Guest guest Report post Posted August 28, 2004 indian subcontinent would have been better had the nation was split up into language group independent states. then india could have been a league/union of these states (along with pakistan and bangladesh states). it would be better so states like UP, tamilnadu, etc... don't drag down kerala, punjab, maharashtra. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted August 28, 2004 so it scares you? and so you want it break up and get weak? you sure are an anti hindu or anti India. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 29, 2004 I think India is as good as it is. If India was to split up again there will be so many riots and destruction that they may never recover. Don't you even think about the people who may die? You think India is too big?..look at China, Russia, America! Are you anti-Indian or something? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xxvvii 0 Report post Posted August 29, 2004 If India was to split up again there will be so many riots and destruction that they may never recover. Don't you even think about the people who may die? You think India is too big?..look at China, Russia, America! ------------ That's the reason why I think it to be fragile. << Hindus would be crashed if India became a hindu country presently. >> wow! what an opinion! a 800M majority in their own country should not form a gov. of their own choice? some one would crush them if they do? If you can't lift it up, it will break into pieces. I'm a boss & not a nursemaid, so I don't give the chances for your exercises before you become strong enough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted August 29, 2004 << I'm a boss & not a nursemaid, >> what company or org. you run please? what is your service or product you sell please? << so I don't give the chances for your exercises before you become strong enough. >> please prove some control you excircised successfully over me or some one here. which book guides you please? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
veluthukaran 0 Report post Posted August 29, 2004 yes, india never really existed as one whole subcontinent state in its history under one authority. i agree that instead of partitioning into muslim state pakistan it would have been better had india been a league of nations (a la European Union) of language speaking states (not divided by religion). we could be economically tied together like the EU (which, coincidentally consists of states analagous to indian states with similar languages, etc...) and have joint cooperation for military. so there would be no weakness. positive value is that states like kerala (my state) and states like punjab, assam (natural gas resources) would not be tied down by states like tamilnadu, UP, etc... and would be independent to shape their own kind of governments according to their cultural traditions. also would no thave to be run by corrupt officials. there would be no conflict in kashmir, not conflict with pakistan (as there would be no pakistan), we would be more peaceful and more advanced, as those states that prosper will be emulated by other failing states. keep in mind that this would never happen as pakistan and bangladesh would have to accept this and split up in to sindh, pathan land, baloch and reunificate west punjab with punjab and bangladesh would reunify with bengal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted August 29, 2004 << yes, india never really existed as one whole subcontinent state in its history under one authority. >> it was, in the times onf pandavas. it was, in the time of king vikramadiya. << i agree that instead of partitioning into muslim state pakistan it would have been better had india been a league of nations (a la European Union) of language speaking states (not divided by religion). >> then it would be lot easy for the invader muslims to conquer each one after one. you see, the invader is not intereted in the economic growth and peace as the first priority. islam wants to rule over every person on earth and every land of the earth first. even when we were big in 1947, we lost the land for islam and still kept the cancer of islam within our own land. now you look around in the world what has happened in the past where islam invaded. we have experienced it for 1000 years, but now no more. and dividing india is very foolish thought in light of the enemy at the border. if any one thinks that pak would live in peace once kashmir becomes an independent muslim state, then it is a great mistake. pak would take over kashmir then, because there would be no one to protect it, being small and independent. << we could be economically tied together like the EU (which, coincidentally consists of states analagous to indian states with similar languages, etc...) and have joint cooperation for military. so there would be no weakness. >> thinking to divide the counry further is very unpatriatic. << positive value is that states like kerala (my state) and states like punjab, assam (natural gas resources) would not be tied down by states like tamilnadu, UP, etc... and would be independent to shape their own kind of governments according to their cultural traditions. >> the same can be done as a state too. << also would not have to be run by corrupt officials. >> are you saying corruption comes because india is big, and would go away as soon as each state becomes a nation itself? that is hard to believe. vice and virtue is no one state's or persons's monopoly. << there would be no conflict in kashmir, not conflict with pakistan (as there would be no pakistan), >> except that pak would gabble kashmir, then it will get stronger/bigger and would be more problem for india. the agenda of islam (convert forcibley or kill the kafirs, and take over non muslim lands) never has stoped. << we would be more peaceful and more advanced, >> no. << as those states that prosper will be emulated by other failing states. >> we would be then the fools and not worth being followed by any sane state. india is united by ramayan and mahabharat, and the books of the vedic culture. consequently, every hindu feels close with any other hindu regrdless of difference in language or local culture. they ought to. the anti hindu ideologies' invasion in india is a serious problem and needs to be solved. we lost land to pak because of that invasion. when you give an asura a land to live, and give up your freedom to enter that land, then essentially you are helping the asura to freely make plans to defeat you or kill you by working in that land where he has no fear or interference from outside. even within india the muslims conrol their neighborhoods to such an extent that even the police does not dare to enter that neighborhood. this gives them a secure place to cook anti hindu programs. a free indian should be able to go anywhere on indian public land freely. all the hindus need to exercise that right to enter any muslim neighborhood or city. you need to fight terrorism at its root level, where it breeds, and in their own homes and lands. so does US. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
veluthukaran 0 Report post Posted August 29, 2004 Why is Islam becoming a cancer in India, is it because of birth rates, conversions, or both? Why is there less conversions from Islam back to hindu then the opposite? These are questions we as Hindus need to address. What is your answer to this, to just kill them, or fight them? This does nothing to solve this problem. We would only be emulating Babar, mughals. We have to persuade muslims to rejoin hindu society by making it so that they will realize that islam is wrong religion and they are worse off for it. have to expose untruths in arab culture. you do this through education not violence. violence only hardens their resolve and makes them recruit more terrorists. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted August 30, 2004 << We have to persuade muslims to rejoin hindu society by making it so that they will realize that islam is wrong religion and they are worse off for it. have to expose untruths in arab culture. you do this through education not violence. >> yes, by education and other non violent means (econmical byocott e.g.,) but if all fails, then ...yuddhAya krita nischaya as krishna advises. << violence only hardens their resolve and makes them recruit more terrorists. >> and non voilence on our side also encourages them to do more violence. and they also say, "you hindus are cowards." why can the violence of islam for 1000 years on the hindus in our own land not harden our resolve to take islam out of bhart? it ought to. while islam gives first priority to violence to spread islam and take over others' lands, hinduism gives violence the last priority, and never says to take over othres' lands, nor it says to convert others. is that not nice? is that not a lot nicer than islam? so if you can agree to this, then please convince your muslim friends, if any, to give up islam in bhadat. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
veluthukaran 0 Report post Posted August 30, 2004 and non voilence on our side also encourages them to do more violence. and they also say, "you hindus are cowards." ------------------- did they call gandhiji or satyagrahis cowards? do you feel so low of yourself that you would not like it if someone called you a coward? this kind of reasoning is childish to say the least. is that not a lot nicer than islam?............ -------------------- no one here is questioning this. we all know what islam has done to bharat. we all know what islam is. problem is comparing hinduism to islam, there is no comparison, islam is not remotely on the same level, so you cannot hold islamic/arab standards to standards of the history of bharat. hindus are more tolerant than muslims, that is why we have mosques in ayodhya, but they have no temples in mecca! we cannot lower our standards. we have to outshine them. you place to much emphasis on being killed by islam. i would rather die than resort to their level, as any satyagrahi would. Truth always exists, even in the midst of UNtruth. Trust there will be a kalki avatar to right adharma. no one has control over this, best to stick to dharma and not get baited like a fish into emulating islamic practices of violence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted August 31, 2004 << best to stick to dharma >> yes, and therefore we need to fight the asuric ideology that has invaded in bharat. get it out by all posible ways. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 31, 2004 << yes, india never really existed as one whole subcontinent state in its history under one authority. >> it was, in the times onf pandavas. wrong.. even at that times the modern india was divided in separate countries and bharat was all the planet earth (pandavas were federal chiefs) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ganeshprasad 0 Report post Posted August 31, 2004 Jai Ganesh Re (wrong.. even at that times the modern india was divided in separate countries and bharat was all the planet earth) The land which goes by the name India today,was ruled by maharaj Bharat in whose name the kingdom was named,even then there were little kingdoms but still they all paid there dues to chakravati raja up until the rule of maharaj parksit, so Bharat or India as we know today had her influence all over the world. let us not try and divide any more then it allready has. Re (pandavas were federal chiefs) Is that good or bad? Jai Shree Krishna Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted September 1, 2004 << wrong.. even at that times the modern india was divided in separate countries and bharat was all the planet earth (pandavas were federal chiefs) >> yes, but technically it is not much different from a country with several states within. all were living per the vedic dharma. that defines hindustan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 1, 2004 the fact is that all that federal states never feel a special "affection" for the ones who, with them, were beyond the (s)hindu river or, in another words, orissa, in vedic times, never felt to be in the same nation with uttar pradesh and in a different one from afghanistan, arabia, italy, and vietnam because all were belonging to bharata varsa modern india is an anglo/muslim creation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ganeshprasad 0 Report post Posted September 1, 2004 Jai Ganesh Pranam maadavji Please keep up your crusade. I use to think you went on a bit too far trying to rid the cancer that has spread in our beloved vedic land, that we call India today but it seems we have enemies every where trying to divide us. Jai Shree Krishna Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted September 2, 2004 jai. thanks. you keep up too. we need unity to solve our problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
