If 1947 never happend ?

[Karachi]

Lets assume the events of 1947 never happened, that Baluchistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were independant, Kashmir/Dardic areas also independent and Punjab/Sindh would still be part of India. How would the region be like? how would the regional politics be? Would there still be wars? or would it be much more peaceful? I need some detailed analysis.

I personally think it would have been much more peaceful, India, Kashmir, Pashtuns and Baloch would have gotten along much better. There would have been a lot more trade, and perhaps the region would have been much richer.re

[Friends of Baloch]

Lets assume the events of 1947 never happened, that Baluchistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were independant, Kashmir/Dardic areas also independent and Punjab/Sindh would still be part of India. How would the region be like? how would the regional politics be? Would there still be wars? or would it be much more peaceful? I need some detailed analysis.

I personally think it would have been much more peaceful, India, Kashmir, Pashtuns and Baloch would have gotten along much better. There would have been a lot more trade, and perhaps the region would have been much richer.re

Your premise is wrong and therefore your question unanswerable.

1947 isnt the problem. It is just a symptom of a much more deep rooted issue with your colonization by the British.

The problem with South Asians generally is that they dont know their own history, let alone World history. When you talk to Indians and pakis it is very clear that most of them dont know or realize how much the British manipulated, changed and framed their modern cultures and identity which dictate who they are today. They are absolutely blind and ignorant to how much of a culturally and pyschologically colonized people they are. They are the perfect example of how dangerous Western Imperialism is.

Indians and pakis are not honest with themselves and never want to challenge their colonization because their minds are still so colonized by British rule that they have forgot who they were before the British conquered and changed them. Instead these smelly pakis and Indians continue to act out on the divide and rule the British imposed on them through their pitiful hyper 3rd world nationalism that claims superiority and authenticity over the other, not understanding that neither of them are authentic they are both colonized losers fighting fictitious battles against themselves 70 years after the British departed.

The fact is that Britain irreparably changed India forever from top all the way down. In every conceivable way, the British have colonized you, shaped you, corrupted you, left their impact and imprint on South Asians. But all you see and think about is "partition" and champion the colonized identities the British gave you, you dont want to dig further and learn your own history and challenge your colonized minds and cultures and embrace who you really were because South Asians are weak minded slaves, prone to serving other people and trying to imitate others.

[Karachi]

^ Not really what I wanted to discuss but, Pakis yes and south asian muslims yes too, however hindus/sikhs are different, yes they were slaves too, but today they consider themselves independent. Of course all the colonization of India left their imprint in south asia, even before British, be it Mughals, be it Indo Aryans etc... all left them. Indians have always absorbed other cultures and made fusion out of them, this is the way we just are, I don't know if it is slave mentality, or maybe we are open to other cultures, it's a matter of perspective. We are not (war) like, neither we have claimed to be. Indians have always been better at Business and Trade, rather then war. Same is true for Africans, some Arabs to an extent, south east asians etc...


Anyways this thread is about 1947, because this one even is recent and it effected a lot of people

[Golden]

what a retarded question once again, why sindh and panjab would be part of India and not other areas. In fact Bacha Khan wanted pathans to be part of India, not Afghanistan. Afghan ass kisser like you should be happy at the fact Pakistan was made because other wise occupied Kashmir is just a teaser for muzlims. British empire Baloch and pathan areas would have been part of India and there is nothing one could have done about it. Because baloch and pathans are south asians at the end of the day and as backward and desi as biharis, sindhis etc. Nothing sophisticated iranic/persian about these people. For Iran where majority are west Iranians, south asia start at their own Balochistan. So one can imagine what they think of desi baloch of Pakistan.

Unlike Pakistan which can hold it self against India, afghanistan on the other hand would have been slave of India in best case scenario. In worst case scenario if afghanistan tried to help or reclaim any land byond hindu kush, Indians would have crushed them. And in case of invasion Kabul would have been burned to ground. Afghans don't have in them to take on someone like India and hold ground like Pakistan did in 1965 when Bharat tried to take Lahore. Afghan best bet would have been some sucide bombs here and there, this is their speciality lol

[Karachi]

what a retarded question once again, why sindh and panjab would be part of India and not other areas. In fact Bacha Khan wanted pathans to be part of India, not Afghanistan. Afghan ass kisser like you should be happy at the fact Pakistan was made because other wise occupied Kashmir is just a teaser for muzlims. British empire Baloch and pathan areas would have been part of India and there is nothing one could have done about it. Because baloch and pathans are south asians at the end of the day and as backward and desi as biharis, sindhis etc. Nothing sophisticated iranic/persian about these people. For Iran where majority are west Iranians, south asia start at their own Balochistan. So one can imagine what they think of desi baloch of Pakistan.

Unlike Pakistan which can hold it self against India, afghanistan on the other hand would have been slave of India in best case scenario. In worst case scenario if afghanistan tried to help or reclaim any land byond hindu kush, Indians would have crushed them. And in case of invasion Kabul would have been burned to ground. Afghans don't have in them to take on someone like India and hold ground like Pakistan did in 1965 when Bharat tried to take Lahore. Afghan best bet would have been some sucide bombs here and there, this is their speciality lol

Punjab and Sindh were always part of India dumbass, that is the difference, Punjab/Sindh are 100 % indian, with indian culture, indian languages, Indian food, Indian clothing, what else is Indian? Pashtuns. baloch, and even dardic/Kashmiries were never Indian, they dont follow Indian culture at all

[Karachi]

what a retarded question once again, why sindh and panjab would be part of India and not other areas. In fact Bacha Khan wanted pathans to be part of India, not Afghanistan. Afghan ass kisser like you should be happy at the fact Pakistan was made because other wise occupied Kashmir is just a teaser for muzlims. British empire Baloch and pathan areas would have been part of India and there is nothing one could have done about it. Because baloch and pathans are south asians at the end of the day and as backward and desi as biharis, sindhis etc. Nothing sophisticated iranic/persian about these people. For Iran where majority are west Iranians, south asia start at their own Balochistan. So one can imagine what they think of desi baloch of Pakistan.

Unlike Pakistan which can hold it self against India, afghanistan on the other hand would have been slave of India in best case scenario. In worst case scenario if afghanistan tried to help or reclaim any land byond hindu kush, Indians would have crushed them. And in case of invasion Kabul would have been burned to ground. Afghans don't have in them to take on someone like India and hold ground like Pakistan did in 1965 when Bharat tried to take Lahore. Afghan best bet would have been some sucide bombs here and there, this is their speciality lol

What are you talking about? why would India do that. Indians have never been invaders of land. The only thing that may have invaded is Indian culture, which indeed could have spread more, but then again, even with in India, different states have retained their cultures, Tamils practice Tamil culture, Bengalis theirs, Punjabis their's, Indian mindset has to never force anyone of anything, unlike muslims

[Golden]

Punjab and Sindh were always part of India dumbass, that is the difference, Punjab/Sindh are 100 % indian, with indian culture, indian languages, Indian food, Indian clothing, what else is Indian? Pashtuns. baloch, and even dardic/Kashmiries were never Indian, they dont follow Indian culture at all

Dumb bihari either it would have been all of british empire or non. India is nation state and they don't care about this stupid backward reasons like someone speak iranic or indic language. These languages are fundamentally similar from same source given diffferent names by British. India wouldn't have given up land, it would have been worst then occupied Kashmir. The more I see afghanis in Pakistan more convinced I'm they are south asians.

Afghani pathans will fit in Bihar but not in Tehran, go figure why.

[Golden]

What are you talking about? why would India do that. Indians have never been invaders of land. The only thing that may have invaded is Indian culture, which indeed could have spread more, but then again, even with in India, different states have retained their cultures, Tamils practice Tamil culture, Bengalis theirs, Punjabis their's, Indian mindset has to never force anyone of anything, unlike muslims

Mauryas and Hindu shahis ruled Afghanistan for centuries before Ghaznavi and Ghauri converted afghan hindus to Islam, read history. Indians consider Afghanistan part of Greater Bharat. Genetics have shown hindu kush moutain is named after natives of current day hindu kush who were butchered by Ghaznavi and Ghauri, they were not hindus from Ganga land as its lead to believe.

India would never have given up any land, as I said Kashmir is just a teaser. Even Pakistan would crush any anti-state rebellion with force as it has done in Balochistan. Now Baloch people are patriotic Pakistanis and full on to Pakistaniat which is same thing as being in to Islamiat. But with India baloch people would in to hinduism.

[Aryana]

Mauryas and Hindu shahis ruled Afghanistan for centuries before Ghaznavi and Ghauri converted afghan hindus to Islam, read history. Indians consider Afghanistan part of Greater Bharat. Genetics have shown hindu kush moutain is named after natives of current day hindu kushwho were butchered by Ghaznavi and Ghauri, they were not hindus from Ganga land as its lead to believe.

India would never have given up any land, as I said Kashmir is just a teaser. Even Pakistan would crush any anti-state rebellion with force as it has done in Balochistan. Now Baloch people are patriotic Pakistanis and full on to Pakistaniat which is same thing as being in to Islamiat. But with India baloch people would in to hinduism.

There are actually many possible explanations as to why they're called the Hindu Kush. None of them involves Hindu "natives" being killed by Ghauris. In fact (according to Wikipedia anyway) it is where Hindu slaves being imported from India into Central Asia died due to the harsh conditions.

what a retarded question once again, why sindh and panjab would be part of India and not other areas. In fact Bacha Khan wanted pathans to be part of India, not Afghanistan. Afghan ass kisser like you should be happy at the fact Pakistan was made because other wise occupied Kashmir is just a teaser for muzlims. British empire Baloch and pathan areas would have been part of India and there is nothing one could have done about it. Because baloch and pathans are south asians at the end of the day and as backward and desi as biharis, sindhis etc. Nothing sophisticated iranic/persian about these people. For Iran where majority are west Iranians, south asia start at their own Balochistan. So one can imagine what they think of desi baloch of Pakistan.

Unlike Pakistan which can hold it self against India, afghanistan on the other hand would have been slave of India in best case scenario. In worst case scenario if afghanistan tried to help or reclaim any land byond hindu kush, Indians would have crushed them. And in case of invasion Kabul would have been burned to ground. Afghans don't have in them to take on someone like India and hold ground like Pakistan did in 1965 when Bharat tried to take Lahore. Afghan best bet would have been some sucide bombs here and there, this is their speciality lol

LOL. Porkistan would never win a defensive war, there is simply no way that it is possible (except for nukes). Remember when your British masters tried conquering Afghanistan and how it turned out? Go and **** your goats instead of trying to frame sugarcoat Porkistan's capabilities.

Also, why would India want to invade Afghanistan? India has almost never been an invader throughout history.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

I doubt Pakistan could hold itself against India, mainly because I think India has really held back. This is because

a.) They are more proficient and effective at Soft Power. Look at how much India influences Bangladesh. Not a shot fired

b.) Wars are costly and would require a full out assault. India rather work on a Space Program and research.

c.) India does not have territorial ambitions like Pakistan.


If India did a full out assault on Pakistan; Pakistan would fall within a year.

[Golden]

There are actually many possible explanations as to why they're called the Hindu Kush. None of them involves Hindu "natives" being killed by Ghauris. In fact (according to Wikipedia anyway) it is where Hindu slaves being imported from India into Central Asia died due to the harsh conditions.



LOL. Porkistan would never win a defensive war, there is simply no way that it is possible (except for nukes). Remember when your British masters tried conquering Afghanistan and how it turned out? Go and **** your goats instead of trying to frame sugarcoat Porkistan's capabilities.

Also, why would India want to invade Afghanistan? India has almost never been an invader throughout history.

India tried to capture Lahore in 1965, no nuke factor back then. Pakistan defended it self and India had to run back. Why India invaded Pakistan? Because Pakistan tried to liberate Kashmir once again.

In similar scenario hypothetical greater India would have burned down Kabulistan in response. Now after nukes days of invasions are over and both countries will not bother with each other. But that was not the case always.

Let's not kid our self here, Afghandustan does not stand a chance against Pakistan let alone Greater India. Your British masters not only conquered Afghanistan but made you give up your land to them which now make part of Pakistan. Even current day Afghanistan borders are drawn up by British empire.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Your premise is wrong and therefore your question unanswerable.

1947 isnt the problem. It is just a symptom of a much more deep rooted issue with your colonization by the British.

The problem with South Asians generally is that they dont know their own history, let alone World history. When you talk to Indians and pakis it is very clear that most of them dont know or realize how much the British manipulated, changed and framed their modern cultures and identity which dictate who they are today. They are absolutely blind and ignorant to how much of a culturally and pyschologically colonized people they are. They are the perfect example of how dangerous Western Imperialism is.

Indians and pakis are not honest with themselves and never want to challenge their colonization because their minds are still so colonized by British rule that they have forgot who they were before the British conquered and changed them. Instead these smelly pakis and Indians continue to act out on the divide and rule the British imposed on them through their pitiful hyper 3rd world nationalism that claims superiority and authenticity over the other, not understanding that neither of them are authentic they are both colonized losers fighting fictitious battles against themselves 70 years after the British departed.

The fact is that Britain irreparably changed India forever from top all the way down. In every conceivable way, the British have colonized you, shaped you, corrupted you, left their impact and imprint on South Asians. But all you see and think about is "partition" and champion the colonized identities the British gave you, you dont want to dig further and learn your own history and challenge your colonized minds and cultures and embrace who you really were because South Asians are weak minded slaves, prone to serving other people and trying to imitate others.

Brilliantly stated; I think the dynamics of this discourse highlight exactly the level of psychological/existyential impact this era has had for the current and future generations of South Asia.

i enjoyed how you cut through secondary and tertiary problems and isiolate the deep rooted underlying problem behind all of this. Karachi is Desi himself, so his frame of reference is concentrated precisely on those things which have been manipulated and manufactured as diversions by the British Colonial and currently Western Hegemonic Agenda.

The irony is that he admits this is true about Pakistan, but somehow Sikhs and Hindus escaped this mental vortex. Fair and Lovely isn't just marketed to Pakistanis ; it's marketed to Indians. Bollywood is not targeted to South Asian Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims alike. The Rapist psychology purveyed through British colonial intrusion is as Much a Hindu thing. Hinduis and Sikhs are more than eager to work and die for European agendas than anyone else. This lack of awareness of the South Asian dynamic among South Asians is precisely the blindsidedness that the Colonialists left behind. India being a rising power while Pakistan sinks into dysfunction; or theiur investment in scientific research while commendable, doesn't change the overarching framework and mentality governing them.

[Karachi]

Brilliantly stated; I think the dynamics of this discourse highlight exactly the level of psychological/existyential impact this era has had for the current and future generations of South Asia.

i enjoyed how you cut through secondary and tertiary problems and isiolate the deep rooted underlying problem behind all of this. Karachi is Desi himself, so his frame of reference is concentrated precisely on those things which have been manipulated and manufactured as diversions by the British Colonial and currently Western Hegemonic Agenda.

The irony is that he admits this is true about Pakistan, but somehow Sikhs and Hindus escaped this mental vortex. Fair and Lovely isn't just marketed to Pakistanis ; it's marketed to Indians. Bollywood is not targeted to South Asian Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims alike. The Rapist psychology purveyed through British colonial intrusion is as Much a Hindu thing. Hinduis and Sikhs are more than eager to work and die for European agendas than anyone else. This lack of awareness of the South Asian dynamic among South Asians is precisely the blindsidedness that the Colonialists left behind. India being a rising power while Pakistan sinks into dysfunction; or theiur investment in scientific research while commendable, doesn't change the overarching framework and mentality governing them.

This is pure BS, where are they working for Colonialists? show example, Indians are only working for themselves, Indians and Chinese, both are rising nations, and both are making a name for themselves, of course there are lots of social problems in India, no one denied that, however to claim Indians are slaves, and Chinese and other hard working nations are not is pure bogus. The west is actually afraid of the rise of India and China, they are our competitors, we are not their slaves

Also what happened in the past (1947) was a tragedy, however India was a much divided nation back then, this is why british divided it so easily, do you really think the west can do same now? India is 100 times more powerful then it was before

[Karachi]

Dumb bihari either it would have been all of british empire or non. India is nation state and they don't care about this stupid backward reasons like someone speak iranic or indic language. These languages are fundamentally similar from same source given diffferent names by British. India wouldn't have given up land, it would have been worst then occupied Kashmir. The more I see afghanis in Pakistan more convinced I'm they are south asians.

Afghani pathans will fit in Bihar but not in Tehran, go figure why.

So guys like Shahid Afridi, Younus Khan, Yasir Shah will fit in Bihar and not in Iran, yeah, you are blind

[Golden]

More pictures from Quetta,