Gandhian politics, comfortably ignoring that without Gandhi, Nehru they had 0 to 0 capability of getting self rule. They had advocated armed exercise to free east pakistan from west and the fact Pakistan was not recognising Bengali language and culture and diverting funds to the west creating problems for people had also helped their cause A bunch of privileged people who had made name and position due to close proximity to center of British political power in South Asia the same way ugly, idiotic, serpentine stooges have grown up in and around New Delhi post independence they had no motivation in life other than self patting for their own intellect and feeling great through hoodwinking of population to believe they were the 'sher in the jungle' , some of these bastards were squarely responsible for partition of India and Bengal, subsequent riots in Calcutta and migration and suffering of countless refugees from East Bengal and none of them or their like minded generations to follow could do anything except blame the congress and communists or blame the british and definitely not leave out the muslims, none of them had the decency to acknowledge many of their mistakes created from myopic views, traditional one upmanship, acute narcissism that had caused suffering to others. Acknowledging mistakes is not a quality of south asians , in fact it is absent in Asia. Controlling others, becoming self styled leader, over eating stuffs & returning a bloated ugly visage everywhere is the dominant characteristic.
    5
  10. 5
  11. 4
  12.  @carlastarkey4775  It was probably not so simple as stopping Pakistan and granting Bangladesh their self rule. I am sure USA had a commitment towards pakistan and strategic interests in south asia to counter Soviet Union and prevent spread of communism. I am sure they could have planned much ahead of the war and pressurise Pakistan to not precipitate any conflict or scuttle the election process, hopefully they had prior knowledge of upcoming events. I dont know what you know about this incident, if you know more on USAs reluctance or rather incapacity to reign in Pakistan I would be very interested to learn. I am happy after reading the document from US govt website on the matter that they were not ovwrtly biased against Bangladeshes independence but was caught in a dilemma to make a choice on taking steps in the conflict. Offcourse their crucial role would have saved lot of innocent lives but we are always wise in hindsight judgements. Placing myself in their position and not foreseeing the level.of genocide about to take place I am not sure I would broken any committment to an ally and pressure it to accept its own dismemberment. However, If it was my agreed upon policy to ensure democratic processes are not compromised among allies then I would have surely arm twisted Pakistan to restore Mujib as PM or at least issue official statement to make a promise, guaranteed by international organisations that Mr. Mujib will be reinstated within specific timeframe after scrutiny and judgment from international organisations. Lot of unknown factors here. Not everything gets declared and I guess not everything gets documented, at the end of tunnel a person as human as you and me probably take final call and could be faltering in judgement or persevering enough to forsee events. I am very interested for more information on that. Good thing is that certain documents on the matter are open for everybody and I felt the document was honest in commentary and that feeling made me feel good
    4
  13. 4
  14. 4
  15. 3
  16. 3
  17. 3
  18. 3
  19. 3
  20. 2
  21. 2
  22. 2
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 2
  26. 2
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44.  @drmodestoesq  On the staying part I would have preferred they maintain some sort of presence in the sub continent , even if locally. Many pockets of the subcontinent wanted that and desperately wants that nowadays. The fall of Goa into Indian hands subsequently has not borne good results for many people there , just an example. Maybe the British could have maintained presence in North East of India, there presence would have been crucial in many fronts, one of which would have been safeguarding of interests of minority of minority and now literally trampled upon community of Anglo Indians and few families who descended directly from them. It is good however they allow these people to migrate to UK easily but I dont understand why I saw few families in utter despair of the turn of events in independent india , painfully visible through their faces. The other benefit would have been protection of the numerous minorities, mostly tribal.population. However, the biggest benefit would probably had been setting an example for rest of the region. *** However, my answer was not on that point. I think the British lacked in judgement and capability in dealing with the situation that led to riots and loss of lives when they had left. Whether they were extremely frustrated and disappointed and completely lost interest in wellbeing and protection of the population during that short period or whether it was lacunae in character and capability of few men in important positions I am not sure, but I can say after going through number of videos , documentaries on the subject , it was not properly handled. Obviously there was no proper infrastructure then, no developed communication system as we enjoy now, much higher chance of misinformation, bad influences than today. Maybe lot of things we take for granted today was not possible then. In any case history should never be used to cherry pick villains and heroes.
    1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1
  51. 1
  52. 1
  53. 1
  54. 1
  55. 1
  56. 1
  57. 1
  58. 1
  59. 1
  60. 1
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65.  @patwsr  Thats good. I like the appreciation. English is obviously not my first language, I make tons of mistakes in grammar and spelling despite googles assistance. Anyway much of this I owe to my access to a hard working , sincere, british (could be Irish) ancestry teacher who has since died I heard from cancer in Kolkata probably lonely with only her husband, as most of their folks and relatives had left for au, nz, hk and other places with increasing lawlessness & ugliness in the culture in the city. I had come to know how some of the folks took it upon themselves to create an atmosphere against non hindu white skinned people in the city. The world barely cares for all these things these days. When europe itself is being run over by ugly immigrant mobs that makes increasingly less sense. It makes me sad. People can be uncontrollable during war and riots, we cannot help that, they can be excused, but when people consciously create situations for others to suffer when things are relative cool, decently controllable it becomes conscious criminality. That has become the face of hinduism for me lately. Anyway, you seem to be from Assam, judging from your last name. For Assam through you I wish to express my respects for Ulfa leader Paresh Barua. It was shocking to learn then Assam govt. had clandestinely killed his family members as revenge against his separatist moves. But thats the case. People will face music. When one selects the path to lanka as their model they will meet their ravanic fate sooner or later.
    1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70.  @PradhanmantriBruhh  I do not dispute that. Muslims opposed because their interest existed in preservation of Pakistan, muslims in India were mostly those from Hindi heartland belts and their followers who had followed the logic of Maulana Azad so they did not want to oppose Pakistan in 1971.Muslims from North India who had migrated to East Pakistan earlier in history had also sided with Pakistani army to participate in many of these atrocities which you people are riling against in 21st century. They were center of problems within West Pakistan too and even though I was against them earlier I do understand their desperateness now. They have to blame themselves for this situation and look back at each step they took in history, rejecting western culture and education during british times to regarding Bengali muslims as not muslim enough even before partition during the independence movements. They were in power for long with onset of North Indian sultanates and mughal rule and probably it was too hard fir them to accept anything at par with other muslims or people of other religions back then, whatever might be the case everything has a background and this one played too. Also I do not discount how demonic the Bengali and other people can be once they are powerful, I had even come across glimpses of that kind of behaviour in post 1971 environment in West Bengal and that after most of them had lost much of their pride and possessions, I can just imagine how they were behaving as privileged subjects of British Raj. But thats the case, this behaviour of taking advantage of vulnerable people is very common across south asia and had been throughout history, whichever side one looks into and things have not changed till today. It also does not mean Hindus just wanted to liberate Bangladesh for the goodness of it. As I had said there were some Hindu leaders who were advocating direct action on east pakistan and integrate it with India - ostensibly to help the Hindus there. Why I say 'ostensibly' is because our experience of surviving as refugees in India earlier in 1947 had not been very welcoming even though our unfortunate situation not caused by our own making (well in some ways or other we do have to share blame also but we were not in decision making situation that had led to partition) and it was our legitimate right of moving to India being victim of decision making process and narcissistic attitude of some Hindu leaders back in history. However, I do not even count those all these things. The situation of neither india nor Pakistan was good enough during 1947 partition and different types of Indians never had long history of voluntarily staying together, so naturally hard feelings were expected and that did happen, non bengali particularly north indian people started taking advantage of our situation, on the positive side we were numerically strong and could fight back. That characteristic and political idea of controlling liberated Bangladesh was later displayed with chronology of events like constructing garland of river barrages surrounding Bangladesh, taking advantage of financial vulnerability of refugee families and particularly the women, sowing seeds of discontent between hindus and muslims to as recent actions as harassing muslims with CAA/NRC like political gimmicks.
    1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76.  @ajthomas770  No it was not due to brain washing. Soon after Bangladesh win in 1971 Indians started believing and behaving they had saved douche bag, incapable, ineffective bangladeshis from pakistani terror. Many people behave like that till this day. That is the south asian & sub-saharan ugliness that gets visible once they become bold enough to think hey had achieved something, results had invariably been catastrophic. There was Bangladeshi people who fought with their lives against the murderous pakistani army but got crucial air and ground support from Indian army, but without the Bangladeshi people risking their lives for their freedom Indian army could not have taken away East Pakistan , the world would not have allowed that also Neither does it mean Bangladesh would have never got independence without Indias help. Armies alone do not win wars, there has to be definite cause and genuine interest of people in supporting the victory, otherwise mighty armies become radar less, it is not just machines which fights battle there has to be motivated and dedicated human beings. Otherwise the Nazis would not have lost either in Soviet Union or on the Western front. There are many other examples on those lines. However, home grown bravados of indians who were not even present during those times leaves no chance to behave the big daddy of the effort. The very people who were cajoling pandit nehru to wage war against east pakistan and protect hindus living there (though I am pretty sure they just wanted the land , resources and power over those, not the people) started picketing state and central govt. for construction of farakka barrage after the war, the argument was Calcutta port was going to die without the barrage, 40 years on Calcutta port has died despite the farakka barrage. Subsequently the river water sharing issue became the primary contentious issue between the two countries, and certain politicians and certain people were egging on towards further escalation,idk where they get motivations for those kind of things, clearly none of them jad suffered much dur to partition or Bangladesh war, like rest of Indians they just assumed leadership and dreamy bravado roles at the price of vulnerable people on both sides of border. This is universal trait in almost all tropical places of the world. When one does not have any problem we will create problems, life is so easy, so romantic. If not for Jyoti Basu and Sheikh Hasina the ganga water sharing issue would have remained hot political playing field till this day. Luckily Mamata was also not rigid with these water sharing issues, though initially she was making odd noises too. Then the bloody hindutva govt started this CAA, NRC farce, who benefitted? Only Amit shah and Modi knows, I know at least few minority people had suffered. People are so fond of gimmicks, life 8s so easy, so romantic. Time do not remain same, every things gets responded in due time. So now trying to say that Bangladeshi people were brainwashed or were bigoted is typical of people who get kocks of life through shadow boxing behind the back of others. Churchill had absolutely correctly observed that Hindus like to build castles in air and resort to endless lies. I had seen that number of times , earlier I used to somewhat sympathise with these people, most of them were refugees, practical and uncompromising but slowly and surely as things started improving that disease of building castles in air had caught up again, despite string. of tragedies just decades earlier. I dont know, I am sure I am different from most of them.
    1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83.  @amaan8123  Honestly, after all these, after all the internet , after all these explosion of information and behaviour of different types of people of the world , I am having multiple thoughts on Vietnam and whether USA and West was actually the villain there , the way I used to think. But still , i value peoples behaviour, expression more than any history books, i have come to believe that history survives within everyone and gets reflected in a persons appearance and behaviors subject to my personal (might be genetic) biases, but so far it absolutely worked. I was very supportive of Bill Clinton and somehow he did deliver on the Bosnian war , preventing further genocide , and the lie on Lewinsky was very, very, painful. But yet, most of the time it works , at least with major events. For another example I thought Mr. Bush Jr. was unfit for the position, I liked Obama but he was probably too surface floater , would have been much better if he had been more serious of the consequences of his decision on Syria, Trump was a disappointment, I used to hear lot of things about his past even before most people in India ever knew that name and I thought he wont be bad until I first saw him on the presidential debate with Hillary, then one action of Biden had really endeared him, it was when Obama gave him some honorary medal as vice president and he could not hold onto his tears. I thought this guy was sensitive and quiet and calm. His action if at all his doing on Afghanistan was disappointing but the way he dealt Ukraine was excellent. In europe it was Macron & Merkel and David Cameroon. In India no one can possibly surpass Dr. Manmohan Singh's image with me. Mostly it works , so far no major disappointment. So on Vietnam I feel Ho Chi Min was a sensible man and the west had somehow bungled on it.
    1
  84. 1
  85.  @muhammadsaqib2355  Strongly agree. Militaries are groomed to take orders, in other words be nutheads, thats the primary prerequisites unlike those loyal chieftains in mughal or nawabi times. Thats because todays defence organisations have their hierarchical structure and orderliness as strengths. I was in a paramilitary organisation and i felt how they needed everyone deposit their brains at the alter of the organisation and subsequently the country. But nutheads are not suitable in managing populations, neither fit to make sensitive and humane decisions. Pakistan suffered because these nutheads were the deciders, from murder of people to rape of women, naturally what was supposed to happen had happened in bangladesh and in pakistan. The pious religious, even if madrasa educated people, or even uneducated common sense holding sensitive people would have been much better option over any kind of nutheads, including their wide varieties inside India. That showed when Imran Khan took over premiership. For the first time pak could squarely humiliate an Indian offensive during Balakot airstrikes orchestrated by Indias own nutheads. But Imran Khans failure was on economic front and on world political front. Economically he should have been helped by an understanding expert and politically he should have been adviced by world political experts. He was a champion.leader of cricket team, a motivator, a passionate, sensitive peoples person, politics beyond his passionate pakistani janata base needed better approach and statesmanship and economically i do not think he has much ideas.
    1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98.  @Rahul_Singh100  No one enjoying power or benefitting from it looks for extra effort to form a new group. People who suffers need to form new groups and if the bengali muslims had formed a political entity based on religious lines there was strong need for it. Their reluctance to take up english education initially coupled with some reforms by hindu individuals in bengal had created a gap and put them in disadvantageous positions economically and socially. However you people as usual like to tell half truths. The congress was essentially a group of hindu leaders with few muslim people in it in insignificant positions or decorative positions whose voices were always ignored, jinnah for example had always wanted an united India and advocated hindu muslim staying together and was opposed to gandhi. He was the lone muslim voice of some consequence inside congress but was mostly made an inconsequential representative stamp of the largest minority group in the region, moreover he was nothing muslim in practice and did not have much muslim support base until later. Congress was formed much before the muslim league and the congress of those times was for greater voice of indian people in running of affairs of state nothing for self rule or independence. Moreover the muslim league had support of bengali hindus of east bengal who were like people of many other parts of the region disadvantaged for being distant from power center in Calcutta. I dont know if there were any members in the party but I know there were support base among hindus. It does not prove in anyway Bengali muslims were religiously bigoted. Far from that. Infact most religious hardline motivation or for that matter any kind of hardline motivation comes from bitter experiences and sense of betrayal of past, no need for explanation I hope. My point was however not on who formed religious parties first, my point was it was the Hindu leaders who had wanted to remain as separate country first. No adulteration in that.
    1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102.  @liverbot4854  Just a short note, i no longer feel.the urge to repeat what i had written earlier, in case you are interested you can go through those. - Hindu leaders did not want anything to do with muslims and by hindu leaders I mean those from hindutva parties, the likes of the ones in power in India today. So if they are now trying to bat for an united India and even Akhand Bharat which is their way of saying they are entitled to regions in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal , Bhutan & Myanmar by virtue of their dirty arses and even dirtier faces, it means they do not want united India , it just means they are born out of serpents and like serpents they have no idea where its head lies and where its tail, they dont have eyes, just strong sense of potential food, they lack idea of the world and solutions to the problems but just knows they need to grab as much as possible, because a serpent just swallows whatever it can reach out to, it does not have any concept of appetite, requirements, and lest you jump onto little bit more ambiguous terms like self control , that happens to be just one of their many tools to mean 'bro do not venture out, the merciless creature with pointed beaks is hovering above there, just control yourself "now"' The 'now' is very important to understand that version of self control, it obviously means they will venture out and gobble up whatever is reachable once that unreachable falcon disappears (shall we say untouchable here?) . In simple terms what people might call greed in their own language is justifiably a weapon in serpentine hands nevermind that makes them.unhealthy, self destructive, ugly and everything else despised. And that should explain their concept of United India , Akhand Bharat and those stuffs.
    1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105.  @FilesdocumentsAndreposit-kr3vb  The division of sub continent on religious lines was first raised by Savarkar , however the idea of a homeland for subcontinental muslims was conceived earlier than that by Allama Iqbal. Even though it had caused immense suffering to multitude of people mostly due to inefficient management and planning by the outgoing british govt. I now feel dividing the country was the correct decision. However, I also feel the time has come to further divide the place of community lines, considering the level of mistrust, atrocities and infighting and cold war between different communities within hinduism as well as between different linguistic communities I feel it makes much more sense to go separate ways provided people wishes that. On those lines I feel the abrogation of article 370 was a strong indicator that division is logical step for health of the people and place. Apart from that continuous strife poisoning the once serene environment of north east india, demand for khalistan, linguistic and cultural cold war between different communities, atrocities on scheduled castes and tribal people by unscrupulous elements and continuous harassment of muslims and somewhat of christian populations are indicators that needs to be done. People do not wish to stay together, they must have their own say. The other possible solution is to completely federalise governance structure , so all communities can work independently of each other keeping defence,inter state communication, transport and international relations at the hands of the center. I cannot and do not wish to remain at the mercy and whims of murderors, liars, bahubalis and rapists. The few good people here and there in every community are themselves at receiving end. Jinnah and Winston Churchill has been proven correct, they were farsighted and truthful and courageous at least. If people do not wish to solve this problem they will be blamed for things that continues to happen and might continue to occur, they wont be spared deginitely. And lest you need some reminder every thing gets settled in long run,the more a solution is prolonged the more the pain and more the future pain for people who keeps quiet or provides f*ucksake arguments. At the least people needs to be honest with themselves. They wish to be serpents and excuse givers they go that way alone and better they remain prepared for some sad days in future.
    1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1