Why was there no Sikh Country after the Partition of India?

Why was there no Sikh Country after the Partition of India?

History With Hilbert

1 год назад

143,952 Просмотров

Ссылки и html тэги не поддерживаются


Комментарии:

@drwellbeing2023
@drwellbeing2023 - 06.02.2024 07:20

What was the point of separate countries when India is still full of millions of Muslims and why did Sikh leadership agree for half of our major Sikh pilgrimages to be desolated and look at the dire state of them in Pakistan now which is our greatest tragedy

Ответить
@drwellbeing2023
@drwellbeing2023 - 06.02.2024 07:16

It’s a tragic loss to the Sikh empire due to their own downfall so no point moaning now and there should have been a separate state then and this guy is somewhat wrong stating Sikhism was under Hinduism umbrella when it’s due to Sikhism that Hinduism wasn’t extinct today and have now forgotten it all!

Ответить
@Troller_007
@Troller_007 - 28.01.2024 06:58

Land of Modern Canada IS Khalistan

Ответить
@RajSingh-jq1tq
@RajSingh-jq1tq - 16.01.2024 06:25

As a Hindu Punjabi, I really want to ask Khalistanis that what would you do to those 40% Hindus are living in Punjab that have been living there for centuries, if let’s assume Punjab becomes a country? Are you planning to take over their land? Are you planning to kill them off? Also, this video fails to address how India Punjab still has almost 40% Hindu Population

Ответить
@Messlam
@Messlam - 04.01.2024 02:30

Also there is an interesting character parallel maybe in “Sir Roger Rohaut”(England) and guru Ravidas maybe. If you consider a name change into the “noble” English side as happened quite often when generals or leaders of all kinds villa to retire.
They all hide at that point like witness protection on paper. The Janus thing was big with them and parallels are the norm. They sired England in my belief. Sire/shire they would trade places with far off other nobles when rebellions would occur etc.
I believe the Brahmins were such and every nation has its related version through time. No harm no foul but yeah that seems to be what I’ve come to in my thoughts. Like prima nocti but more like the sheriff and postman in a town ends up daddy in secret… lol but not joking. With love

Ответить
@Messlam
@Messlam - 04.01.2024 02:22

Do you think Ukraine may represent a modern Sikh state attempt? Not sure In race or whatever but In the hill families etc? Great vid thank you

Ответить
@yuvisingh6947
@yuvisingh6947 - 31.12.2023 21:17

Soon we will Khalistan zindabad

Ответить
@preteendhillon
@preteendhillon - 27.12.2023 15:38

After partion of punjab. There was no indian partitioned. India and pakista came into existence after 1000 independent nations got united togather. Punjab khalsaraj was biggest nation areas wise out of 1000 nations

Ответить
@amanpreetkumar9294
@amanpreetkumar9294 - 21.12.2023 02:03

big mistake by sikh not creating their own homeland

Ответить
@sangha95
@sangha95 - 17.12.2023 16:13

Many people refer to it as a partition of punjab not india

Ответить
@TacticalEarProductions
@TacticalEarProductions - 14.12.2023 20:44

There are several ethnic groups in India with their own language including Punjab which mostly has Sikhs. Why don’t all of those regions have their own state? You could apply the same logic to them too, right? This is a classic case of another outsider without adequate understanding of the real complexities of the situation coming in and telling us what to do.

Ответить
@Mauto7
@Mauto7 - 14.12.2023 07:09

Hhv

Ответить
@bizzarebullies4318
@bizzarebullies4318 - 09.12.2023 13:31

while sikhs were just 2% they gave a contribution of around 85% for the independence of india

Ответить
@Hgps23184
@Hgps23184 - 08.12.2023 05:48

Sikh county in india coming soon

Ответить
@koseku3
@koseku3 - 01.12.2023 10:45

sikh means penis in turkish 😂

Ответить
@chanpreetsingh361
@chanpreetsingh361 - 22.10.2023 02:41

Britishers should have put some negotiations on the table among sikhs at that time. Since Sikhs has overwhelmingly supported Britishers in WW1 &2 Just like jews. They could have offered us a big part of Punjab.

Ответить
@repure1999
@repure1999 - 14.10.2023 15:50

Prior to the British had its own state or country. The british let it be until that eventually conquered it after Maharaja Ranjit Singh.

Sikhs have alot of control in Punjab and live peacefully with it's Hindu and Muslim brothers aswell... Khalistan is for propaganda now, CIA pushes Pakistan to create more issues than needed.
Punjab needs it's basic necessities to survive and live, which are more than met.

Have fun with the propaganda machine.

Ответить
@psprakash966
@psprakash966 - 11.10.2023 09:16

I think Sindhi also doesn't have a country

Ответить
@SS-tw2rx
@SS-tw2rx - 09.10.2023 09:58

India in it's politics and it's peoples. All indians are indians only some Hindu,s some, Muslims, some Sikh and christians. Religion and caste politics politician divide and rule policy they cannot unite India giving equal rights to all. No one hates India due to politicians and peoples hate each other's this cause saparations. Look at Pakistan they wanted country saparate they took it and again pushtun, Punjabi, Sindhi,s all others want saparate country. It is the peoples who always want their favour.

Ответить
@zohaibaziz885
@zohaibaziz885 - 09.10.2023 04:29

Khalistan Zindabaad

Ответить
@50calorie82
@50calorie82 - 07.10.2023 12:19

You are way off the rail bro. Man where to even start, many points are not well researched through . Since , Guru Nanak Dev ji , the first Sikh Guru. Never saw themselves as sect of Hinduism . They have been a separate nation from get go.

Ответить
@naveedmushtaq7471
@naveedmushtaq7471 - 06.10.2023 18:12

Sikhs & Muslims were not satisfied and both nations are not satisfied so far because this division wasn't made with justice⚖ and ignored intentionally so important things during this division, resultantly, Sikhs are fighting for Khalistan & Muslims are fighting for Kashmir, What ignored in this division? Majority of Sikhs & Muslims, British Government was supporting to the Hindus that time and wanted its interference in this region by this Un-justified division & succeeded, So Christian✝ interference is running in this region by this Un-justified division.This division is showing combination of two clever nations (01) Hindus (02) British🇬🇧 both are our enemies.

Ответить
@peterdsouza1259
@peterdsouza1259 - 05.10.2023 18:53

The British betrayed the Sikh during the time of partition

Ответить
@shehzadchowdhury8327
@shehzadchowdhury8327 - 05.10.2023 17:46

Sikh is a religion if Punjabis of India demand country it should be Punjabis of all faith

Ответить
@SlaHu.
@SlaHu. - 05.10.2023 13:36

Canada has lot of free land .
Canada should give their land to ndp.

Ответить
@KishorJoshiMCh
@KishorJoshiMCh - 04.10.2023 19:17

Sikhism is a sect (Panth) of Sanatan Dharma (Hinduism) and not a separate religion.

Ответить
@satishthokare6292
@satishthokare6292 - 04.10.2023 09:07

The partition of India was not on the line of religion, there were some fanatic radicals Muslim political leader who want separate homeland for their own interest, even half of the Muslim population not supported that Idea at that time hence we see more Muslim population in India than Pakistan itself.
India is not Hindu country it's totally a secular country, more secular than so called western countries having just handful minorities.

Ответить
@simplemixvlog7865
@simplemixvlog7865 - 03.10.2023 19:32

Excellent explanation

Ответить
@MustafaAli-lb8dq
@MustafaAli-lb8dq - 03.10.2023 13:06

They will have soon.
Long Live Khalistan!

Ответить
@khemsingh04
@khemsingh04 - 02.10.2023 19:59

Soon..

Ответить
@charanteja_
@charanteja_ - 02.10.2023 18:07

Sikhs are an integral part of India even before the British came in. They played a crucial role in the Independence and even today they make up a huge percentage of power throughout India. People should understand that when Gurunanak founded Sikhi to fight the oppressions against the Mughal Islamic rulers (these were the times of Bhakti Movement in the Hindu communities), the first people to join Sikhism were the people from the Hindu families. They treated it as a revolution within the Hindu communities in that region to join the Khalsa and fight against the Mughal rulers. Sikhs will always be a part of India, similar to other cultures and states.

Ответить
@user-xq6xu3fo8c
@user-xq6xu3fo8c - 02.10.2023 16:53

11 th guru is Justin T

Ответить
@thegamingbro.........5531
@thegamingbro.........5531 - 02.10.2023 16:28

There is no sikh country because there was no demand for it just like there is no hindu country. Pakistan is for muslims but india is for INDIANS, not hindu, not muslim, not sikh but INDIANS. there was no demand for hindu country or a sikh country.

Ответить
@30ashvin
@30ashvin - 01.10.2023 18:24

To really understand this topic, one has to first understand the origins of Sikhisim. First things first - all the Sikh Gurus were born to Hindu parents & it was customary for Hindu families in Punjab to raise their eldest son as a Sikh. During the Mughal era both communities were equally persecuted in Punjab & many Sikh Gurus there laid down their lives in support of their bretheren. Thus, Sikhisim was never really considered as different from Hinduisim, cousins at best. Till today, Hindus & Sikhs have shared families, culture & traditions. The British with their policy of 'divide & rule' pushed the valiant Sikhs to treat themselves as separate from the Hindus. While some Sikhs fell for this ruse, the majority did not. During the Partition of India Hindus & Sikhs fought the marauding Muslims together& were also not differentiated by during attacks by Muslims on their villages in the areas deemed for Pakistan. While a sizeable chunk of Punjab went to Pakistan, Punjabi Hindus & Sikhs from (west) Punjab fled that area and settled in Indian Punjab. The need for a separate Sikh homeland was never felt because both communities share a strong bond & enjoyed & continue to enjoy cordial relations. The topic of this video is thus a misnomer.

Ответить
@mayakrishnan7299
@mayakrishnan7299 - 01.10.2023 17:46

Then why hindu didn't get seperate country

Ответить
@PK-se2jh
@PK-se2jh - 01.10.2023 17:36

dont agree with many points. we sikh dont want a seperate country. India is our national and civilization.

Ответить
@SH-px6zv
@SH-px6zv - 01.10.2023 14:42

The main cause is baldev singh...that is main reason sikhs have no our country 😢

Ответить
@Vk-wx8ls
@Vk-wx8ls - 01.10.2023 14:39

Khalistan will be carved out of Canada, insha allah.

Ответить
@ramr3948
@ramr3948 - 01.10.2023 09:40

If every religion in India wants a separate country, there should have been atleast 10 countries in India.
Sikhs have whole India for themselves and they are highly respected here. Don't create division in our society with your useless videos.

Ответить
@mitraabbasi6064
@mitraabbasi6064 - 01.10.2023 09:30

Hindu promise sikhs in 1947 if they give their land to india and break punjab then we give u khalistan but after division clever hindu kkill sikhs and break sikh part of punjab into 3 pieces 1947 punjabis r 75% muslims gurdaspur qasoor division and many more areas r muslimz but sikh n hindu capture these areas forcefully hindu only use shiks and now they capture indian punjab

Ответить
@jonysins6504
@jonysins6504 - 01.10.2023 07:49

Time to invade Pakistan, afganistan, Bangladesh, Nepal , Bhutan , Srilanka and It's time for made Akhand Bharat 🚩🚩🚩🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🕉️🕉️🕉️🔱🔱🔱

Ответить
@hasilhasil9268
@hasilhasil9268 - 01.10.2023 07:20

Sikhs brave comunity

Ответить
@manusharma7527
@manusharma7527 - 01.10.2023 05:44

Who are the sikhs in our Indian Knowledge -
Baba Nanak Ji🙏, Baba Banda Ji🙏, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Sher Bhagat Singh, Sher Udham Singh, PM Manmohan Singh and many more....

Who are so called Sikhs persented to us-

Punnu, Nijjar, Bindarawala so on and so forth.

Make Khalistan in Canada.

The state that we know and Love is India.

Ответить
@alcyone2484
@alcyone2484 - 30.09.2023 13:20

For that you need to learn indian history since 9th Century, Sikhism started after 1755 CE, you need to understand all those events.

Ответить
@user-dr6dd6en9x
@user-dr6dd6en9x - 29.09.2023 19:59

Because there wasent sikh majority even in sikh empire there was only 9 percent sikh

Ответить
@imransajid6187
@imransajid6187 - 29.09.2023 19:42

One opinion is that Master Tara Singh, the leader of Sikhs in 1940's was from Rawalpindi and due to communal violence between Muslims and Sikhs for decades in his hometown was against the creation of Pakistan. He was instrumental in leading the Sikhs towards joining India. Other Sikh leaders like Maharaja of Pakltiala state from East Punjab, were also inclined to joining India as many were in Congress. Master Tara Singh refused Jinnah's (the Muslim leader behind the creation of Pakistan) prposal to struggle jointly for Pakistan in which Sikhs could have negotiated some sort of their separate rule in Punjab. Had Tara Singh accepted Jinnah's offer, the bloodshed in partition of Punjab could have been avoided.

Ответить
@bluerobe1
@bluerobe1 - 29.09.2023 16:28

there will be someday, if sikhs can get india freedom so can for themselves.

Ответить
@amirkhalid7915
@amirkhalid7915 - 29.09.2023 16:04

Actually hindus make a bluff with British saying that Sikhs are there branch. Sikhs like Jews Muslim and Christian beliefs in one God and believe he is not human or have no face.

Ответить
@naveedgillani3772
@naveedgillani3772 - 29.09.2023 14:32

سکھوں کو ازادی دے دو اور کشمیر کو بھی ازادی دے دو اور امن سے رہو

Ответить
@asmsieam
@asmsieam - 29.09.2023 11:42

Then why bengal isn’t a country? Once we euled bengal sultanate from dhaka

Ответить