B-52 came into existance in 1955 in USA but not Britain ..... After 7 good year of our Independence.
A View on Gandhi
- Thread starter rajpaldular
- Start date
B-52 came into existance in 1955 in USA but not Britain ..... After 7 good year of our Independence.
Agar kabhi zarurat padi to Musalmaan hi Jatto ka saath denge , ye baat bata deta hoon.
Few things, as mentioned earlier, which I couldn’t understand about Gandhi:
1. Was he was race suprimist ? People say this was because of 'Hinduism blessing' which divide people based on varna (color) where a lighter color is prefered over the darker color. We can see that even today that even some Jats say they are superior than Baniyas or others because of their 'lighter skin' or strength. Though people say he got enlighted later in his life. A few People even call him racist.
2. Has he done enough for the Harijans. Ambedkars opposed the word harijans. They blame Gandhi opposed the separate electorate for harijans because he didn’t want the real upliftment of the untouchables. Supporters says Gandhi didn’t want futher division among Hindus. Did Gandhi put sincere efforts to remove untouchability ?
3 Why did Gandhi oppose the idea of emigration of all muslims to Pakistan if he was racist ? Gandhi did say on occasion for Jews that a man has the right to call a country his home where he earn bread and butter. So a Jew born in France is a french. Was that the reason he didnt want muslims to be displaced like Jews?
Any unbiased views on these?
1. Was he was race suprimist ? People say this was because of 'Hinduism blessing' which divide people based on varna (color) where a lighter color is prefered over the darker color. We can see that even today that even some Jats say they are superior than Baniyas or others because of their 'lighter skin' or strength. Though people say he got enlighted later in his life. A few People even call him racist.
2. Has he done enough for the Harijans. Ambedkars opposed the word harijans. They blame Gandhi opposed the separate electorate for harijans because he didn’t want the real upliftment of the untouchables. Supporters says Gandhi didn’t want futher division among Hindus. Did Gandhi put sincere efforts to remove untouchability ?
3 Why did Gandhi oppose the idea of emigration of all muslims to Pakistan if he was racist ? Gandhi did say on occasion for Jews that a man has the right to call a country his home where he earn bread and butter. So a Jew born in France is a french. Was that the reason he didnt want muslims to be displaced like Jews?
Any unbiased views on these?
Last edited by a moderator:
rakeshsehrawat
New member
During war with China in 1962 Soldiers wore fleet shoes in dense snow of himalyas.
Ib janta ka ke byont hai? agar Pakistan ki tarah yahan bhi military raj aa jaye to log kya kar lenge?
malikdeepak1
New member
Yeah!
That satisfies my curiosity to certain extent.
I would also like to have some more clarifications or knowledge about him or his activities.
1. Gandhi is being alleged that he did fasting during the time of division of our country in order to help the "pukistaanis" with some 55/65 crores and not for maintaining peace. Was this his real agenda behind his fasts?
2. I have read somewhere that he promised that after independence the president of country would be a "harijan" and a "lady". AFAIK Dr. Rajender prasad was neither a harijan nor a lady. (I'm not questioning who was the president, but why he was elected when Nehru, the main ally of gandhi, was PM and he should have kept gandhi's words). Is this just a rumour?
3. He could have saved Bhagat singh if he would have denied signing the treaty. But he did not do so. difference in ideology, perhaps or some pressure from others that it would hamper their movement for getting swaraj that too only half of it?
Please enlighten me!
Thanks for your patience and answers
upendersingh
New member
Certainly I had read it B-52 somewhere, but it might be B-29 or other series of this aircraft in fact. By the way, crux of the matter was British Army had warplanes and Indians were nowhere to Britishers' defence power then. You must be agreed upon this fact that Britishers had warplanes in 40s. Thanks for correction. Will be more thankful to you if you can tell the real name of the aircrafts. It will be good for amending the facts I/we have read.
upendersingh
New member
An army of 20 lac soldiers without warplanes can be devastated only by one pilot with the attack of just one nuclear bomb. Along with the men, machines have also become decisive in warfares in present.
upendersingh
New member
साथ दे तो रहे हैं. लश्कर-ए-तोयबा वाले खूब जाट फौजियों का खून बहा रहे हैं कश्मीर में. इंडियन मुजाहिदीन के आतंकवादी भी खूब बढ़िया साथ निभा रहे हैं. कुछ समय पहले बंगलादेश राइफल्स के लोगों ने बी.एस.एफ. के दर्जनों जवानों को मारकर बहुत अच्छा साथ निभाया था जाटों का. बी.एस.एफ. में भी जाट कोई कम थोड़े ही हैं. तुम थोड़ा-सा कमजोर पड़ो, तुम्हें खाने के लिए तैयार बैठे हैं लोग. मुसलमानों का नंबर तो बाद में लगेगा, उससे पहले और बहुत तैयार बैठे हैं. कुंडू साहब, तुम आदमी तो ठीक-ठाक हो, लेकिन ये हरकत तुम्हारे जैसे एक खरे आदमी को शोभा नहीं देती. अब ये मत पूछ लेना कि कौन-सी हरकत?
upendersingh
New member
Arrey mera bhai toh naraaz ho gya , achha koni kahoon muslim saath denge.
Hurricane and P-51 Mustang were two major fighter planes in Royal Air force ( British ). Hurricanes were British made while P-51 Mustangs were imported from America.
akshaymalik84
Active member
Ye Saari Gandhi ki baat/burai...NCERT ki books mei chapwa dyo...make young generation to hate MKG .ask your children to follow the path of HINSA and Untruth,tell them to be like Bhagat singh and WASTE their life on country. Ask your children to go to Army and die on front for you and your country.
We all follow what we think is right so did they. Whats the argument? Who did wronge?.....go ahead and change that wronge and change our country.
We all follow what we think is right so did they. Whats the argument? Who did wronge?.....go ahead and change that wronge and change our country.
Its really nice to know that Bhagat Singh WASTED his life for the country.
Its still good that you didn't called him a terrorist unlike Mayawati who declared Chandersekhar Azad a terrorist.
Gandhi was a good politician and was a domineering personality. He ran congress by his own rules and people who were not in sync with his ideas were sidelined by him. He won the confidence of the British by praising them and in turn British made him anonymous leader of People of India. During the course of time and events Jinnah and Ambedkar came out from nowhere and emerged as leaders of Muslim and Dalit communities. In a counter attack, Gandhi started Muslim and Dalit appeasement policy. He started talking about welfare of Muslims and Dalits. Hindusim and Nationalism took a back seat.
That's why Gandhi was upset when so many Muslims were leaving India and shifting to Pakistan. He was not concerned a bit about the violence and bloodshed. He wanted Muslims to stay in India at ANY cost.
During the partition Gandhi went of fasting for the violence against Muslims but hardly showed any concern about the millions of Hindus who were massacred, raped, maimed, tortured by Muslims. Gandhi didn't wanted Hindus from Pakistan to shift in India. Gandhi wanted those Hindus die there for the goodness.
The Hindus who managed to escape from Pakistan were shocked to hear this speech from Gandhi on 23rd September 1947 :"I asked them why all they came here (in Delhi). Why they did not die there? I still hold on to the belief one should stick to the place where we happen to live even if we are cruelly treated and even killed. Let us die if the people kill us; but we should die bravely with the name of God on our tongue. Even if our men are killed, why should we feel angry with anybody, you should realise that even if they are killed they have had a good and proper end."
Nehru was not an anonymous choice for Prime Minister's post. Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel was more popular in Congress and was a better administrator than Nehru. Gandhi could not nominate people for every post by his will. So, In the political deal, Nehru got the Prime Minister seat while Patel became home Minister and Presidential Seat was given to Patel camp as a compansation. Lady and Harijan are just nice points to become goody goody boy.
I don't know whether Gandhi could save Bhagat Singh or not but ironically Gandhi never showed any intentions to save Bhagat Singh. So many International personalities like King of Norway, various American Businessmen, Prominent Jews and even many British MPs requested the British Rulers change decision about Bhagat Singh.
Most of the congress members, Subhash Bose and millions of patriotic Indian wrote to Gandhi to save Bhagat Singh. Subhash Bose asked Gandhi not to sign the Gandhi-Erwin pact unless the british agreed to commute the death sentence of Bhagat Singh. But Gandhi was unrelenting. In a very weak attempt gandhi just wrote a letter to Viceroy pleading the case for Bhagat Singh. Gandhi neither gave any speech about Bhagat Singh, nor did he go on any fast.
The British still were very unsure of the reaction in India if Bhagat Singh was hanged. They needed to gain some ground so they could brace for any violent reactions. So they decided to sign the Gandhi-Irwin pact and agree to a compromise with the Indian people. Gandhi signed the pact which ended the civil disobedience movement and British had nothing to do in return.
Subhash Bose remarked on the pact "Between us and the British lies an ocean of blood and a mountain of corpses. Nothing on earth can induce us to accept this compromise which Gandhiji had signed."
The Gandhi-Irwin pact was signed on 4th March 1931. Bhagat Singh and his associates were hanged on 23rd March 1931. Gandhi's signing of the Gandhi-Irwin pact just days before Bhagat Singh was hanged was totally inexplicable. The least Gandhi could have done was wait till the actual date of execution. This would have put a lot of pressure on the British.
Spot On, Couldn't agree more.
R
rameshlakra
Guest
It is very easy to criticise. Mahatma Gandhi could not have done better for his country. He neglected his own family (his grandsons are living in obscurity). One can always find faults after the events, but at that point of time he had ensured that a country called India was born. Things could have been worst, as small provinces could have mushroomed into full states in a way the African continent is. Division of country was not his choice, things had snowballed into situation to the point of no return- either have division or face civil war (as bluntly put by Jinnah). He can be called a lunatic, moody, autocratic or "sathiya-ya-hua"- but it was all need of the hour and i would call it determined and clear cut decision making. His path to truth and non-violence is the only solution to terrorist problem we have today. Read a few books like "My experience with truth" and "freedom at midnight" to understand him.
Regards
Regards
rajpaldular
Active member
सर्वप्रथम मैं सभी जाटलैंड.कॉम के सदस्यों का धन्यवाद करना चाहूँगा जिन्होंने "गाँधी पर एक द्रष्टि" पर अपना अमूल्य समय निकाल कर अपने अपने विचार प्रस्तुत किये. एक सदस्य श्री अभिमन्यु सिंह जी को संभवतया मेरा गांधीजी पर लिखना अप्रिय लगा है, परन्तु मैं भी स्वतंत्र भारत का एक नागरिक होने के नाते अपने विचार प्रस्तुत करने अधिकार रखता हूँ.
श्री उपेन्द्र सिंह जी लाकड़ा ने लिखा है की यदि १९४७ में भारत का विभाजन नहीं होता तो ५० करोड़ से अधिक मुसलमान भारत में होते और १-२ प्रधान मंत्री भी उनका बन गया होता, उपेन्द्र सिंह जी आपका कहना सही है कि पाकिस्तान और बंगलादेश के रूप में लक्ष्य तो है परन्तु परिणाम में कौन परिवर्तित करेगा? कांग्रेस और क्षेत्रीय पार्टियाँ तो अल्पसंख्यक तुष्टिकरण में लगी हुई है और भारतीय जनता पार्टी कभी अपने बल बूते पर केंद्र में सरकार बना लेगी ऐसा लगता नहीं है. एक सूरत में भारतीय जनता पार्टी अपने दम पर सरकार बना सकती है, यदि कांग्रेस की तर्ज़ पर "भाजपा" श्रीमती मेनका गाँधी को पार्टी की अध्यक्ष बना दे और श्री वरुण गाँधी को "सयुंक्त महासचिव" बना दे परंतु ये "संघ परिवार" को कभी भी रास नहीं आयेगा. तो मेरे प्रिय उपेन्द्र सिंह जी पाकिस्तान और बंगलादेश को हिन्दू देश कौन बनाएगा?......
श्री उपेन्द्र सिंह जी लाकड़ा ने लिखा है की यदि १९४७ में भारत का विभाजन नहीं होता तो ५० करोड़ से अधिक मुसलमान भारत में होते और १-२ प्रधान मंत्री भी उनका बन गया होता, उपेन्द्र सिंह जी आपका कहना सही है कि पाकिस्तान और बंगलादेश के रूप में लक्ष्य तो है परन्तु परिणाम में कौन परिवर्तित करेगा? कांग्रेस और क्षेत्रीय पार्टियाँ तो अल्पसंख्यक तुष्टिकरण में लगी हुई है और भारतीय जनता पार्टी कभी अपने बल बूते पर केंद्र में सरकार बना लेगी ऐसा लगता नहीं है. एक सूरत में भारतीय जनता पार्टी अपने दम पर सरकार बना सकती है, यदि कांग्रेस की तर्ज़ पर "भाजपा" श्रीमती मेनका गाँधी को पार्टी की अध्यक्ष बना दे और श्री वरुण गाँधी को "सयुंक्त महासचिव" बना दे परंतु ये "संघ परिवार" को कभी भी रास नहीं आयेगा. तो मेरे प्रिय उपेन्द्र सिंह जी पाकिस्तान और बंगलादेश को हिन्दू देश कौन बनाएगा?......
rajpaldular
Active member
? आप तो इन दोनों देशों को हिन्दू राष्ट्र बनाने की बात कर रहे हैं, कहीं ऐसा न हो कि हम भारतीय हिन्दुओं को ही अगले २०-२५ वर्षों में समाप्त कर दिया जाये. भारत में नक्सलवाद चीन का फैलाया हुआ है, जो कि कई राज्यों में अपनी गहरी जड़ें जमा चुका है, अफगानिस्तान से अमेरिका अपनी सेना को २०११ में वापस बुला लेगा, ये निर्णय अमेरिकी कांग्रेस ने ले लिया है और भारत को कह दिया है कि वह अपने विकास कार्यक्रम अफगानिस्तान में जारी रखे तो जैसे ही अमेरिकी फ़ौज अफगानिस्तान से हटेंगी वैसे ही तालिबान और पाकिस्तान के आतंकवादी भारतीयों को अफगानिस्तान से दौड़ा दौड़ा कर भारत में खदेड़ देंगे अथवा मार देंगे और संभवतया तालिबान अगले २०-२५ वर्षों में बेलगाम होकर भारत में आतंक मचाएगा, पाकिस्तान के आतंकवादी तो चीख चीख कर कह ही रहे हैं कि जब तक भारत के लाल किले पर हरा झंडा (इस्लामिक झंडा) नहीं फहराएंगे तब तक चैन से नहीं बैठेंगे. .....