Bipat no one has denied the negative aspects or British rule, just trying to balance the negatives and the positives is different than having a lopsided view that is very subjective and usually without evidence. You have made all sorts of claims that are shown as either not factual or illogical. India has had since 1947 to get its act together as an independent country. Oehr countries with less infrastructure after the war, less resources, less institutional structures than what the British left have done much better- Indians should take responsibility for their own results. And before you criticize the British so much look around you and imagine India without the benefits derived from British rule. This isn't being for or against Empire, just dealing with facts, Studying economic history might also help.

There were horrors of Mughal rule, of local Indian kingdoms and throughout history- and you rely on folk memory of anti-British super Indian patriots who apparently have difficulty also in dealing with the question in an objective way. Give me a break- my family was in India during British rule, while I may discount some observations from bias I certainly have an idea. And apparently you haven't read much about what India was like before British rule..India should take responsibility for the millions upon millions living n abject poverty while the elite spends money on space programs or reject foreign aid for the poor or ensure the population as a whole has toilets.

I am quite unsure what kind of idiot would call the invasion of Goa a rescue except one with little knowledge of the English language or logic.

I certainly understand that you can argue that the invasion may have been justified in some kind of twisted justification of Indian imperialism, that doesn't deny it was an invasion.

And yet you have never presented evidence here was a referendum held in Kashmir, Hyderabad or Goa on whether they wished to be independent or not. Isn't it a but curious why India never lets people vote on such things ?

.

EMR---I do know the history of India!!!
The British occupation was the most recent and most total. (The Princely States were ruled as subsidiaries---and paid with wealth for that privilege.)
The is a British Forum that is why we discuss Britain. (Also---- the continued accusation that it is Brexiters that are pro Empire)

You still don't accept the word "Bharat " is a WORD for what YOU keep saying is a 'foreign' word "India".

Spend more than 3 weeks in the country learn at least one of the languages then perhaps you will know what you are talking about!!

Do some research and you will find the word "rescue" used----You yourself admit the activity to end Portuguese rule could have been justified. So doesn't justification indicate a "rescue"?

Whether or not a referendum should have been held in Kashmir in times past---you must surely realise that to hold one now would invite incursion and violence from outside.
Why do you ignore the results of elections?
Why would tiny Goa want independence when at present it is a State and rules itself and shares in the rule of India!
What will you be saying if in future a Goan becomes PM of India??


Hyderabad I have said I do not know the past situation.
There is nothing to stop Muslims from there going to Pakistan or Bangladesh since then. Certainly more Burqas worn there than in Kashmir!! It is a city doing well.

At least Bipat is honest. She does not know the history of modern India and Muslims should go back to Pakistan.

I disapprove of the actions if India in Kashmir and other border regions, Israel in the occupied territories, Russia in Ukraine, thecUSxarmed interventions that helped fuel the very terrorism you refer to.
I am not single minded unlike you...
The history of the mess that is Kashmir is well documented and forms part of world history, it's time you read it..

I accept Bharat as the description of an ancient civilisation, to refer to India today as Bharat does not reflect the ethnic, religious, , cultural mix today that is as far away from Bharat as the moon is from the earth..

Bipat , saying soething could be argued isnt the same as saying such an argument could be is necessarily valid.

You keep mentioning elections not covering the topic- did India have a referendum on whether Goa wished to be part of the Indian state ? What on earth does a Ga politician have to do with anything ?

Your Hindu nationalism showing by saying if Muslims dont like it they are free to leave their home. What a pleasant neighbor you must be to Muslims.

If some idiot called the invasion a rescue doesnt show tat it was, only that some people are mentally challenged.

I said they could go if they wanted to----an indication if they didn't, that they are happy in India. ----I did not say "should go back"---- now who is telling untruths also I said I did not know detailed history of Hyderabad----not India.
Read the posts EMR.

Only someone who views Muslims in a negative way would use the words you did.

That is the same language British racists use against migrants, including those from the Sub continent...
Muslims in India have been there for over 1000 years, some could probably trace their ethnicity to ths days of the ancient Bharat civilisation..
They are not a different people just a different religion, unless you determine Indianess by religion..
Hindus being more Indian than anyone else.
At least you admit that you do not know the history or have researched it , the history of the sub continent ancient and modern ,, this is reflected in many of your posts ...

For 'f's sake EMR -----Bharat is its name!!!!! In Hindi---Bharat and India are both official short names for the Republic.
How does the word 'India'----reflect the different States, religions etc??????

You have confirmed, Bharat is the ancient name for a civilisation that existed 2000 years ago in a language just one of many used in India.
What is the Urdu name, what do all the different linguistic groups call their country of citizenship..
India is far more than the nation the Hindu nationslists want it to become....

1) Read the referendum results. A Goan politician can become President or PM of the Republic.

2) You are the one talking of Hyderabad could be independent. The recent change making Hyderabad capital of a new State, would seem to indicate that Muslims there are happy to be part of India. At Partition how many went to Pakistan?

In our town we have many Muslim and Christian neighbours. One such is minding my laptop dongle and Jio Wifi as I write this!!! (We are in the UK until end of April). I am not a Hindu.

3) Suggest you look at the Wiki--references and find out.
(What was the Portuguese 'right' to rule part of another continent? What about Daman and Diu ----should they be independent?)

It is the PRESENT DAY official name of the Republic along with INDIA -----Hindi and English are the two official languages----Bharat/India.

Approx. 80% of the population are nominally Hindu. Why does that upset you????

Ref 2 , It just shows your ignorance of the country you call your second home.
The massive population changes were mainly in the border areas.
I suggest you look at a map of India and where it's historical concentrations of followers of Islam live.
They are not a different people, just a different religion,...
They part of the huge ethnic, religious, cultural mix that is India...