How Nehru Let Us Down

[ozyjat]

“I remember many a time when our senior generals came to us, and wrote to the defence ministry saying that they wanted certain things... If we had had foresight, known exactly what would happen, we would have done something else... what India has learnt from the Chinese invasion is that in the world of today there is no place for weak nations... We have been living in an unreal world of our own creation."
Jawaharlal Nehru, Rajya Sabha, 1963

Instead of "I", Nehru used the collective "we", a clear indication of his reluctance to own up his own mistakes as a man.

"The fact of the matter is that Nehru felt a gnawing of conscience throughout this episode. He knew that the blame for the disaster was more his than that of his loyal friend [defence minister V K Krishna Menon]," says journalist and historian Durga Das.

The roots of politicisation of the army are to be found in Nehru's hatred for the man in uniform. Soon after Independence the first commander-in-chief of the Indian armed forces, General Sir Robert Lockhart, presented a paper outlining a plan for the growth of the Indian Army to Prime Minister Nehru.
Nehru's reply: "We don't need a defence plan. Our policy is non-violence. We foresee no military threats. You can scrap the army. The police are good enough to meet our security needs."
He didn't waste much time. On September 16, 1947, he directed that the army's then strength of 280,000 be brought down to 150,000. Even in fiscal 1950-51, when the Chinese threat had begun to loom large on the horizon, 50,000 army personnel were sent home as per his original plan to disband the armed forces.

For some reason, he disliked Field Marshal K M Cariappa despite his excellent leadership during the 1947-48 war that saved Kashmir. But his attempts to supersede him and make General Rajendrasinhji the first commander-in-chief of India failed when Gen Rajendrasinhji declined.

During the 1947-48 war with Pakistan in Kashmir, Nehru interfered with purely military decisions at will, which delayed the war and changed the ultimate outcome in Pakistan's favour. He developed a precedent to violate channels and levels of communications at that time. His penchant for verbal orders to the various army commanders, of which he kept no records, violated the chain of command.

Menon, along with Nehru, caused havoc in the army's working, disregarding professional opinion and advice, violating all channels and levels of communication and encouraging the same within the army hierarchy, which ended with disastrous results in the Sino-Indian conflict. Like his boss, Menon believed in giving verbal orders and disliked records.

After the infamous 'Jeep scandal' (purchase of Jeeps for the use of the army, which the army rejected on account of their poor condition, but was forced to accept since the Jeeps were already paid for), it became necessary to remove Krishna Menon, who had fixed that deal, from the post of high commissioner to the United Kingdom because of political and media pressure.
But Prime Minister Nehru rewarded him by making him Minister for Defence with Cabinet rank. This tradition has been faithfully carried forward to date by the followers of Nehru and by politicians who vehemently opposed him and the policies of the Congress party, with equal vigour. In power and out of power, political compulsions seem to demand different ethics.

It is not out of place to mention here that the government dropped the case slapped on the nondescript company that had supplied the Jeeps soon after Krishna Menon took over as defence minister.

Nehru always displayed an abject lack of sovereignty . Examples are galore, right from the time of Partition.

His refusal to accept the accession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir on September 19, 1947, when it was originally offered by Maharaja Hari Singh, a good five weeks before the invasion of his state by Pakistan. Had the accession been accepted then, the entire state would have been ours.

Later, Nehru practically surrendered our sovereignty when he invited Lord Louis Mountbatten, the governor general, to preside over and chair the meetings of his own Cabinet and the Cabinet Committee on Defence on matters regarding the accession and the military action after Pakistan invaded Jammu and Kashmir. Mountbatten, basically a servant of the British Crown, did his best to delay the decisions.

Worse, as India started winning the war and liberating parts of north Kashmir, Nehru inexplicably (most likely under the strong influence of Mountbatten and his wife, who shaped much of his thinking in those days) declared a 'ceasefire' and stopped our victorious army dead in its tracks before it could liberate the entire state. He declared the ceasefire arbitrarily, without consulting his full Cabinet, the Constituent Assembly (as Parliament was then known), his military commanders, or the maharaja/prime minister of Jammu and Kashmir.

Nehru was the architect of Article 370, with which he burdened India to placate a hurt Sheikh Abdullah.

The Chinese occupation of Tibet should have forced a reassessment of the threat to India. After they enforced their suzerainty on Tibet in 1951, the threat deserved greater attention. But when General K M Cariappa met Nehru to discuss the defence of the North East Frontier Agency, he was bluntly told to mind only Kashmir and Pakistan as his concerns for defence and leave China to the politicians and the diplomats.

Nehru's rigidity on the border issue, his insistence on Chinese withdrawal before border talks could begin, his grant of political asylum to the Dalai Lama and permission to him to establish a Tibetan government-in-exile (an act that created conditions for a future invasion of Tibet by India or outside powers through India to restore the Dalai Lama's rule, if desired), the hostile Indian press on the question of the occupation of Tibet, and Nehru's increasingly aggressive statements on the border made the Chinese believe he had become a tool in the hands of the Anglo-American imperialists.

India, under Nehru, was an antithesis of most of the theories he applied in governance. Taking advantage of the British imperial legacy when it suited us while otherwise denouncing it roundly, we managed to lose all the respect China had for us, to be replaced by contempt. Which made it easier for them to ambush and capture or kill our patrols and take punitive action against us in 1962.

[raj2rif]

Dear Mr. Sangwan,

Thanks for a nice post. Mr. Nehru's vision of the India was probably too outdated in the era of cold war that followed after seond world war. I don't have much knowledge about the credentials of Mr. Krishna Menon, but have heard that he was probably the most intelligent member of his cabinet. How he interfered with the defense forces may be debatable. If he and Nehru were trying to force their will on the defense forces then it raises many questions on the credibility of the army/defense cheifs during his time. The army Chief was if I am not wrong 4th or 5th in heirarchy during that time. One objection to the interference by then Chief probably would have settled the issue. McArthur walked out from FDR's meeting denouncing the president's decision to cut defense expenditure during the great depression in USA. McArthur clearly visualized the problems associated with the rise of Hitler in 30's and thus gave his plan to the president to be ready for next was as far back as 1933-34. I am sure if our generals then had carried out detailed strategic study of Chinese invasion of Tibet in 50's, they would have projected the case for defense of NEFA.
I am not arguing that Nehru was right in his governance. It may be easy for us to analyze and find faults with it at this time since the history is now known to us. It may have been difficult for some one to project future. But than a person leading a big nation should have a foresight and vision to visualise such situations.
I don't know whether or not our threat perception is identified even now. In most cases we are too engrossed with Pakistan and have ignored the Chinese front for a long time. There are still areas which needs to be developed in case we have to fight any future war in that area. With strategic advantage clearly in our favor purely on the consideration of terrain, with careful planning and meticulous execution we can give China run for her money.
It is a good topic raised and I hope many members will give their valuable views on this topic. Blaming Nehru alone would not be correct. In his cabinet, if he made wrong decision or decisions without consulting the cabinet, then atleast one minister should have objected. Was it a case of loyalty to Congress first and nation later? If that was the case they were not the right people to govern us. As far as I know, only one Congress leader ever objected to Nehru face to face and he was none other than our own Ch. Charan Singh I think in 1959 Congress annual meeting.

[rkumar]

...........I don't know whether or not our threat perception is identified even now. In most cases we are too engrossed with Pakistan and have ignored the Chinese front for a long time. There are still areas which needs to be developed in case we have to fight any future war in that area. With strategic advantage clearly in our favor purely on the consideration of terrain, with careful planning and meticulous execution we can give China run for her money.
...........

I fully agree with you Tavathia Sahab on this point. India should focus more on China and ofcourse the Paksitani export of terrorism to India. I will always be suspicious of Pakistan and China. I raise this issue at every possible plateform. I am sure Americans will now sensitise us at least on China front.

RK^2

[ozyjat]

Dear Col Tavathia,
Mention not.
I agree with what you are saying.To upset nehru in those days was to upset the vote bank.Our Generals did try to raise their voice but they were told off ever single time they tried to do so.Actually they never got any backup from the politicians.The example of one firepower demonstration in 1956 arranged by none other than General B M Kaul stands out.

"The firepower demonstration went off admirably well. It had to; we had practised it for months. A Chinese general who was sitting next to General B M Kaul found it a bit too difficult to swallow and asked General Kaul whether it would be possible to achieve in actual battle conditions, the kind of concentration of fire then observed during the demonstration.

"Instead of answering that question directly, General Kaul went into the mechanics of strategy and tactics vis-Ã*-vis firepower concentration. The Chinese military delegation on their return journey said to the Burmese in Rangoon that the senior officers of the Indian Army were 'chair-borne' soldiers," says Captain C L Datta, who was ADC to Presidents Rajendra Prasad and S Radhakrishnan, in his book With Two Presidents.

When Gen Kaul evacuated his forces from NEFA in 1962, the opposing Chinese general was the same one who had sat next to him during the demonstration and asked him that question!
So basically there was no one eligible enough to challenge Nehru and his decisions.


Dear Mr. Sangwan,

Thanks for a nice post. Mr. Nehru's vision of the India was probably too outdated in the era of cold war that followed after seond world war. I don't have much knowledge about the credentials of Mr. Krishna Menon, but have heard that he was probably the most intelligent member of his cabinet. How he interfered with the defense forces may be debatable. If he and Nehru were trying to force their will on the defense forces then it raises many questions on the credibility of the army/defense cheifs during his time. The army Chief was if I am not wrong 4th or 5th in heirarchy during that time. One objection to the interference by then Chief probably would have settled the issue.

[ishwarlamba]

Dear Deep,
it looks u are reading the book on the great Chankey. Read it full, many things will be clear.
Regards
Ishwar Lamba

[ozyjat]

Namaskar Uncle Ji,

Yes you are right.Actually the book is pretty enthralling.A lot to learn for young brains like myself.

Best regards


Dear Deep,
it looks u are reading the book on the great Chanakya. Read it full, many things will be clear.
Regards
Ishwar Lamba

[gaganjat]

Nathu Ram Godse jaldi mar gaya.

[rkumar]

Nathu Ram Godse jaldi mar gaya.

hahhaaha..kyoonki..aatankwadi jiada din zinda nahi rehte...

RK^2

[gaganjat]

hahhaaha..kyoonki..aatankwadi jiada din zinda nahi rehte...

RK^2


hahahaha..kai baar...aatankwadi thode dino me hi sare kaam kar jate hai....

GD^2

Sorry kaka sab majak mae likh raha hu

[jitender_singh]

Hi,

I don't think Nathu Ram Godse was a Terrorist.

Regards
Jitender

[rkumar]

Hi,

I don't think Nathu Ram Godse was a Terrorist.

Regards
Jitender

He was surely a Prototype terrorist, guided by fanatic ideology to kill some one.

RK^2

[jitender_singh]

Before came to conclusion , see who he killed and why he killed ( after saw a mass massacre of hindus during partition )..


He was surely a Prototype terrorist, guided by fanatic ideology to kill some one.

RK^2

[rkumar]

Before came to conclusion , see who he killed and why he killed ( after saw a mass massacre of hindus during partition )..

Umm..every terrorists has similar justification for killings..To me he was a fanatic terrorist like all those who are killing innocent people these days also..

RK^2

[dhruvdahiya]

From that standard all freedom fighters were also terrorists. Godse can not be called a terrorist because he too was a nationalist and had the interest of Hindustan Supreme in his mind.





Due respect.

[jitender_singh]

Dhruv,

I am fully agreed with you.

Regards
Jitender


From that standard all freedom fighters were also terrorists. Godse can not be called a terrorist because he too was a nationalist and had the interest of Hindustan Supreme in his mind.





Due respect.

[jitender_singh]

aaah you cant even compare these jehadi's terrorists with our freedom fighters like bhagat singh , udham singh...

:confused:


Umm..every terrorists has similar justification for killings..To me he was a fanatic terrorist like all those who are killing innocent people these days also..

RK^2

[rkumar]

From that standard all freedom fighters were also terrorists. Godse can not be called a terrorist because he too was a nationalist and had the interest of Hindustan Supreme in his mind.





Due respect.

All Terrorists in Kashmir also say the same thing. For them also the interest of Islam is supreme. This is idiotic way of justifying killings of innocent people. For me there is no diffrence between a Godse and a terrorist in Kashmir or anywehere.

RK^2

[dhruvdahiya]

Respected Rajendra uncle ji,

You don't sound convincing at all. Rather you are angry. You did not say a word about Bhagat Singh Or Subhas Chander Bose?




due respect.

[jitender_singh]

Sir,

Please don't follow a british path..

Today in morning I was reading a english newspaper. there were few remarks about kashmir, British still pronounce its as a disputed land not a integral part of India. For them its just a piece of land for which both India and Pakistan are fighting for years.

Why dont they tell something about Ireland, ????????///

Regards
Jitender


All Terrorists in Kashmir also say the same thing. For them also the interest of Islam is supreme. This is idiotic way of justifying killings of innocent people. For me there is no diffrence between a Godse and a terrorist in Kashmir or anywehere.

RK^2

[rkumar]

Respected Rajendra uncle ji,

You don't sound convincing at all. Rather you are angry. You did not say a word about Bhagat Singh Or Subhas Chander Bose?




due respect.

Subhash Chander Bose never killed any innocent person. He lead an army against British who were ruling India. So did Bhagat Singh. Bhagat Singh and his friends acted againts British. Let us not glorify a murderer like Godse by putting his name in the same league as o Bhagat Singh just for the sake of arguments. There is no end to such logics as that will glorify even Chambal decoits.

RK^2

[rkumar]

Sir,

Please don't follow a british path..

Today in morning I was reading a english newspaper. there were few remarks about kashmir, British still pronounce its as a disputed land not a integral part of India. For them its just a piece of land for which both India and Pakistan are fighting for years.

Why dont they tell something about Ireland, ????????///

Regards
Jitender

After 7/7 British know now what it takes to create nations on religious ideology...They have started harvesting the crop which they sowed ..Don't think that USA is siding with India just because they like our names or faces. They are realising the mistakes of supporting Pakistan which ofcourse they can not admit openly...Just watch in coming months and years what will happen...World is realigning againts terrorism in a very significant manner... However, once again this has nothing to do with Godse..I consider Godse a very mean and insignificant person.

RK^2

RK^2

[dhruvdahiya]

Subhash Chander Bose never killed any innocent person. He lead an army against British who were ruling India. So did Bhagat Singh. Bhagat Singh and his friends acted againts British. Let us not glorify a murderer like Godse by putting his name in the same league as o Bhagat Singh just for the sake of arguments. There is no end to such logics as that will glorify even Chambal decoits.

RK^2


Respected uncle ji may i request you to say a few words about innocence as it seems to me a HUGE word.


Due respect

[jitender_singh]

I fully agreed British realized thier mistake.only CIA and MI5 had prepared Bin laden to fight against soviet forces in afghanistan.Even mayor of london accept it.

Well, i don't think US is with India or Pakistan . pakistan is just act as a catalyst for them to keep an eye on south-asia.

Today, even father of mohammad atta( who crashed plane in world trade tower in 2001) declared its a start of holy war after july7 attack.

Well , i don't think godse is terrorist , he didn't spread any terror by killing mahatma gandhi.

Regards
Jitender







After 7/7 British know now what it takes to create nations on religious ideology...They have started harvesting the crop which they sowed ..Don't think that USA is siding with India just because they like our names or faces. They are realising the mistakes of supporting Pakistan which ofcourse they can not admit openly...Just watch in coming months and years what will happen...World is realigning againts terrorism in a very significant manner... However, once again this has nothing to do with Godse..I consider Godse a very mean and insignificant person.

RK^2

RK^2

[shailendra]

I came across this very funny cartoon....
Talk about home grown terrorism!

By the way, isn't there something else in the news today about more acts having been foiled by scotland 'yarn' in London??? Apparently something again in the subways etc...

[amitshokeen]

There is no doubt that all the gandhi are the reason why india cannot become strong nation.
All these trust should be out under india govt supervision.

[ozyjat]

First of all i would like to thank you all for showing so much interest in this thread.
Now Jitender i fully agree with you because agar Nathu Ram Godse Gandhi ko nahin udata to pata nahin wo india ke aur kitne tukde kara deta.Kitne hi hindu marte aur pata nahin kya kya hota.I read an incident once about the day Bhagat Singh was to be hanged.On the eve of that day Gandhi along with Neharu went to see the britishers and in a 4 hour meeting he did not say a single word about excusing Bhagat Singh. Britisheres ne unki kuchh baatien maan li aur ye log wahaan se chup chap nikal aaye.Wo chahta to bhagat singh ki saza rukwa sakta tha.
Nathu ram godse ne to khud suli pe chadkar hamare jaison ki raksha ki hai.
Well keep posting guys and i thank you all again.


Before came to conclusion , see who he killed and why he killed ( after saw a mass massacre of hindus during partition )..

[deepender]

I cannot believe this thread has degenerated into a Gandhi-bashing and Godse-hailing discussion.

Very interesting, but quite unbelievable indeed.

[dahiyarules]

Gandhi was a great guy. But I still have some doubts about him. The other day I was reading his autobiography. He spoke about how he still regrets that he wasnt by his dads bedside, when he was dying, becuase he was all to eager to bang his wife. ouch! One thing is for sure, Gandhi was a "tharkee" too when he was younger. When he became old, he preached otherwise.

[mukeshkumar007]

Now Jitender i fully agree with you because agar Nathu Ram Godse Gandhi ko nahin udata to pata nahin wo india ke aur kitne tukde kara deta.Kitne hi hindu marte aur pata nahin kya kya hota.I read an incident once about the day Bhagat Singh was to be hanged.On the eve of that day Gandhi along with Neharu went to see the britishers and in a 4 hour meeting he did not say a single word about excusing Bhagat Singh. Britisheres ne unki kuchh baatien maan li aur ye log wahaan se chup chap nikal aaye.Wo chahta to bhagat singh ki saza rukwa sakta tha.
Nathu ram godse ne to khud suli pe chadkar hamare jaison ki raksha ki hai.
Well keep posting guys and i thank you all again.

some one has rightly said that "A critic is a man who knows the way but lack of courage to drive the Car "

by the way whatever you have written in ur post is completely out of logic and unbelievable too.

[ozyjat]

Bhai re tu bhi kasuti baat kha gya, jisa bhi tha apne tai bada tha yaar umar main ye baat nahin kahni chahiyen.Baaki teri marji.Just wanted to say this to you as a Jatland community member.

Gandhi was a great guy. But I still have some doubts about him. The other day I was reading his autobiography. He spoke about how he still regrets that he wasnt by his dads bedside, when he was dying, becuase he was all to eager to bang his wife. ouch! One thing is for sure, Gandhi was a "tharkee" too when he was younger. When he became old, he preached otherwise.

[rkumar]

Gandhi was a great guy. But I still have some doubts about him. The other day I was reading his autobiography. He spoke about how he still regrets that he wasnt by his dads bedside, when he was dying, becuase he was all to eager to bang his wife. ouch! One thing is for sure, Gandhi was a "tharkee" too when he was younger. When he became old, he preached otherwise.

One needs very strong character to say truth like this. Nothing wrong in being Tharkee I suppose. This is human trait and most males have it. Gandhi was great Indian and great world citizen.

RK^2

[gaganjat]

Nehru , Gandhi they were all same. If he was so good for India and bad for foreign rulers, he would have been killed much before that. But Indians took long time to understand his reality.

People who believe that Gandhi and Nehru kinds were good for India are either foolish or trying to be politicians.

[rkumar]

..................

People who believe that Gandhi and Nehru kinds were good for India are either foolish or trying to be politicians.

Bhai Gagan,

Being a film-critic does not make one hero of the film. Anyone can give advice sitting in commentary box. Gandhi and Nehru had no dire needs to jump in fray like many other maharajas of India at that time. Neither of them knew when India would be free and if at all she would be free in their lifetime.

Not agreeing with your version does not amount to be foolish or politician. Like you have your conviction, we too have our very strong logic and conviction about the contributions of people in nation building. Gandhi is one person who changed the fate of not only India, but of many people in many countries. Many leaders drew inspirations from his style of functioning. Let us not be under the illusion that intelligence is monopoly of only few.

RK^2

[dhruvdahiya]

Respected members,

There is no logic in discussing any thing when we do not tolerate other's point of view and start passing aspirtions stealthly designed in our cocoons. All including Gandhi had their weaknesses and Commited blunders due to poor foresight,their larger than a mortal image not withstanding. Gandhi was a great man, no one can dispute that but he must account for his undoings too. Let us not take extreme positions and start rebuking each other.




due respect

[gaganjat]

My conclusion came from the results they have given to India. We have to be on one side but the right one.


Bhai Gagan,

Being a film-critic does not make one hero of the film. Anyone can give advice sitting in commentary box. Gandhi and Nehru had no dire needs to jump in fray like many other maharajas of India at that time. Neither of them knew when India would be free and if at all she would be free in their lifetime.

Not agreeing with your version does not amount to be foolish or politician. Like you have your conviction, we too have our very strong logic and conviction about the contributions of people in nation building. Gandhi is one person who changed the fate of not only India, but of many people in many countries. Many leaders drew inspirations from his style of functioning. Let us not be under the illusion that intelligence is monopoly of only few.

RK^2

[jitender_singh]

I agreed, gandhi was a effective speaker and was famous in whole world due to his non-violence policy.

But I cannot support his work, wat he had did to India.

He did education of law from Uk and later on went to South africa for practice.and when Gora log threw him out from the train, he suddenly feel the act of racism and imperialism..

Why he didn't realize that at the time of education in UK.............

Regards
Jitender




Bhai Gagan,

Being a film-critic does not make one hero of the film. Anyone can give advice sitting in commentary box. Gandhi and Nehru had no dire needs to jump in fray like many other maharajas of India at that time. Neither of them knew when India would be free and if at all she would be free in their lifetime.

Not agreeing with your version does not amount to be foolish or politician. Like you have your conviction, we too have our very strong logic and conviction about the contributions of people in nation building. Gandhi is one person who changed the fate of not only India, but of many people in many countries. Many leaders drew inspirations from his style of functioning. Let us not be under the illusion that intelligence is monopoly of only few.

RK^2

[rkumar]

Those who like Gandhi and those who oppose, are like two banks of a river. Let us be there where we are and enjoy the flow of water in between...

RK^2

[dahiyarules]

I swear that I read this in his own autobiography. I can provide the text for evidence. I myself was shocked when I read this. In our schools they teach us about "Gandhi the saint." However I absolutely adore the person. I have read about a lot of people of modern times, but never came across anyone as honest and cleanhearted as Gandhi. I have travelled over many countries, and the first thing that comes to people's mind, when they hear about India is Gandhi. Hes like our brand ambassador. Put this in contrast to Pakistan, whose brand ambassadors are Jehadis, islamic fundamentalists, and Army dictators. So we are not doing that bad over all.

[jagmohan]

Dear All.

This is what I wrote on Gandhi in Oct 2003.

"Gandhiji name does inspire extreme reactions from individuals, more so from the younger generation. I am 45 years young and please don't count me in the older generation. Since the discussion has thrown up many side issues, may I attempt to give my views.

Dear Shailendra: It is a fact that people who have travelled far have always had a better perspective. Now I don't mean to say that one who hasn't dosen't. Historically communities who have dared to travel (Or displaced) have done well. They have occupied new lands, captured and killed if need be. The history of JATS points to this fact. We travelled and conquered. It was in this context that I said that progress of our community can be pointed to the fact that our grandfathers fought in WW I & II. By no means it means that those who didn't fight with or for the British have made no progress.

Points have been made regarding why Britishers ruled us and what were our Rajas doing. The fact is simple. The Rajas were enjoing and the 'Praja' was too weak to protest. Whenever someone from the 'Praja' decided to fight against the oppresor he fought. If he succeeded he ruled. If he failed he was hung. As simple as that. And let me remind my friends that if we become weak again, we would be 'gulams' again. And this time it may not be the Britishers, may be the Bangladeshis. (I know I am going to stir some really nasty comments: Can't help it as truth is always bitter). And there is no real Gandhi today to electrify the masses.

When did Gandhiji say that Non-violence means that you don't defend yourself against Armed agression. He had very clear views on fighting for your motherland. Comparing non-violence with cowardice is incorrect.
No one has said that it was Gandhiji who gave us freedom. Even Gandhiji never claimed so. He was not even present in Delhi when 'Chacha Nehru' unfurled the Tri-colour. I think Gandhiji was in Kolkata fighting communal forces. Achieveing freedom was like achieveing God. You follow different routes to do that. No one has denounced the role played by Chandershekar 'Azad', Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose. They did what they thought was correct. But to think that those who were in the Indian National Army (INA) were more loyal than the Indian Army of that time is totally incorrect. By the way there are doubts about the contribution of INA towards the freedom struggle and Independence. May be some one more knowledgeable can throw some light in a separate discussion. My study of Military History says that they hardly fought a battle of consequence in the Eastern Front (Burma War) and were used mainly as porters and camp followers by the Japanese. (Again I am stepping into a very sentimental area, but facts are facts). However, what SC Bose did, no one else, including Gandhiji, could do. Even though Gandhiji remains the tallest Indian in my eyes, others contributions can't be wished away.

Let me for a moment take you all back to your villages in the 50s & 60s (Those who were not born can ask their elders). Whose photographs or poeters did you see in your 'Haveli's' and houses. I am 99.9% on the dot when I say that the Photos were of Gandhiji, Sir Chhotu Ram, Swami Dayanand, Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Chandershekhar Azad and may be, just may be that of Nehru. Later Shastriji's photos were also added. And ofcourse that 'Geeta ka Updesh' ka poster (Krishna and Arjun) was a must.

I thought a formal congratulations was not needed for those who have a different view point. We are all 'ONE', brothers and sisters on this JATLAND site. I am sure we respect each other and that would naturally mean each others views as well. An old saying "If two people agree with each other on all issues, one of them is surely mad". It is important to have different viewpoints on issues.

Where is Jitender Singh Hooda who started this discussion on Gandhiji? Bhai Hooda, hope you are not reading 'My Experiments with Truth' before giving your considered opinion!!! (08 Oct 2003)"

Regards,

JS Malik

[deepender]

Col Malik ji, A very balanced write-up, I really liked reading it. Thanks!


Rajendra ji,

I agree with what you said -- Gandhi does today and will continue to evoke strong emotions. One thing seems certain: We can agree with his ideologies or we can disagree with his ideologies or we can even hate him as a person, but we will never be able to ignore his role in our civilization....

Personally, I believe in many ideas that Gandhi stood for (like social and political). And from today's perspective, I also am not so sure about value of a few of his other ideas (like some economic). But I never doubt Gandhi's intent, and his great leadership abilities. Gandhi was one person who did what he preached. "Be the change, you want to see in the world", he said. And he did. I'm not sure if anyone amoungst us or our great leaders today can say that. Albert Einstein once said, "Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this walked the earth in flesh and blood.".......the strong emotions both in favor of and against Gandhi's contribution show that Einstein was right; we, on the whole, remain as perplexed on this topic as ever!



Those who like Gandhi and those who oppose, are like two banks of a river. Let us be there where we are and enjoy the flow of water in between...
RK^2

[ramksehrawat]

Without going into the role played in our freedom struggle or post-independence era by Gandhi and Nehru, I am of the view that they had certainly some charisma, because of which they were able to sway the masses world over. Even Nehru-Gandhi baiters (myself included) have to admit at least one thing that these two personalities force us even today to think and read about them. They occupy an important part of our lives even today; we devote our time and energy in thinking about them is no less a charisma. Whatever they did for the country, good or bad, is a very relative issue. For them, they must have chosen the best for themselves and for the country in their judgement according to the prevalent circumstances then. But I am personally of the opinion that they could have done still better if acted prudently as in the case of Kashmir there was no need for Nehru to run to UN when our army was doing a good job to retrieve the occupied territory. Similarly, if you read Gandhi he had a dual personality. His public face was totally different in comparison to his private actions, especially in respect of his own children as well as his blind love for Nehru. These two had formed a sort of nexus to deprive other leaders like Bose and Patel their rightful place in national affairs. But for his blind love for Nehru, it is my personal opinion, that Jinnah could have been handled in a better and different way thus avoiding partition of the country.

They ceased to exist long back but still play an important role in our political as well as day-to-day lives. And why not ? After all we Indians spend most of our lives in thinking of past and judge all actions of present in historical perspective (whether to justify or criticise) but still manage to commit the same mistakes over and over again. I am personally of the view that Gandhi was given much higher pedestal than he really deserved. He was fighting for the independence, OK. But so were others before him and even during his time.

Why to call him mahatma? He was no God ? He was simply a human being in bones and flesh. If he was cleaning the toilets so were others, millions of Indians !!! There were already so many mahatmas in this country whose only contribution is to reduce the Indians to impotency. Our forefathers commited a mistake in raising him to such a high pedestal and we are repeating the same mistake by according the same status to the present gang leader, Sonia Devi as well as the whole khandan before her !!! Everything, from hospitals to graveyards are named after one family. Didn't others do anything for this country ? "Jyada meetha khane se bhi bimari badhti hain aur shayad yehi karan hai congress ke downfall ka".

The fact remains that they did some good and some bad. It was their time, they performed their role. This is our time and we have to perform our role keeping in view the circumstances now as brooding over all the time about them is not going to take us anywhere. They were our elders. Whatever we are today, good or bad, is because of them for which we must thank them without worshipping them like Gods or Mahatmas. They were simply human beings and had their interests to look after too.

I am not a political animal; no love for any particular party but respect good performance and able people. I am of the view that persisting with one person to do something for the country has been our bane. If somebody works for the betterment of masses than only we should give him another chance. Otherwise, we should say "thank you very much". After all we are one billion of whom millions are highly educated provided they come out of their closets.

For the so called higher casts, how long this Mahatma and his children of God (harijans) will keep on tormenting us is not known. But I am sure, one day the people of this country would have to stop believing in "shanti" and right-left cheek policy to get rid of them.

[ozyjat]

Rightly said Sehrawat sir,
Like you said Nehru ran to the UN eventhough we were doing a good job at the war front.He would have taken the same stupid and lily-livered action in the case of Hyderabad.But luckily our then home minister Sardar Patel without telling him and against the threats of Lord Mountbatten went on to attack Hyderabad and thank god due to his sole efforts Hyderabad is not a disputed state like Kashmir.
Ofcourse they play an important part in our discussions even today because they left us with a fish bone stuck in our throats.

I am not trying to bash Gandhi or Nehru all i am trying to say is one should not follow these people blindfolded like most of us the indians do.The problem lies in the fact that congress was always a party led by this nehru family, all the other worthy leaders were left out due to Gandhi's immense love for nehru.

Ye nehru ke kapre london se dhulkar aate the and when he got this great admiration from gandhi he suddenly decided to become a freedom fighter and unfortunately no one at that time challenged him from becoming our prime minister.






They ceased to exist long back but still play an important role in our political as well as day-to-day lives. And why not ? After all we Indians spend most of our lives in thinking of past and judge all actions of present in historical perspective (whether to justify or criticise) but still manage to commit the same mistakes over and over again. I am personally of the view that Gandhi was given much higher pedestal than he really deserved. He was fighting for the independence, OK. But so were others before him and even during his time.

Why to call him mahatma? He was no God ? He was simply a human being in bones and flesh. If he was cleaning the toilets so were others, millions of Indians !!! There were already so many mahatmas in this country whose only contribution is to reduce the Indians to impotency. Our forefathers commited a mistake in raising him to such a high pedestal and we are repeating the same mistake by according the same status to the present gang leader, Sonia Devi as well as the whole khandan before her !!! Everything, from hospitals to graveyards are named after one family. Didn't others do anything for this country ? "Jyada meetha khane se bhi bimari badhti hain aur shayad yehi karan hai congress ke downfall ka".

For the so called higher casts, how long this Mahatma and his children of God (harijans) will keep on tormenting us is not known. But I am sure, one day the people of this country would have to stop believing in "shanti" and right-left cheek policy to get rid of them.

[mukeshkumar007]

..............Choro Kal Ki Bate, Kal Ki Bate Purani.......
....Naye Daur Maie Likhenge Hum Milke Ek Nayi Kehani, ....

Hum Hindustani, Hum Hindustani, Hum Hindustani...............