05-06-2006, 09:27 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-G.Subramaniam+May 6 2006, 08:10 AM-->QUOTE(G.Subramaniam @ May 6 2006, 08:10 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Netaji's brother , Sarat Chandra Bose, tried to get West Bengal inside East Pakistan as a <b>united</b> muslim majority bengal
He was defeated by Shyama Prasad Mukerji who insisted on a partition
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
united being the key word here. that united bengal would become a muslim majority proivince wasnt his fault - its a legacy of bengal's history. ever since bengal fell in muslim hands it was muslim marority. but at least it was very prosperous, and had east and west bengal been one single muslim majority state (under the union of india ofcourse, not pakistan), then economically bengal as a whoile would have been a lot better off, no 71 war and refugee problem would have happened etc. ofcourse all this while (since 47) bengal would simultaneously have been another touchy state in so far as communal violence and hindu-muslim tentions are concerned, like a up or a hyderabad.
i support what S P Mukherjee did, tho the best thing would have been in between. in 1947 india should not have agreed to the border line between east and west bengal as drawn at the time of the partition of bangal (decades before the partition of india) by Curzon. we should have taken a lot more land and a lot less muslim people. indian bengal should ideqally have been the size of bangladesh.
<!--QuoteBegin-G.Subramaniam+May 6 2006, 08:10 AM-->QUOTE(G.Subramaniam @ May 6 2006, 08:10 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Netaji's niece is a notorious anti-hindu
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
can we have more info on this please?
He was defeated by Shyama Prasad Mukerji who insisted on a partition
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
united being the key word here. that united bengal would become a muslim majority proivince wasnt his fault - its a legacy of bengal's history. ever since bengal fell in muslim hands it was muslim marority. but at least it was very prosperous, and had east and west bengal been one single muslim majority state (under the union of india ofcourse, not pakistan), then economically bengal as a whoile would have been a lot better off, no 71 war and refugee problem would have happened etc. ofcourse all this while (since 47) bengal would simultaneously have been another touchy state in so far as communal violence and hindu-muslim tentions are concerned, like a up or a hyderabad.
i support what S P Mukherjee did, tho the best thing would have been in between. in 1947 india should not have agreed to the border line between east and west bengal as drawn at the time of the partition of bangal (decades before the partition of india) by Curzon. we should have taken a lot more land and a lot less muslim people. indian bengal should ideqally have been the size of bangladesh.
<!--QuoteBegin-G.Subramaniam+May 6 2006, 08:10 AM-->QUOTE(G.Subramaniam @ May 6 2006, 08:10 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Netaji's niece is a notorious anti-hindu
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
can we have more info on this please?