On this day, 6th January : Indira Gandhi's body-guards convicted of her murder are executed

[MenInG]

Indira Gandhi's role in Blue Star is well known and so is her assassination by the two men

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Blue_Star

Was she justified in carrying out this operation? Was there no other way to resolve this?

 

[MenInG]

A lot of Pakistanis felt that justice had been served when Indira was assassinated.

 

[indipper]

Indian version of Mumtaz Qadri?

 

[GBK_Fan]

A lot of Pakistanis felt that justice had been served when Indira was assassinated.

Justice is never served by assassinations. What she did was debatable and a lot of non Khalistani Sikhs support her actions.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

She has often been described as India's version of Margaret Thatcher AKA the iron lady. How is she viewed by today's Indians?

 

[Madplayer]

Justice is never served by assassinations. What she did was debatable and a lot of non Khalistani Sikhs support her actions.

Majority of non-Khalistani sikhs despise her. Lets not kid ourselves here, she was an autocratic leader who didnt do justice to the legacy of her father. Her infamous 'forced sterilization programme' aimed at poor Indian women should tell you what kind of a leader she was.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Majority of non-Khalistani sikhs despise her. Lets not kid ourselves here, she was an autocratic leader who didnt do justice to the legacy of her father. Her infamous 'forced sterilization programme' aimed at poor Indian women should tell you what kind of a leader she was.

The worst thing to happen to India post independence, this indira ghandi. But bhakts worship her as she was instrumental in 1971. My only regret is that she got her due too late. Kissinger was right about her.

 

[GBK_Fan]

Majority of non-Khalistani sikhs despise her. Lets not kid ourselves here, she was an autocratic leader who didnt do justice to the legacy of her father. Her infamous 'forced sterilization programme' aimed at poor Indian women should tell you what kind of a leader she was.

My quote was in the context of operation Blue star.

 

[TM Riddle]

Majority of non-Khalistani sikhs despise her. Lets not kid ourselves here, she was an autocratic leader who didnt do justice to the legacy of her father. Her infamous 'forced sterilization programme' aimed at poor Indian women should tell you what kind of a leader she was.

I agree with you there.She was a despot who had no regards for the Constitution and tried to subvert it for her personal gains. The reason for her popularity is primarily due to India's thumping win in 71 for which imo she gets a lot of undeserved credit while real heroes like General Sagat Singh Rathore lay forgotten.
The black phase of India's history after independence happened under her reign when she declared the emergency in 1975.
And Sikhs have every right to despise her. Invading their most sacred religious site with tanks and that too on an auspicious day when the number of pilgrims were higher than usual is something which can never be justified no matter how you look at it.

 

[TM Riddle]

The worst thing to happen to India post independence, this indira ghandi. But bhakts worship her as she was instrumental in 1971. My only regret is that she got her due too late. Kissinger was right about her.

Indian army won us the day and not her.
We were lucky to have leaders such as Field Marshall Sam Manekshaw at helm.

 

[Gabbar Singh]

There were a lot of things Gandhi should have been punished for however I'd rather she wasn't killed in the manner she was. Because of her assassination 1000s of innocent people were killed by Congress party goons on the streets of Delhi and elsewhere. They should have just let natural justice take care of Gandhi.

 

[LastManstanding]

Indian army won us the day and not her.
We were lucky to have leaders such as Field Marshall Sam Manekshaw at helm.

She had the foresight to sign the indo-soviet treaty which prevented US and China from entering the war and so deserves credit for the victory.

 

[CricketCartoons]

She had the foresight to sign the indo-soviet treaty which prevented US and China from entering the war and so deserves credit for the victory.

India was in the lap of the soviets thanks to pandit nehru. But agree, she had foresight about her death after her dastardly action against the Sikhs.

 

[TM Riddle]

She had the foresight to sign the indo-soviet treaty which prevented US and China from entering the war and so deserves credit for the victory.

US administration under Nixon and Kissinger was anti India as used to be the case back then and having fought a war with China less than a decade before , we exhausted almost all our options when it came to asking for any of Major powers' help and therefore She did what she had to i.e aligning India with USSR. Doesn't require a rocket science to figure that out. Any sane leader would have done that.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

She had the foresight to sign the indo-soviet treaty which prevented US and China from entering the war and so deserves credit for the victory.

So it seems that her most notable service to the nation was to win a war against a far smaller opponent. Couldn't any leader have achieved this? I find it surprising that even to this day Indians view a leader through a Pakistan focus lens.

 

[LastManstanding]

So it seems that her most notable service to the nation was to win a war against a far smaller opponent. Couldn't any leader have achieved this? I find it surprising that even to this day Indians view a leader through a Pakistan focus lens.

As usual you missed the point or chose to ignore it. Pakistan wasn't the main problem but US and China were. The treaty with USSR ensured both the countries stayed out of the 71 war else who knows what parts of the country would we have lost to Chinese.

 

[JaDed]

She was a terrible leader, her disrespect for the constitution and democracy is what landed us leaders like Lalu,Mulayam etc and insurgency.

She also set the tone for agitation politics,where she should had just resigned fought the case and would had surely still won,irrespective she shouldn't had been killed in that way.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

As usual you missed the point or chose to ignore it. Pakistan wasn't the main problem but US and China were. The treaty with USSR ensured both the countries stayed out of the 71 war else who knows what parts of the country would we have lost to Chinese.

This seems like a straw man argument, there was never any real chance that the US or China was going to take part in an India/Pakistan war, so as far as Gandhi's reputation resting on '71, that war was with Pakistan. Hence the very obvious conclusion that Indians view her success mostly through a war with Pakistan.

 

[TM Riddle]

This seems like a straw man argument, there was never any real chance that the US or China was going to take part in an India/Pakistan war, so as far as Gandhi's reputation resting on '71, that war was with Pakistan. Hence the very obvious conclusion that Indians view her success mostly through a war with Pakistan.

Captain you are a good poster but it's amply clear that you have very limited knowledge when it comes to subcontinental history and how things went around back then. The said conflict happened at the peak of cold war and US would have definitely intervened had it not for possible Russian backlash. Heck they even stationed their seventh fleet near the Arabian sea to check Indian Navy and were soon to be joined by the British. It was only after when USSR sent her nuclear armed fleet to counter it that Americans stepped back.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Captain you are a good poster but it's amply clear that you have very limited knowledge when it comes to subcontinental history and how things went around back then. The said conflict happened at the peak of cold war and US would have definitely intervened had it not for possible Russian backlash. Heck they even stationed their seventh fleet near the Arabian sea to check Indian Navy and were soon to be joined by the British. It was only after when USSR sent her nuclear armed fleet to counter it that Americans stepped back.

If you say so. My understanding is that it was the period of the cold war for a reason. The war remained cold because Russia and the US never actually got involved in any wars, probably they allowed the more dumber nations to do the fighting on their behalf. You have to admire the Americans though, even half a world away they were getting your region jumping through hoops just in case.

 

[TM Riddle]

If you say so. My understanding is that it was the period of the cold war for a reason. The war remained cold because Russia and the US never actually got involved in any wars, probably they allowed the more dumber nations to do the fighting on their behalf. You have to admire the Americans though, even half a world away they were getting your region jumping through hoops just in case.

Its easy to laugh at and dismiss all of that since we have the benefit of retrospect now but at that time it was a different ball game altogether. Tensions used to be really high with threat of an all out nuclear war looming over the world.

 

[Madplayer]

Captain you are a good poster but it's amply clear that you have very limited knowledge when it comes to subcontinental history and how things went around back then. The said conflict happened at the peak of cold war and US would have definitely intervened had it not for possible Russian backlash. Heck they even stationed their seventh fleet near the Arabian sea to check Indian Navy and were soon to be joined by the British. It was only after when USSR sent her nuclear armed fleet to counter it that Americans stepped back.

1971 wasnt strictly the "peak" of cold war to be fair. On the contrary it was during the period of détente when USA and USSR had started dialogue and were less hostile towards each other.

The USA's fleet could have been there due to the fact that that in the same year (1971) Srilanka was pressing the UN to declare Indian ocean as a zone of peace, a move which was oppossed by all big powers including USA at that time.

Thirdly, USA and USSR generally didnt indulge openly in war (exceptions are there but they were weaker nations) but rather engaged in proxy wars arming one regime against another. We cant rule out the possibilty that USA would have joined the war but it was indeed unlikely.

 

[TM Riddle]

1971 wasnt strictly the "peak" of cold war to be fair. On the contrary it was during the period of détente when USA and USSR had started dialogue and were less hostile towards each other.

The USA's fleet could have been there due to the fact that that in the same year (1971) Srilanka was pressing the UN to declare Indian ocean as a zone of peace, a move which was oppossed by all big powers including USA at that time.

Thirdly, USA and USSR generally didnt indulge openly in war (exceptions are there but they were weaker nations) but rather engaged in proxy wars arming one regime against another. We cant rule out the possibilty that USA would have joined the war but it was indeed unlikely.

If India didn't have a treaty signed with USSR , they would definitely have joined the war. The treaty acted as a deterrent and Russian navy positioning it's nuclear capable fleet in the waters of Indian ocean thus encircling the seventh fleet of US didnt help matters either.
With regards to Detente , it was still at the infancy and the first major breakthrough didnt come until 1972 (a year later) when the two countries signed the SALT 1 treaty.
Besides the Detente argument is weak considering it was marred by so many setbacks for instance NATO becoming nervous at the deployment of new Russian SS 20 missiles in 1979 and thus deciding to deploy its own cruise missiles in Europe to act as a deterrent to a possible Russian attack in Western Europe , American refusal to accept SALT 2 treaty and of course the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan which further fueled the tensions.

 

[Madplayer]

If India didn't have a treaty signed with USSR , they would definitely have joined the war. The treaty acted as a deterrent and Russian navy positioning it's nuclear capable fleet in the waters of Indian ocean thus encircling the seventh fleet of US didnt help matters either.
With regards to Detente , it was still at the infancy and the first major breakthrough didnt come until 1972 (a year later) when the two countries signed the SALT 1 treaty.
Besides the Detente argument is weak considering it was marred by so many setbacks for instance NATO becoming nervous at the deployment of new Russian SS 20 missiles in 1979 and thus deciding to deploy its own cruise missiles in Europe to act as a deterrent to a possible Russian attack in Western Europe , American refusal to accept SALT 2 treaty and of course the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan which further fueled the tensions.

We can't say they would definitely have joined the war. US' foreign policy was based on pressure tactics against non-communist countries rather than all out war. The use of force was possible but unlikely against a country like India. Talking about Détene, if you look carefully at it, you will realize it was strongest in the initial stages only. This was because it had a strong back ground. The SALT 1 treaty wasnt really the first big achievement of the softening stance of USA and USSR. Infact, it was the realization after cuban missile crisis of 1962 and the dialogue process in the subsequent years about how this conflict can bring doom to both the countries, which made détente stronger in its initial phases. As the years moved forward, it weakened and led to the Second cold war peaking in the 80s and finally leading to disintegration of the USSR under Gobrachev. So the mention of what happened in 1979 is pointless here as Detente was ending that time and we are talking about 1971 anyway when Detenté was infact strong with all the leaders excited about its prospects.