Let's be serious anything post the era of the delhi Sultanate and 1100AD basically turned India into a ISIS style country. It was no different to what ISIS was doing to the Syrians.The worst time in India's long civilisational history was British rule. That's saying something.
Nah, from India's PoV too, the American move is too early. But India has less to complain while Russia has more to complain, nothing much to see here.
Nothing of that sort . Sati was British propaganda to show the British as saviours. There has been no documented coverage of Sati apart from a single digit cases in Bengal (which was the base of the British East India company and where majority of British mkssionaries would do their conversions). Sati was primarily done by the women herself and it was more of western India phenomenon which essentially happened due to Turkic and muslim invasions who would rape and defile indian women. In rajasthan they would do Jauhar where wived of princes, nobility would commit mass suicide by jumping into massive pyres to avoid being humiliated.Perhaps the biggest contribution of British in India was removal of social practices like Sati, child marriage, untouchability
Yeah, but the fact is you were still doing it.Nothing of that sort . Sati was British propaganda to show the British as saviours. There has been no documented coverage of Sati apart from a single digit cases in Bengal (which was the base of the British East India company and where majority of British mkssionaries would do their conversions). Sati was primarily done by the women herself and it was more of western India phenomenon which essentially happened due to Turkic and muslim invasions who would rape and defile indian women. In rajasthan they would do Jauhar where wived of princes, nobility would commit mass suicide by jumping into massive pyres to avoid being humiliated.
And untouchability never went away because Dalits were emancipated only after the British left with the new constitution of India. Heck the British further strengthened the caste system and did caste based recruitment (martial race theory) into the British Indian Army which continues till this day. Child Marriage continues till this day in rural India. Half of the reason British could rule India was because the British avoided getting involved in massive social engineering projects on the ground level unlike the Portuguese or Turks who in the end also failed and would fail to expand or would face constant rebellions.
This is just typical gaslighting to show the Raj as a good progressive entity when it was pretty much the most extractive form of empire that existed. Stable yes but extractive and rapacious. The Mughals couldn't do as much insidious damage as the British did. The Mughals were just illiterate bullies and degenerates the British were far more intelligent and reptilian for lack of a better word.
Between 1815 and 1818, the number of incidents of sati in Bengal doubled from 378 to 839.
Opposition to the practice of sati by evangelists like Carey, and Hindu reformers such as Ram Mohan Roy, ultimately led the British Governor-General of India Lord William Bentinck to enact the Bengal Sati Regulation, 1829, declaring the practice of burning or burying alive of Hindu widows to be punishable by the criminal courts.[15][16][17] These were followed up with other legislation, countering what the British perceived to be interrelated issues involving violence against Hindu women, including: Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act, 1856, Female Infanticide Prevention Act, 1870, and Age of Consent Act, 1891.
You were still doing it after independence too. The 1987 Act also describes 'forced burning'.Isolated incidents of sati were recorded in India in the late 20th century, leading the Indian government to promulgate the Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, criminalising the aiding or glorifying of sati.[18]
As I remarked earlier, sweetie stays true to form.
I can confidently say yes.
Most of his works are lying read on my bookshelves.
How many of his books have you read? Have you even heard his name before this farticle you've quoted?
BTW, if you really want to know something about the shaping of modern India, it's freedom struggle & it's ongoing journey as a democracy warts et al, which I very much doubt a snotty tramp like you has the intellectual curiosity or appetite or even the intellect to appreciate, you ought to read him. He has quite a few flaws in his work but it'd serve as a good primer.
That penny about the "pot of gold " finally dropped eh? I always thought of Paddy as a complete dimwit & you as a midwit. Why ? You marked your presence on # 8720 & 8722 in your typical fashion of sniffing around & raising your leg & then a full 10 min later you did the same in #8723 .
Your thought process in those 10 min must've gone - gee that "data mining that pot of gold" seems ok but since when is big daddy here being charitable to me?
Up his & yours... Hmm, waitaminute, big daddy's taken advantage of my dyslexia again.
And then you regurgitated what you usually do.
Thanks for reaffirming my reading of you, sweetie. You're so predicable, it's getting boring now. Like stealing candy from a kid.
![]()
This very picture was used months ago to assert the same. You can tell because it has a distinctive dent in the missile where some clumsy Russian photo-shopper removed the Ukrainian watermark.The British Brimstone I rocket fell into the hands of the Russian army in the Zaporozhye direction of Ukraine. An unexploded rocket was found near the positions of Russian troops. The Brimstone missile is 3 times more effective than the American AGM-65G Maverick missile against modern tanks and is a valuable model for research by the Russian army. The rocket was made in September 2001, and the forward compartment of the rocket was made in 2004. These missiles began to enter service with the UK in 2005, this is a fire-and-forget missile. The homing air-to-ground missile is equipped with an active radar homing head. The rocket discovered in Ukraine belongs to the first modification of the Brimstone 1 in its early version.
lets see if the west has the balls to sanction china, real sanctions not some name sake " will not buy your toilet bucket" ones.
So you were already being oppressed when Britain arrived anyway. Like I said, you were doomed to being invaded during that period anyway.
Like who? Which countries of your particular developmental stage did better on their own?
Oh sure, that's why a trading company managed to invade you. Would the Marathas have led to a democratic India? The same Marathas that murdered 400,000 people (textile workers) in Bengal and Bihar in the decade before Britain arrived? Social fabric? What with Imperial rule of a different but equally murderous source and Sati and the caste system? It seems to me that the only real difference between the Marathas and the British is that the British were better organised and white. The last one probably being the most relevant here.
Yeah, so the Marathas would have done exactly the same as the British, except their skin colour was different, so therefore more acceptable to you.
![]()
Ice age LOL. If you think Britain took so much, how much do you think Russia took? As well as exploiting and looting all those lands invaded since 1462, they also stole >20% of the world's natural resources, valued at $75tr. And killed tens of millions through famine and persecutions of Christians.
![]()
10 Countries With the Most Natural Resources
Commodities are the raw materials used for products manufactured worldwide. This article lists the top 10 countries with the most value in natural resources.www.investopedia.com
![]()
Persecution of Christians in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
And they continue doing this, even today in the 21st century, but you support them, so fvck you and your hypocrisy.
Let's be serious anything post the era of the delhi Sultanate and 1100AD basically turned India into a ISIS style country. It was no different to what ISIS was doing to the Syrians.
The British just took advantage of the societal anarchy that came with it and added more systems to tie down the locals and continue their extractive policy.
Funny, because price of everything had increased in Croatia since the war had started - and especially of food.west feeding the world at ukraines cost. Seems export is only to bring down price of grains and inflation across the developed countries while ukrainians themselves starve. history repeats itself.
From the fact the Marathas murdered 400,000 people in the decade before Britain arrived and the Mughals were also in your country.How on earth did you get that out of what I posted?
Google all the independent countries outside Europe of the time and look it up.
![]()
![]()
Not very smart, eh? The Marathas were Hindus. It didn't matter to Hindus which family ruled over us, as long as they ruled properly. The Marathas were pretty decent rulers.
You still don't realise how fvcked up your people were in India. You were literally our Nazis... and for 200 years.
From India's perspective, it's not our problem. It's just national interests. We can't choose our neighbours.
If you hate the Russians so much, you should not have stopped at Berlin. The route to A-A line was open.