India should change name of some Indian cities

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Changing names of the city is not rewriting history. Many Indian cities name got changed like Bombay, Madras, Calcutta etc. Even in Lahore, what used to be known as Dharampura before partition is now called as Mustafabad. Secularism is not a burden only on India. Muslims wanted a seperate country where they give no rights to minorities but expect Indians to remain secular and not change cities named after muslims is hypocrisy.

I was replying to a post which mentioned universities and other institutions or structures which had been changed. You are interjecting into a conversation at a different point which I never raised or queried.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Aurangabad, Allah bad and Faizabad already renamed :modi

Growing up as a kid, these names sounded like Hyder is bad, Aurang is bad, Faiz is bad.....

These names meant nothing for me as a non-farsi, Arabic speaker.....

 

[Kianig89]

The heritage should be preserved,
lot more things to be done for developmentother than name changing

Growing up as a kid, these names sounded like Hyder is bad, Aurang is bad, Faiz is bad.....

These names meant nothing for me as a non-farsi, Arabic speaker.....

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

The heritage should be preserved,
lot more things to be done for developmentother than name changing

For andhbhakhts, changing names of cities = development

 

[Champ_Pal]

The heritage should be preserved,
lot more things to be done for developmentother than name changing

There should be a museum to document all the history of who ruled what...

Having a city named after an invader means people are accepting them and were good for the land (which they are not).

Anyways, India has far bigger problems than these mere dirty places named after some Turkic invaders. All these renaming of cities is just another diversion tactic by the ruling government to keep people looking the other way rather than at the impending urgent issues like clean air, infra and poverty.

 

[Kianig89]

For andhbhakhts, changing names of cities = development

As they say the messianic spell, Modi Ji

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Atleast the name changes in India invite open discussions and criticism for all to see. Name changes happen everywhere but it had to be in moderation as not to wipe out history.
Our neighbors just run through it as a matter of fact and little to no discussion. Their history literally starts from 1400 years ago.

Our Name-Changing Mania and Historical Illiteracy

The changing of the names of cities, roads and parks has become a preoccupation in the Indian Subcontinent. On both sides of the border line, people are still

thefridaytimes.com

The changing of the names of cities, roads and parks has become a preoccupation in the Indian Subcontinent. On both sides of the border line, people are still continuing it. In Pakistan, especially in Karachi and Lahore buildings, roads and parks which were once named after Sikhs and Hindus got new names. In Karachi Ram Bagh was renamed as Aram Bagh. Likewise, in Lahore Krishna Nagar was renamed as Islampur. Afterwards, the maniacal wave was halted till 1965. But in the late 1960s, it resurfaced, and lots of towns and districts were renamed. Now, the scheme was embodied in religious fervour and politics. Therefore, Montgomery city became Sahiwal and Lyallpur became Faisalabad. The trend got an official endorsement: the federal and provincial departments changed the names of places, which were technically under their jurisdictions. A case in point is Sita Road Railway Station, which was renamed as Rehmani Nagar. The idea of changing names again took root in the regime of General Zia-ul-Haq, when there was a move to change the name of Jacobabad town. But the idea was rejected by the local people. After a long silence, Asif Ali Zardari revived the trend. He renamed Nawabshah city as Shaheed Benazirabad. Afterwards, there was silence. But, we were wrong. Here goes the story.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Our neighbors just run through it as a matter of fact and little to no discussion. Their history literally starts from 1400 years ago.

Lol even if we consider it 1400 then still you don't know much about it at all. Otherwise would have reflected in your posts.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Ahmedabad
Moradabad
Aurangabad
Faizabad
Farooqabad
Adilabad
Sahibabad
Hyderabad
Secunderabad
Firozabad
Mustafabad
Ahmednagar
Tughlaqabad
Fathabad
Usmanabad
Baktiyarpur
Mahmudabad
Muzaffarpur
Burhanpur

All these city names sound too masculine, they should be changed to something softer, like Bareilly, Cochin, Mumbai, Ranchi, or Chennai. @Bhaijaan

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Lol even if we consider it 1400 then still you don't know much about it at all. Otherwise would have reflected in your posts.

I do not have to write entire thesis and have genuine discussion where some is openly insulting cutlures with dumb memes.

I am happy to discuss the issue because erasing history and name changes is a complex issue and one can have mutiple perspectives. It requires nuance and mutual respect, which wont be happening in this thread.

 

[JaDed]

Or Hari Nagar, Subhash Nagar

Yeah but Ashok Nagar even stretches to South, Delhi to Chennai Ashok Nagar everywhere.

 

[JaDed]

Atleast the name changes in India invite open discussions and criticism for all to see. Name changes happen everywhere but it had to be in moderation as not to wipe out history.
Our neighbors just run through it as a matter of fact and little to no discussion. Their history literally starts from 1400 years ago.

Our Name-Changing Mania and Historical Illiteracy

The changing of the names of cities, roads and parks has become a preoccupation in the Indian Subcontinent. On both sides of the border line, people are still

thefridaytimes.com

The changing of the names of cities, roads and parks has become a preoccupation in the Indian Subcontinent. On both sides of the border line, people are still continuing it. In Pakistan, especially in Karachi and Lahore buildings, roads and parks which were once named after Sikhs and Hindus got new names. In Karachi Ram Bagh was renamed as Aram Bagh. Likewise, in Lahore Krishna Nagar was renamed as Islampur. Afterwards, the maniacal wave was halted till 1965. But in the late 1960s, it resurfaced, and lots of towns and districts were renamed. Now, the scheme was embodied in religious fervour and politics. Therefore, Montgomery city became Sahiwal and Lyallpur became Faisalabad. The trend got an official endorsement: the federal and provincial departments changed the names of places, which were technically under their jurisdictions. A case in point is Sita Road Railway Station, which was renamed as Rehmani Nagar. The idea of changing names again took root in the regime of General Zia-ul-Haq, when there was a move to change the name of Jacobabad town. But the idea was rejected by the local people. After a long silence, Asif Ali Zardari revived the trend. He renamed Nawabshah city as Shaheed Benazirabad. Afterwards, there was silence. But, we were wrong. Here goes the story.

Don’t think Pakistan is a great example to have in such a case..

 

[sweep_shot]

For andhbhakhts, changing names of cities = development

This made me laugh. Very true.

They are all about gimmicks and slogans. Very little substance.

 

[RexRex]

Lol...by this logic Abdali and Ghaznavi would be Indians favorites

Joshilla asked why did indian muslims have affinity for muslim rulers (Mughals) but indian christians did not for christian rulers (British). My reply was that the Mughals actually settled in India, married the locals and have ancestors today in India whereas the British kept to themselves and eventually left India. No lineage. Or very few like anglo-indians. I wonder what anglo-indians of today think of the British Raj.

Shashi Tharoor made this argument when asked by someone.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Joshilla asked why did indian muslims have affinity for muslim rulers (Mughals) but indian christians did not for christian rulers (British). My reply was that the Mughals actually settled in India, married the locals and have ancestors today in India whereas the British kept to themselves and eventually left India. No lineage. Or very few like anglo-indians. I wonder what anglo-indians of today think of the British Raj.

Shashi Tharoor made this argument when asked by someone.

Indian Muslims having at least a tiny amount of Mongol, Turkic, Persian or Arab ancestry are in severe minority. 90% of Muslims in India are local converts. The remaining 10% are locals mixed with the invaders. Even among them, they are majority South Asian with may be 10-30% foreign admixture.

Mughals to their credit did not salute to the Ottoman Caliphate to find legitamacy. They found themselves ruling a huge chunk of land filled with riches. So did not bow down and send tribute to the Turkic Caliph in Constantinople. In contrast, British East India company was subordinate to the Queen. I am sure there are thousands in India with British admixture. Their generals and soldiers were not super chaste.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Atleast the name changes in India invite open discussions and criticism for all to see. Name changes happen everywhere but it had to be in moderation as not to wipe out history.
Our neighbors just run through it as a matter of fact and little to no discussion. Their history literally starts from 1400 years ago.

Our Name-Changing Mania and Historical Illiteracy

The changing of the names of cities, roads and parks has become a preoccupation in the Indian Subcontinent. On both sides of the border line, people are still

thefridaytimes.com

The changing of the names of cities, roads and parks has become a preoccupation in the Indian Subcontinent. On both sides of the border line, people are still continuing it. In Pakistan, especially in Karachi and Lahore buildings, roads and parks which were once named after Sikhs and Hindus got new names. In Karachi Ram Bagh was renamed as Aram Bagh. Likewise, in Lahore Krishna Nagar was renamed as Islampur. Afterwards, the maniacal wave was halted till 1965. But in the late 1960s, it resurfaced, and lots of towns and districts were renamed. Now, the scheme was embodied in religious fervour and politics. Therefore, Montgomery city became Sahiwal and Lyallpur became Faisalabad. The trend got an official endorsement: the federal and provincial departments changed the names of places, which were technically under their jurisdictions. A case in point is Sita Road Railway Station, which was renamed as Rehmani Nagar. The idea of changing names again took root in the regime of General Zia-ul-Haq, when there was a move to change the name of Jacobabad town. But the idea was rejected by the local people. After a long silence, Asif Ali Zardari revived the trend. He renamed Nawabshah city as Shaheed Benazirabad. Afterwards, there was silence. But, we were wrong. Here goes the story.

In all honesty I am not really a fan of renaming cities or roads in Pakistan either unless there is good reason for it. But two of those mentioned, Montgomery and Lyallpur were named after British colonialists, and the British were only interested in extracting the assets of India to Britain. Not sure how Pakistan decided on naming convention either. Faisalabad sounds like it was maybe named after a Saudi benefactor (?) but Sahiwal does sound local. I know in Punjab one of the towns is still called Toba Tek Singh which is presumably some Sikh dignitary from the past.

 

[deltexas]

Really, tag me in those threads if you haven't already came across my comment.

You never responded to a post when I asked what about the dozens of temples that were razed when Babri was demolished..

 

[HalBass9]

You never responded to a post when I asked what about the dozens of temples that were razed when Babri was demolished..

I’ve often spoken out against Pakistan, including condemning those who resort to violence and property damage over incidents like Quran burnings. My stance has always been clear: let them burn it, millions have memorized the Quran, and its essence remains intact.

As for Pakistanis destroying a temple in retaliation for the demolition of the Babri Masjid, that was a senseless act and remains so. But unfortunately, that kind of reaction is not uncommon in the subcontinent, where collective decisions can sometimes reflect a lack of rationality.

Let’s not confuse condemning bigotry on one side as somehow excusing or justifying wrongdoing on the other. You’ll never see me engaging in “what about India” or similar deflections. That’s a tactic often used by those trying to justify bigotry. I don’t believe in using past events as a shield for present hate, doing so is just another way to enable it.

Ironically, I’ve even been accused of anti-Hinduism by Hindutva members voices for criticizing the idea that religious belief could ever justify something as extreme as the right to kill. Calling that out is not hate nor anti-Hinduism.

 

[deltexas]

I’ve often spoken out against Pakistan, including condemning those who resort to violence and property damage over incidents like Quran burnings. My stance has always been clear: let them burn it, millions have memorized the Quran, and its essence remains intact.

As for Pakistanis destroying a temple in retaliation for the demolition of the Babri Masjid, that was a senseless act and remains so. But unfortunately, that kind of reaction is not uncommon in the subcontinent, where collective decisions can sometimes reflect a lack of rationality.

Let’s not confuse condemning bigotry on one side as somehow excusing or justifying wrongdoing on the other. You’ll never see me engaging in “what about India” or similar deflections. That’s a tactic often used by those trying to justify bigotry. I don’t believe in using past events as a shield for present hate, doing so is just another way to enable it.

Ironically, I’ve even been accused of anti-Hinduism by Hindutva members voices for criticizing the idea that religious belief could ever justify something as extreme as the right to kill. Calling that out is not hate nor anti-Hinduism.

Resorting to violence when religious scripts are burnt no matter what religion is to be condemned. I agree. It's a law and order issue and police should deal with it. But any violent responses should be handled by police and shut them down.

Agree on the 2nd one - yes it is senseless rationality. Issue is pak posters not you - condemn Babri but are silent on dozens of temple razing . Thats the issue. For me - any demolition of any religious building irrespective of religion is a law and order issue that needs to be effectively dealt by police very strictly..

Agree bigotry is bigotry. Issue is muslims are perceived to be absolutely victimized in Ind by pak posters here. Not the case. Muslims have equal rights as anyone in Ind as India is a secular republic. Not the case in pak where minorities have no rights and are crumpled. Its like die or convert. Just the population numbers reflect that reality. I condemn bigotry against anyone.

No religious belief can ever justify killing anyone. That is ridiculous. My personal opinion - religion is just a belief to be a good person. Doesn't mean whatever is written in it is gospel truth that needs to be implemented to the T.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

I’ve often spoken out against Pakistan, including condemning those who resort to violence and property damage over incidents like Quran burnings. My stance has always been clear: let them burn it, millions have memorized the Quran, and its essence remains intact.

As for Pakistanis destroying a temple in retaliation for the demolition of the Babri Masjid, that was a senseless act and remains so. But unfortunately, that kind of reaction is not uncommon in the subcontinent, where collective decisions can sometimes reflect a lack of rationality.

Let’s not confuse condemning bigotry on one side as somehow excusing or justifying wrongdoing on the other. You’ll never see me engaging in “what about India” or similar deflections. That’s a tactic often used by those trying to justify bigotry. I don’t believe in using past events as a shield for present hate, doing so is just another way to enable it.

Ironically, I’ve even been accused of anti-Hinduism by Hindutva members voices for criticizing the idea that religious belief could ever justify something as extreme as the right to kill. Calling that out is not hate nor anti-Hinduism.

Half your posts are "what about India" and similar deflections. We all are guilty of such deflections from time to time.
Chill out!

Post in thread 'Unrest in Sweden over planned Quran burnings'

Jan 30, 2025

India is not woke like Sweden. Government does not go soft on Islamists. They know the consequences.

Imagine if India took action against all extremists, regardless of whether they were in the majority.

• HalBass9

Post in thread 'Jaffar Express resumes operation from Peshawar after 17-day gap [Update@ Post#683]'

Mar 13, 2025

The Good Taliban days

Taliban were never good, they were necessity just as they are for India now.

• HalBass9

 

[HalBass9]

Half your posts are "what about India" and similar deflections. We all are guilty of such deflections from time to time.
Chill out!

Post in thread 'Unrest in Sweden over planned Quran burnings'

Jan 30, 2025

India is not woke like Sweden. Government does not go soft on Islamists. They know the consequences.

Imagine if India took action against all extremists, regardless of whether they were in the majority.

• HalBass9

Post in thread 'Jaffar Express resumes operation from Peshawar after 17-day gap [Update@ Post#683]'

Mar 13, 2025

The Good Taliban days

Taliban were never good, they were necessity just as they are for India now.

• HalBass9

LOL, it's all good, just a comprehension hiccup for you. But I must admit, the fact that you had to look it up is pretty funny.

If you read it closely, it was never a case of "what about India." The responses always stayed within context. For example, the recent talks between the Taliban and Indian officials were brought up while Indian posters were busy discussing "good" vs "bad" Taliban.

My posts are never about whataboutism regarding India, they’re always focused on criticizing Indian issues, particularly the bigotry rooted in Hindutva ideology. It’s your unhealthy nationalism that takes this as a personal attack. There are over a billion Indians, you can’t speak for all of them, nor can you bring about real change while a government built on bigotry remains in power.

But let’s not make this all about me. I’m sure you’ve got better things to do on a Friday.

 

[speed]

Babur had great foresight he did not wish to be buried in India and his sons buried him in kabul, after initially being buried in India.

 

[sweep_shot]

Babur had great foresight he did not wish to be buried in India and his sons buried him in kabul, after initially being buried in India.

Didn't know this. Thanks for sharing.

It is a shame BJP lunatics are disrespecting legends like Aurangzeb and Babur out of pettiness and ignorance.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

LOL, it's all good, just a comprehension hiccup for you. But I must admit, the fact that you had to look it up is pretty funny.

If you read it closely, it was never a case of "what about India." The responses always stayed within context. For example, the recent talks between the Taliban and Indian officials were brought up while Indian posters were busy discussing "good" vs "bad" Taliban.

My posts are never about whataboutism regarding India, they’re always focused on criticizing Indian issues, particularly the bigotry rooted in Hindutva ideology. It’s your unhealthy nationalism that takes this as a personal attack. There are over a billion Indians, you can’t speak for all of them, nor can you bring about real change while a government built on bigotry remains in power.

But let’s not make this all about me. I’m sure you’ve got better things to do on a Friday.

Nice wiggling !
Carry on!

Good taliban and band taliban is Pakistan's narrative, we never have doubts about Taliban.
Its you who drag in by your imaginary "what about India and Taliban"

 

[Rajdeep]

I am yet to hear any reasonable response from anyone on why the names should not be changed?

Muslims didnt wanted to live in India along with Hindus. So why should India have cities named after muslim invaders? Yeh kaisa dadagiri hai?

Will Pakistan or Bangladesh have cities named as Ashoknagar, Lakshmipur or Narayangunj? Why Dharampura in Lahore changed to Mustafabad? Similarly India has no reason to keep any of its cities named after muslims.

 

[sweep_shot]

Next time India gets conquered (by China, Muslims, or another group), some of their cities should be renamed.

For example, Arunachal Pradesh is called Zangnan by China. I don't know why Arunachal Pradesh is with India; it should be with China. Those people are ethnically closer to Chinese than Indians.



Actually, China has named quite a few places within Arunachal Pradesh --> https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...mes-for-arunachal-pradesh/article68015051.ece.

========================

China releases fourth list of 30 more names for places in Arunachal Pradesh​

The Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs released the fourth list of standardised geographical names in Zangnan, the Chinese name for Arunachal Pradesh​

China has released a fourth list of 30 new names of various places in Arunachal Pradesh amid Beijing’s stepped-up assertions in recent weeks to re-emphasise its claim over the Indian State.

India has been rejecting China renaming places in Arunachal Pradesh, asserting that the State is an integral part of the country and assigning "invented" names does not alter this reality.

The Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs released the fourth list of standardised geographical names in Zangnan, the Chinese name for Arunachal Pradesh which Beijing claims as part of south Tibet, state-run Global Times reported on Sunday.

The official website of the Ministry posted 30 additional names for the region.

Set to take effect from May 1, the implementation measures stipulate in Article 13 that "place names in foreign languages that may harm China's territorial claims and sovereignty rights shall not be directly quoted or translated without authorisation," the report said.

The Chinese Civil Affairs Ministry released the first list of the standardised names of six places in Zangnan was released in 2017, while the second list of 15 places was issued in 2021 followed by another list with names for 11 places in 2023.

The recent statements by China to reassert its claims over the State started with Beijing lodging a diplomatic protest with India over Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh, where he dedicated to the nation the Sela Tunnel built at an altitude of 13,000 feet in Arunachal Pradesh.

The tunnel will provide all-weather connectivity to strategically located Tawang and is expected to ensure better movement of troops along the frontier region.

Chinese Foreign and Defence ministries have issued a flurry of statements to highlight China's claims over the area.

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar on March 23 dismissed China's repeated claims on Arunachal Pradesh as "ludicrous" and that the frontier State was a "natural part of India".

"This is not a new issue. I mean, China has laid claim, it has expanded its claim. The claims are ludicrous to begin with and remain ludicrous today," he said in response to a question on the Arunachal issue after delivering a lecture at the prestigious Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS) of the National University of Singapore (NUS).

"So, I think we've been very clear, very consistent on this. And I think you know that is something which will be part of the boundary discussions which are taking place," he said.

Beijing was also peeved over the U.S. statement recognising Arunachal Pradesh as part of Indian territory.

State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel said on March 9 that "the U.S. recognises Arunachal Pradesh as Indian territory, and we strongly oppose any unilateral attempts to advance territorial claims by incursions or encroachments, military or civilian, across the Line of Actual Control."

Both the Chinese Foreign and Defence Ministries criticised the U.S. statement saying that the China-India boundary issue is a matter between the two countries and has nothing to do with Washington.

On the latest release of names by the Chinese civil affairs ministry, the Global Times report said the translation of names of the place in foreign languages or minority languages should comply with standards formulated by related organs of the State Council, which is the central cabinet of China.

Standard translations are made public through notices, the national database for geographical names and official publications on geographical names, according to the implementation measures, it said.

The State Council issued a revised regulation on place names in April 2022, which applies to naming, renaming, usage, cultural protection and other management of geographical names within Chinese territories, it said.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

I am yet to hear any reasonable response from anyone on why the names should not be changed?

Muslims didnt wanted to live in India along with Hindus. So why should India have cities named after muslim invaders? Yeh kaisa dadagiri hai?

Will Pakistan or Bangladesh have cities named as Ashoknagar, Lakshmipur or Narayangunj? Why Dharampura in Lahore changed to Mustafabad? Similarly India has no reason to keep any of its cities named after muslims.

History is combined lesson of all positives and negatives. Selective deletion of the past is a slippery slope and we can become totally delulu cultures which imagine themselves to be champions of "peace" and "the one true message". Or even worse, like people who reject their own heritage and imagine themselves to be something else.
We need to be proud of what we had been, all the successes and the failures, to find firm footing in reality.

But, again. I dont think anyone has the permanent naming rights to any place, except maybe the scientific units named after greater minds. After a certain point, some of the past does lose its relevance. I guess the true intent of renaming matters, it should be without malice to the fellow countrymen in the present.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Next time India gets conquered (by China, Muslims, or another group), some their cities should be renamed.

For example, Arunachal Pradesh is called Zangnan by China. I don't know why Arunachal Pradesh is with India; it should be with China. Those people are ethnically closer to Chinese than Indians.

Actually, China has named quite a few places within Arunachal Pradesh --> https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...mes-for-arunachal-pradesh/article68015051.ece.

========================

China releases fourth list of 30 more names for places in Arunachal Pradesh​

​

Its not about what should happen. It always happens in history my naive swept up buddy.
Victors always dictate and change the conquered lands as they seem fit. If India does get "conquered", of course the names will be changed by whoever conquers it. Everyone knows it.

When is Bangladesh changing back to East Pakistan?

 

[HalBass9]

Nice wiggling !
Carry on!

Good taliban and band taliban is Pakistan's narrative, we never have doubts about Taliban.
Its you who drag in by your imaginary "what about India and Taliban"

Lol, off course you didn't, when you stop getting your feelings hurt then re read it again.

 

[Rajdeep]

Next time India gets conquered (by China, Muslims, or another group), some of their cities should be renamed.

For example, Arunachal Pradesh is called Zangnan by China. I don't know why Arunachal Pradesh is with India; it should be with China. Those people are ethnically closer to Chinese than Indians.



Actually, China has named quite a few places within Arunachal Pradesh --> https://www.thehindu.com/news/natio...mes-for-arunachal-pradesh/article68015051.ece.

========================

China releases fourth list of 30 more names for places in Arunachal Pradesh​

The Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs released the fourth list of standardised geographical names in Zangnan, the Chinese name for Arunachal Pradesh​

China has released a fourth list of 30 new names of various places in Arunachal Pradesh amid Beijing’s stepped-up assertions in recent weeks to re-emphasise its claim over the Indian State.

India has been rejecting China renaming places in Arunachal Pradesh, asserting that the State is an integral part of the country and assigning "invented" names does not alter this reality.

The Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs released the fourth list of standardised geographical names in Zangnan, the Chinese name for Arunachal Pradesh which Beijing claims as part of south Tibet, state-run Global Times reported on Sunday.

The official website of the Ministry posted 30 additional names for the region.

Set to take effect from May 1, the implementation measures stipulate in Article 13 that "place names in foreign languages that may harm China's territorial claims and sovereignty rights shall not be directly quoted or translated without authorisation," the report said.

The Chinese Civil Affairs Ministry released the first list of the standardised names of six places in Zangnan was released in 2017, while the second list of 15 places was issued in 2021 followed by another list with names for 11 places in 2023.

The recent statements by China to reassert its claims over the State started with Beijing lodging a diplomatic protest with India over Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh, where he dedicated to the nation the Sela Tunnel built at an altitude of 13,000 feet in Arunachal Pradesh.

The tunnel will provide all-weather connectivity to strategically located Tawang and is expected to ensure better movement of troops along the frontier region.

Chinese Foreign and Defence ministries have issued a flurry of statements to highlight China's claims over the area.

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar on March 23 dismissed China's repeated claims on Arunachal Pradesh as "ludicrous" and that the frontier State was a "natural part of India".

"This is not a new issue. I mean, China has laid claim, it has expanded its claim. The claims are ludicrous to begin with and remain ludicrous today," he said in response to a question on the Arunachal issue after delivering a lecture at the prestigious Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS) of the National University of Singapore (NUS).

"So, I think we've been very clear, very consistent on this. And I think you know that is something which will be part of the boundary discussions which are taking place," he said.

Beijing was also peeved over the U.S. statement recognising Arunachal Pradesh as part of Indian territory.

State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel said on March 9 that "the U.S. recognises Arunachal Pradesh as Indian territory, and we strongly oppose any unilateral attempts to advance territorial claims by incursions or encroachments, military or civilian, across the Line of Actual Control."

Both the Chinese Foreign and Defence Ministries criticised the U.S. statement saying that the China-India boundary issue is a matter between the two countries and has nothing to do with Washington.

On the latest release of names by the Chinese civil affairs ministry, the Global Times report said the translation of names of the place in foreign languages or minority languages should comply with standards formulated by related organs of the State Council, which is the central cabinet of China.

Standard translations are made public through notices, the national database for geographical names and official publications on geographical names, according to the implementation measures, it said.

The State Council issued a revised regulation on place names in April 2022, which applies to naming, renaming, usage, cultural protection and other management of geographical names within Chinese territories, it said.

You do realize right that China is an atheist communist country that hates any form of religion. They hate muslims like you. If you happen to visit there, they will probably treat you as Uighur muslims. I know China is an adopted daddy of many here but guess you are getting too cozy with them without realizing the reality.

Also, there is no next time as far as muslims are concerned in conquering India. It took 20 mins to bring down Babri Masjid and 1 parliament session to remove autonomy of Kashmir. Pakistan fought 4 wars to free Kashmir and lost a 4. Also India got great relationship with Arab world. So chances of muslims conquering India in 2025 is very slim. Btw, what is your idea...how exactly you thought muslims will conquer India? Thousands of richshaw pullers will cross east bengal border and launch attack on India is it?

India is a country with 80% hindus. A country where muslims didnt wanted to live and got their own country. So India should not have any city with muslim names. Hindus, Christian, Buddhist or any other name is fine.

 

[bk19xsa]

1. The Viceregal Lodge → Rashtrapati Niwas (Shimla)

2. King George’s Medical College (KGMC) → Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University (Lucknow)

3. Victoria Terminus (VT) → Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus (CSMT) (Mumbai)

4. Connaught Place → Rajiv Chowk (Delhi)


5. Elphinstone Road Station → Prabhadevi Station (Mumbai)


Universities and Educational Institutions


1. Delhi College → Zakir Husain Delhi College

2. Queen Mary’s College → Maharani College (Jaipur)


Parks & Gardens
1. Victoria Park → Lohia Park (Lucknow)

2. Cubbon Park → Sri Chamarajendra Park (Bengaluru)

Roads and Avenues

1. Curzon Road → Kasturba Gandhi Marg (Delhi)


2. King’s Way → Rajpath (Delhi) → Further renamed to Kartavya Path (2022)

3. Queens Road → J.C. Bose Road (Kolkata)

No one calls Connaught Place Rajiv Chowk and even Google maps India keeps the distinction.

Connaught Place (CP) is a large commercial and financial district in central Delhi. It has a circular design with inner and outer circles full of shops, restaurants, and offices.

Rajiv Chowk is the name of the Delhi Metro station located underneath Connaught Place. So when people say "Rajiv Chowk," they often mean the metro station at Connaught Place.

We should erase India Gate as it's a monument from the British for British India. The soldiers names on India Gate memorial are names of British Indian soldiers.

 

[BouncerGuy]

STAY ON TOPIC GUYS

 

[cricketjoshila]

Mughals invaded & settled down in India for good whereas British ruled for 200 years, then left.

Both were invaders one ruled for 200 years other 300 years. If timurid m

Joshilla asked why did indian muslims have affinity for muslim rulers (Mughals) but indian christians did not for christian rulers (British). My reply was that the Mughals actually settled in India, married the locals and have ancestors today in India whereas the British kept to themselves and eventually left India. No lineage. Or very few like anglo-indians. I wonder what anglo-indians of today think of the British Raj.

Shashi Tharoor made this argument when asked by someone.

Mughals married either into their own family or into a Rajput royal family they had military alliance with. Political marriages.

They continued their timurid culture. Their court and language of conversation in the family remained Farsi.

They showed no respect or acceptance to the indigenous people their culture or religion.


They oppressed the local hindu population.

Mughals also killed a number of Sikh Gurus.

Their royal titles called them Ghazi. You know what it means?

Where would these Mughals go? They didn't have a place to return to. Babur was driven out of Ferghana by his relatives. They had lost Kabul. British had london and UK to return to.

 

[Kriketer]

Correct.

Before Mughals and other Islamic empires, Indian subcontinent was quite irrelevant and boring. It was divided into small kingdoms. There was nothing called India.

Yet you won't hear a word on it from our neighbours. Funny when you read up history of subcontinent before Islam, it just seems all disoriented and bloodied with these little kingdoms attacking each other. Their history is quite barbaric yet they love foolishly portraying hinsa-pasand yoga-tree hugger deep breathing all jolly sholly peace loving image before Muslims. Moghuls united subcontinent, brought enormous global trade, built infrastructure in dust bowl boring barren lands, and gave Hindus rozi-rooti and actually brought lasting peace in the region, how else do you think they would be 1.5 billion Hindus now if it was any other way, defenseless weak malnourished people could have easily been converted by swords, if Muslim leaders wanted that way.

Ahsan faroomsh people, Moghuls and Muslim leaders of the past have given Indians an identity or else they would only be known for hunger, malnourishment, and poverty.... went back to it after Moghuls it seems

 

[Kriketer]

If we were weak we would have converted. We were not. We kept fighting to keep our religion and culture. Those who were weak converted.

Make peace with the fact that such invaders can be glorified in Pakistan and not India and pakistanis will be able to do nothing when the names of these invaders are erased.

Pakistanis need to mind their own business and tackle problems like perennial begging around the world, terrorism, extremism, no toilets, crashing economy, public crushed under army boots etc etc and not advise others.

Its laughable when pakistanis talk about minority rights. Go look at pakistan.

We will keep erasing symbols of glorification of these tyrants in our country and there's nothing you or your country can do about it.

Changing Mumbai to Aurangzebad is a better suggestion, but sure go ahead change them to Rakeshabad or Gobarabad. That's the only way you could avenge, the fact will remain your generations were ruled by Muslims, you can't change history books no matter how much you Hindutva cry about Muslims. Time and time again you keep proving you are becoming a toxic ill society for a minority religion which no surprise could lead to another country getting carved out of India by the 240 million. Perhaps changing Mumbai to a lovely city name like Aurangzebad could happen then

 

[amax]

I am yet to hear any reasonable response from anyone on why the names should not be changed?

Muslims didnt wanted to live in India along with Hindus. So why should India have cities named after muslim invaders? Yeh kaisa dadagiri hai?

Will Pakistan or Bangladesh have cities named as Ashoknagar, Lakshmipur or Narayangunj? Why Dharampura in Lahore changed to Mustafabad? Similarly India has no reason to keep any of its cities named after muslims.

Pakistan didnt change any city names, three largest cultural centers of Pakistan :Multan, Lahore , Peshawer have Sanskrit names. Dharampura is known as Dharampura for all practical purposes, you tell a rickshaw driver , take me to dharampura not mustafabad.

 

[Rajdeep]

Changing Mumbai to Aurangzebad is a better suggestion, but sure go ahead change them to Rakeshabad or Gobarabad. That's the only way you could avenge, the fact will remain your generations were ruled by Muslims, you can't change history books no matter how much you Hindutva cry about Muslims. Time and time again you keep proving you are becoming a toxic ill society for a minority religion which no surprise could lead to another country getting carved out of India by the 240 million. Perhaps changing Mumbai to a lovely city name like Aurangzebad could happen then

How about changing the name Mumbai to Kasababad?

 

[Vikram1989]

How about changing the name Mumbai to Kasababad?

Or Abbottabad to Obamabad

 

[cricketjoshila]

Changing Mumbai to Aurangzebad is a better suggestion, but sure go ahead change them to Rakeshabad or Gobarabad. That's the only way you could avenge, the fact will remain your generations were ruled by Muslims, you can't change history books no matter how much you Hindutva cry about Muslims. Time and time again you keep proving you are becoming a toxic ill society for a minority religion which no surprise could lead to another country getting carved out of India by the 240 million. Perhaps changing Mumbai to a lovely city name like Aurangzebad could happen then

There's no British to give anyone a new country. Anyone who wishes to carve a new country will get DANDA. While you can dream and cry and whine here.

Spain and Greece were once ruled by the same tyrannical Invaders, once they threw them out they removed every symbol glorifying them.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Yet you won't hear a word on it from our neighbours. Funny when you read up history of subcontinent before Islam, it just seems all disoriented and bloodied with these little kingdoms attacking each other. Their history is quite barbaric yet they love foolishly portraying hinsa-pasand yoga-tree hugger deep breathing all jolly sholly peace loving image before Muslims. Moghuls united subcontinent, brought enormous global trade, built infrastructure in dust bowl boring barren lands, and gave Hindus rozi-rooti and actually brought lasting peace in the region, how else do you think they would be 1.5 billion Hindus now if it was any other way, defenseless weak malnourished people could have easily been converted by swords, if Muslim leaders wanted that way.

Ahsan faroomsh people, Moghuls and Muslim leaders of the past have given Indians an identity or else they would only be known for hunger, malnourishment, and poverty.... went back to it after Moghuls it seems

People here were trading with Europe long before any Muslim invader put his foot here.

Mauryans had united the subcontinent long before any Muslim was born.

Muslim invaders came to loot a rich land from their central Asian and arab barren lands.

Muslim rulers tried their best. But just like they couldn't convert all the greeks or Spanish or Jews, they couldn't convert all the Indians.

The weak malnourished people converted and now try to steal achievement of those invaders as their own.

 

[Hitman]

Changing Mumbai to Aurangzebad is a better suggestion, but sure go ahead change them to Rakeshabad or Gobarabad. That's the only way you could avenge, the fact will remain your generations were ruled by Muslims, you can't change history books no matter how much you Hindutva cry about Muslims. Time and time again you keep proving you are becoming a toxic ill society for a minority religion which no surprise could lead to another country getting carved out of India by the 240 million. Perhaps changing Mumbai to a lovely city name like Aurangzebad could happen then

LOL, if only you could do something for those subhumans in Palestine instead of crying like a baby here.

 

[Kriketer]

How about changing the name Mumbai to Kasababad?

You mean the one sent by RAW? Might as well change it to Rawabad, or name it after Modi.... Butcherabad.

In all seriousness, Aurangzeb contributed a lot in development of what is today India, naming Mumbai to Aurangzebad will pay great tributes to a great leader of Maha Bharat history

 

[Rajdeep]

You mean the one sent by RAW? Might as well change it to Rawabad, or name it after Modi.... Butcherabad.

In all seriousness, Aurangzeb contributed a lot in development of what is today India, naming Mumbai to Aurangzebad will pay great tributes to a great leader of Maha Bharat history

In all seriousness, Israel is contributing a lot in the development of the historic land of Palestine as well. Giving the entire land to Israelis will pay great tribute.

 

[Rajdeep]

Btw @Kriketer , if RAW send Kasab to Mumbai, who send Osama Bin Laden to Abbotabad?

 

[Kriketer]

There's no British to give anyone a new country. Anyone who wishes to carve a new country will get DANDA. While you can dream and cry and whine here.

Spain and Greece were once ruled by the same tyrannical Invaders, once they threw them out they removed every symbol glorifying them.

Those 240 million are far well capable of providing danda in response, they have been getting it among Hindutva for a long while anyways so it's been all under

LOL, if only you could do something for those subhumans in Palestine instead of crying like a baby here.

Aah Sanghi at their usual, cheering for thousands of children getting murdered and calling them subhuman, why are we not surprised.

Looks like I have hit some Sanghi nerves here by reminding them of their great beloved leader named Aurangzeb

 

[Hitman]

Those 240 million are far well capable of providing danda in response, they have been getting it among Hindutva for a long while anyways so it's been all under

Aah Sanghi at their usual, cheering for thousands of children getting murdered and calling them subhuman, why are we not surprised.

Looks like I have hit some Sanghi nerves here by reminding them of their great beloved leader named Aurangzeb

Aurangzeb is past, Benjamin Netanyahu is present.

 

[Kriketer]

In all seriousness, Israel is contributing a lot in the development of the historic land of Palestine as well. Giving the entire land to Israelis will pay great tribute.

You mean giving to European colonziers? Palestinain Jews were living peacefully before genocidal Europeans showed up. We get that Sanghi loved their European lords beating the day light out of their ancestors and are forever destined to boot lick white skins becsuse of their deeply rooted inferiority complex, but doesn't mean other people support colonial projects. It is rather comical how Sanghi quickly jump to mocking Palestinain children getting bombed to defend any of their take. Not sure why reminding you of your own great beloved leader Aurangzeb make you bring up other events? Let's stick to India and it's leaders who ruled Sanghi bhakts ancestors for generations

 

[Kriketer]

Aurangzeb is past, Benjamin Netanyahu is present.

Yes of them is a wanted criminal by International Criminal Court for committing genocide and war crimes and will get arrested if he steps foot in majority of countries. Even India is inclined to uphold that

 

[Hitman]

Yes of them is a wanted criminal by International Criminal Court for committing genocide and war crimes and will get arrested if he steps foot in majority of countries. Even India is inclined to uphold that

He doesn't need to step foot in other countries. He is perfectly capable of squashing pests and insects from his home like he has been doing so.

 

[Rajdeep]

You mean giving to European colonziers? Palestinain Jews were living peacefully before genocidal Europeans showed up. We get that Sanghi loved their European lords beating the day light out of their ancestors and are forever destined to boot lick white skins becsuse of their deeply rooted inferiority complex, but doesn't mean other people support colonial projects. It is rather comical how Sanghi quickly jump to mocking Palestinain children getting bombed to defend any of their take. Not sure why reminding you of your own great beloved leader Aurangzeb make you bring up other events? Let's stick to India and it's leaders who ruled Sanghi bhakts ancestors for generations

Delhi Sultanates, Taimurs, Mughals and Aurangazeb had done to India & Hindus 10 times worse than what Israel is doing in Palestine. However, you are shedding crocodile tear for Palestine and at the same time praising Aurangazeb is the hypocrisy for everyone to be seen. Then again, wider world is used to it by now...so nothing surprising. You guys will support any barbarity and cruelity as long as they are muslims.

BTW, I have already posted about my thoughts of Israel's occupation of Palestine...go and read it. Unlike you, i have a kind heart and not hypocrite.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Those 240 million are far well capable of providing danda in response, they have been getting it among Hindutva for a long while anyways so it's been all under

Aah Sanghi at their usual, cheering for thousands of children getting murdered and calling them subhuman, why are we not surprised.

Looks like I have hit some Sanghi nerves here by reminding them of their great beloved leader named Aurangzeb

Anyone trying to divide the lesson will get chittrofied. Ask the terrorists in Kashmir or the Khalistanis.

That's how terrorists are treated.

Look how Myanmar treated the armed revolt in Arakan.

 

[Kriketer]

People here were trading with Europe long before any Muslim invader put his foot here.

Mauryans had united the subcontinent long before any Muslim was born.

Muslim invaders came to loot a rich land from their central Asian and arab barren lands.

Muslim rulers tried their best. But just like they couldn't convert all the greeks or Spanish or Jews, they couldn't convert all the Indians.

The weak malnourished people converted and now try to steal achievement of those invaders as their own.

You had to go through iron age to make any sort of a weak unity refrence, your history before Moghuls remains weak full of blood bath. Majority of Muslim rulers were of the same region, but that is a fact that Sanghis can't make peace with. Their ancestors just adopted a new religion which made more sense to them, why is that unacceptable to Sanghis? Again if Moghuls wanted Hindus to convert by force then India would be a Muslim country now.

Hindus live peacefully in many Muslim countries, and still line up for visas to Muslim counties in millions. Muslim don't hate you neither give two hoots about Hindu history of their ancestors, but same can't be said about Sanghi Hindudva who keep crying over their historical beloved prosperous influential Moghul leaders and Muslims around them. Get a hold of your islamophobia

 

[cricketjoshila]

Yes of them is a wanted criminal by International Criminal Court for committing genocide and war crimes and will get arrested if he steps foot in majority of countries. Even India is inclined to uphold that

India isn't even a signatory to this court. Netanyahu was in US recently. No one arrested him. No one will arrest him either.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I am yet to hear any reasonable response from anyone on why the names should not be changed?

Muslims didnt wanted to live in India along with Hindus. So why should India have cities named after muslim invaders? Yeh kaisa dadagiri hai?

Will Pakistan or Bangladesh have cities named as Ashoknagar, Lakshmipur or Narayangunj? Why Dharampura in Lahore changed to Mustafabad? Similarly India has no reason to keep any of its cities named after muslims.

You have heard plenty, just pretended not to see them.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Pakistan didnt change any city names, three largest cultural centers of Pakistan :Multan, Lahore , Peshawer have Sanskrit names. Dharampura is known as Dharampura for all practical purposes, you tell a rickshaw driver , take me to dharampura not mustafabad.

Here's another post which our Indian posters are pretending to have missed.

 

[Rajdeep]

You have heard plenty, just pretended not to see them.

Let me hear it from you then. Why should India have cities named after muslims when muslims did not wanted to live in India and demanded (and got) a separate country?

Hope you will answer it and not run away again saying thread distraction.

 

[Rajdeep]

@Kianig89

 

[cricketjoshila]

You had to go through iron age to make any sort of a weak unity refrence, your history before Moghuls remains weak full of blood bath. Majority of Muslim rulers were of the same region, but that is a fact that Sanghis can't make peace with. Their ancestors just adopted a new religion which made more sense to them, why is that unacceptable to Sanghis? Again if Moghuls wanted Hindus to convert by force then India would be a Muslim country now.

Hindus live peacefully in many Muslim countries, and still line up for visas to Muslim counties in millions. Muslim don't hate you neither give two hoots about Hindu history of their ancestors, but same can't be said about Sanghi Hindudva who keep crying over their historical beloved prosperous influential Moghul leaders and Muslims around them. Get a hold of your islamophobia

What weak? Mauryans had a larger empire than Mughals.

The Guptas are another example.

History is weak? You mean when India was making progress in various scientific discoveries, trading with Europe, building cities?

Majority of Muslim rulers were foreigners. Converted one barely got any important position unless they were already holding some kind of political influence. Why don't you name these indigenous muslim rulers.

Mughals tried. But Hindus kept fighting back. Not everyone falls for the sword or money.

Those muslim countries don't have issues with what we rename in India or where we build temples. Pakistanis seem to have issues.

Pakistanis hate Hindus and you are no different. Tyrants and their symbols will be erased. Our temples will be reconstructed and all you will do is post and whine about it on PP.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Let me hear it from you then. Why should India have cities named after muslims when muslims did not wanted to live in India and demanded (and got) a separate country?

Hope you will answer it and not run away again saying thread distraction.

If Muslims didn't want to live in India, how come there are still as many there as in Pakistan?

 

[cricketjoshila]

If Muslims didn't want to live in India, how come there are still as many there as in Pakistan?

Because we made ourselves a secular nation.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Because we made ourselves a secular nation.

So then you should have replied to your compatriot @Rajdeep instead of quoting me. He was the one who insisted "muslims did not wanted to live in India".

Please don't quote me in order to spread propaganda.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Because we made ourselves a secular nation.

Kaptaan saab has unintentionally started appreciating India .
The end days are here.

 

[Rajdeep]

So then you should have replied to your compatriot @Rajdeep instead of quoting me. He was the one who insisted "muslims did not wanted to live in India".

Please don't quote me in order to spread propaganda.

Muslims wanted a separate country..it is a fact. Many Muslims chose to stay back in India for multiple reasons, historic land, lived all their lives here etc. However, the fact that India took the route of secularism, they never felt alienated as minorities. But IMO there should not be any city named with muslim names as they initially didnt wanted to stay with India and caved out the country.

 

[cricketjoshila]

So then you should have replied to your compatriot @Rajdeep instead of quoting me. He was the one who insisted "muslims did not wanted to live in India".

Please don't quote me in order to spread propaganda.

They didn't. But many didn't leave because Pakistan's map didn't turn out what muslim league projected it to be.

Once India became secular, they didn't want to leave.

Here is Sardar Patels famous speech of 1948 calling out the hypocrisy of certain section of muslims.

@Rajdeep

Listen to that speech.

 

[Hitman]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1903433781685649913

 

[Kriketer]

What weak? Mauryans had a larger empire than Mughals.

The Guptas are another example.

History is weak? You mean when India was making progress in various scientific discoveries, trading with Europe, building cities?

Majority of Muslim rulers were foreigners. Converted one barely got any important position unless they were already holding some kind of political influence. Why don't you name these indigenous muslim rulers.

Mughals tried. But Hindus kept fighting back. Not everyone falls for the sword or money.

Those muslim countries don't have issues with what we rename in India or where we build temples. Pakistanis seem to have issues.

Pakistanis hate Hindus and you are no different. Tyrants and their symbols will be erased. Our temples will be reconstructed and all you will do is post and whine about it on PP.

No, that's only in your sanghi mindset that Pakistanis hate Hindus, that gibberish is fed to you through your government, media and bollywood so no surprise. As for temple yes you should build them wherever you like as long as you are not destroying minorities places to build on top of them.

Tyrant is what you have as a facist Hindudva government and it's farigh Sanghis obsessing over avenging their ancestors who lived a good happy life under Muslim rulers. So are you going to tear down Taj Mahal? India is literally know for Taj Mahal and cow dung, guess which ones associated with whom....

 

[HalBass9]

What weak? Mauryans had a larger empire than Mughals.

The Guptas are another example.

History is weak? You mean when India was making progress in various scientific discoveries, trading with Europe, building cities?

Majority of Muslim rulers were foreigners. Converted one barely got any important position unless they were already holding some kind of political influence. Why don't you name these indigenous muslim rulers.

Mughals tried. But Hindus kept fighting back. Not everyone falls for the sword or money.

Those muslim countries don't have issues with what we rename in India or where we build temples. Pakistanis seem to have issues.

Pakistanis hate Hindus and you are no different. Tyrants and their symbols will be erased. Our temples will be reconstructed and all you will do is post and whine about it on PP.

Pakistanis rightfully oppose Hindutva extremists, your frustration comes from that truth, so you twist the narrative to rally other Hindus around your own indoctrinated hate. Try embracing Hinduism instead of Hindutva, and you might finally realize that no one hates you for being Hindu.

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Pakistanis rightfully oppose Hindutva extremists, your frustration comes from that truth, so you twist the narrative to rally other Hindus around your own indoctrinated hate. Try embracing Hinduism instead of Hindutva, and you might finally realize that no one hates you for being Hindu.

Why are you bothered about what happens in the Indian territory?
This inherent desire to butt into other regions is no difference than the Akhand Bharat desires of the Hindutva brigade.
Your points are an exact mirror image of the thing you hate the most. Pure bigotry and expansionist desire to subdue others.
Try embracing Islam instead of fanatic Islamist ideology, you might realize that no one hates you for being a Muslim.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

They didn't. But many didn't leave because Pakistan's map didn't turn out what muslim league projected it to be.

Once India became secular, they didn't want to leave.

Here is Sardar Patels famous speech of 1948 calling out the hypocrisy of certain section of muslims.

@Rajdeep

Listen to that speech.

That doesn't even make sense. Muslims wanted to leave India but they didn't because they found out afterwards that Pakistan did not turn out how they expected? I think you should maybe stay out of this and stop trying to make your propaganda fit reality. Let people explain their own words instead coming up with illogical fantasy.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Muslims wanted a separate country..it is a fact. Many Muslims chose to stay back in India for multiple reasons, historic land, lived all their lives here etc. However, the fact that India took the route of secularism, they never felt alienated as minorities. But IMO there should not be any city named with muslim names as they initially didnt wanted to stay with India and caved out the country.

But you said Muslims didn't want to live in India. Those were your exact words, and yet half of Muslims clearly did, and chose to stay there, much to your dismay I expect. So if you don't want any cities with Muslim names, fine you can argue your case. Just don't base it on false premise which can easily be disproved.

 

[Rajdeep]

But you said Muslims didn't want to live in India. Those were your exact words, and yet half of Muslims clearly did, and chose to stay there, much to your dismay I expect. So if you don't want any cities with Muslim names, fine you can argue your case. Just don't base it on false premise which can easily be disproved.

Muslims didnt wanted to live with Hindu majority India post independence and demanded a separate country. It is a fact. Yes many muslims stayed back in India just like how many Hindus stayed back in Pak/BD for reasons explained previously. However that doesn't change the fact that people from only one faith didnt wanted to co-exist with others and demanded a split.

 

[cricketjoshila]

That doesn't even make sense. Muslims wanted to leave India but they didn't because they found out afterwards that Pakistan did not turn out how they expected? I think you should maybe stay out of this and stop trying to make your propaganda fit reality. Let people explain their own words instead coming up with illogical fantasy.

Have you ever seen what map of pakistan Muslim league had? Guess not.

Muslim league wanted entire Bengal and parts of Assam. They also laid claim to parts of western UP. All this was denied. Muslims from many of these areas didn't migrate fully.

May be you should read history from neutral sources and not learn it from pakistani books.

 

[Rajdeep]

Have you ever seen what map of pakistan Muslim league had? Guess not.

Muslim league wanted entire Bengal and parts of Assam. They also laid claim to parts of western UP. All this was denied. Muslims from many of these areas didn't migrate fully.

May be you should read history from neutral sources and not learn it from pakistani books.

I wonder how western UP in Pakistan would have worked. The state of UP is in central India. So had Muslim league got their way, we would be having a part of India in the middle of the country as Pakistan with international borders?

 

[guard]

I am yet to hear any reasonable response from anyone on why the names should not be changed?

Muslims didnt wanted to live in India along with Hindus. So why should India have cities named after muslim invaders? Yeh kaisa dadagiri hai?

Will Pakistan or Bangladesh have cities named as Ashoknagar, Lakshmipur or Narayangunj? Why Dharampura in Lahore changed to Mustafabad? Similarly India has no reason to keep any of its cities named after muslims.

Its your country (majority hindu) so.. why ask others (non indian-non hindu).

Implement what you want.. name them Britney Spears avenue if you feel affinity to that.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Muslims didnt wanted to live with Hindu majority India post independence and demanded a separate country. It is a fact. Yes many muslims stayed back in India just like how many Hindus stayed back in Pak/BD for reasons explained previously. However that doesn't change the fact that people from only one faith didnt wanted to co-exist with others and demanded a split.

You need to stop presenting your warped viewpoints as facts. It is not a fact that only one faith didn't want to co-exist with others. How could you even prove such a monumental claim?

 

[guard]

You need to stop presenting your warped viewpoints as facts. It is not a fact that only one faith didn't want to co-exist with others. How could you even prove such a monumental claim?

The fact that some individuals call muslims animals should tell you why the events that happened, happened.

It was tragic nonetheless.

 

[Rajdeep]

You need to stop presenting your warped viewpoints as facts. It is not a fact that only one faith didn't want to co-exist with others. How could you even prove such a monumental claim?

With the fact that only Muslims wanted a separate country based on religion. Not Christians, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs.

Pakistan was caved out of India because muslims did not wanted to live in Hindu Majority India and that was the viewpoint of Jinnah. You asking such silly questions is making me surprised.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The fact that some individuals call muslims animals should tell you why the events that happened, happened.

It was tragic nonetheless.

The stupid part is that I have already acknowledged that there might well be a case for renaming cities, but we aren't even getting to the case for doing so because these guys are presenting ridiculous scenarios where one side (Hindus) are presented as good, and the other side (Muslims) are presented as evil.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

With the fact that only Muslims wanted a separate country based on religion. Not Christians, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs.

Pakistan was caved out of India because muslims did not wanted to live in Hindu Majority India and that was the viewpoint of Jinnah. You asking such silly questions is making me surprised.

Then why don't you say Muslims wanted a separate country based on religion rather than people from only one faith didnt wanted to co-exist with others.

Those are not the same things and you are changing words and changing meanings with them. You are doing that to build a case built on your own interpretation which reflects your bias.

 

[Rajdeep]

Then why don't you say Muslims wanted a separate country based on religion rather than people from only one faith didnt wanted to co-exist with others.

Those are not the same things and you are changing words and changing meanings with them. You are doing that to build a case built on your own interpretation which reflects your bias.

Its the same thing for me. Why do you think only Muslims wanted a seperate country and not others? It is clear that they didn't wanted to live with hindu majority India as they couldnt co exist. Lets hear your analogy...why only Muslims wanted a different country?