Sinking State of Bangladesh: Idiotic Musings

[vin pahadi (kumauni)]

Supreme leader's foreign policy is always wait and watch. It has paid dividends. First Pakis screwed themselves, then Sri Lanka, and Maldives. The later two came running to India for debt relief. Maybe, he is trying the same shit here which I believe they do not deserve. The sledge hammer should have come down on them instead what we see is Supreme leader following the same script. Granted this leverage can be used in near future, Kanglus after all can't feed themselves. But it is time to act on them and screw over them. He can't act like nothing is happening in Manipur or Bangladesh.

I will wait and see, but I have become pessimistic with his foreign policy. Let us see what he is going to do after Trump is in office. Kanglus should run helter skelter. Giant hammer should come over their heads and teach the subhumans a lesson they won't forget.

i hv no hopes from political leaders...they will run country by their own pace. when they was in chief minister post, they act like fearless, brave etc. but when they came in big office (prime minister etc), they become mild. coz after they care for their image more than nation interest nd benefit. like modi becomes soft after getting many muslim nd other countries highest awards etc. he doesnt want to call dictator or supressive leader. thats why we see "sabka sath sabka vikas" etc churan, although that community dont vote for him, whatever he do for them. this will also happen with yogi, if he become prime minister. they care more about their image nd what others will say about him mindset. i dont trust 3 professionals:- police, judge nd politician. no one can say/know "r they all currupt or some can be honest also".

 

[ezsasa]

Keep sending onions and potatoes to these namakhar*ms


View: https://x.com/sidhant/status/1869351640198967789?t=B7lGRefRlZlWaJhmwfUwFA&s=19

WHY THE FCUK ARE THEY NOT BLOCKING THE TRADE PORTS!!!!
YOU HAVE HUNDREDS OF OTHER LEVERAGES!!
FKING STUPID MEA BABUS GO FK YOURSELVES!!!!

my guess would be that beedi advisors want to use GoI as stepping stone to remain in power i.e delay elections till they form their own political outfit, hence the constant provocations. these folks think in binaries, they probably calculated that since GoI is pro-SHW, so GoI would condemn their interim govt.

they didn't realise that even pakiland uses this tactic every few years, that GoI does not recognise pak as a country. our response is India has an embassy in your country, what more legitimacy do you want.

their original plans were probably dashed when modi invited their chief advisor to represent beedi in voice of global south conference, invitation meant GoI is not going to publicly oppose their interim govt.

i would be reading their provocations as desperation. more the provocations, more the desperation within their advisors.

historically usurpers are insecure and have a tendency to over play their hand.

 

[ezsasa]

my guess would be that beedi advisors want to use GoI as stepping stone to remain in power i.e delay elections till they form their own political outfit, hence the constant provocations. these folks think in binaries, they probably calculated that since GoI is pro-SHW, so GoI would condemn their interim govt.

they didn't realise that even pakiland uses this tactic every few years, that GoI does not recognise pak as a country. our response is India has an embassy in your country, what more legitimacy do you want.

their original plans were probably dashed when modi invited their chief advisor to represent beedi in voice of global south conference, invitation meant GoI is not going to publicly oppose their interim govt.

i would be reading their provocations as desperation. more the provocations, more the desperation within their advisors.

historically usurpers are insecure and have a tendency to over play their hand.

even if this group manages to hang on to power, what would be their policy priorities be:
since there is a globalist hand in this coup. their priorities would be a subset of globalist agenda.

- sunni islamist supremacy
- some sort of DEI based social hierarchy (dharmics at the bottom)
- polarisation in the society to keep them distracted
- climate justice
- rent seeking state
- total control over news and views
- some form of UBI irrespective of whether economy supports it
- create conditions for illegal immigration into europe and U.S.
- some sort of regional/internal conflict

 

[Hari Sud]

The Islamization of Muslim countries contributes to their economic stagnation.

In the Arabian Peninsula, the introduction of Islam in the 7th century brought an end to tribal conflicts and instilled a sense of discipline, unity, and purpose among the region’s desert inhabitants. This transformation was both timely and necessary, proving to be a vital asset. Armed with swords and mounted on horseback, they began spreading their message—first to neighboring regions, then westward to Spain, and eastward to Iran and western India.

Wherever they went, they amassed wealth, often transferring it to their headquarters in Baghdad, or settled as rulers, preaching and converting local populations. These campaigns, which spanned nearly 800 years, led to Muslim dominance from northern India to Spain—a truly remarkable achievement. Only Genghis Khan dealt a significant blow to their ascendancy, but following his demise, they swiftly recovered and re-established their rule.

Their entry into the realm of science and technology was substantial during the 8th to 12th centuries. During this period, mathematicians from India and geometers from Greece made significant contributions. The knowledge gained during this era was not only shared with Europe but also profoundly impacted the continent, as it is still the basis for the use of Arabic numerals. These numerals are rooted in Indian arithmetic and the concept of zero. However, this period came to an end when the Muslim world, which had been under the rule of Baghdad, declared its independence and began to govern itself. Consequently, the transfer of knowledge from the conquered world back to Baghdad ceased.

The prosperity of the Muslim world was guaranteed by the locals who continued with their profession as artisans or traders or merchants. They paid taxes which made the Muslim rulers immensely wealthy. Hence the area ruled by Islamic world had two distinct cultures I.e. the ruler who carried the sword and the locals who guaranteed continued prosperity.

In an era of sword-wielding rulers and submissive populations, most rulers left tax-paying locals alone, except for occasional despots who attempted to impose Islam on unwilling subjects—such attempts often led to brief periods of decline.

While these rulers achieved military success, they neglected the opportunities presented by trade, innovation, and exploration, which could have brought lasting prosperity. Instead of building wealth through commerce, they relied on the sword—today replaced by bombs and intimidation—to seize resources from others.

In Pakistan, for example, the focus on warfare and conflict has stifled economic progress. High business skills largely migrated to India in 1947, leaving Pakistan bereft of entrepreneurial expertise. Consequently, Pakistan prioritizes military spending over economic growth, perpetually facing cash shortages. Over the past 70 years, it has turned to America and international agencies like the IMF and World Bank for financial support—receiving IMF aid 23 times to date. Without such assistance, Pakistan’s economy would collapse.

A similar story plays out across much of the Islamic world, from Afghanistan to Morocco. Many Muslim nations rely on foreign science, skills, and funding to function, remaining economically stagnant. While Arab nations enjoy oil wealth, they still depend on outside expertise to transform their economies. Meanwhile, Bangladesh, once a secular Muslim country, has recently begun Islamization. Within a year, half of its business activity has disappeared, echoing Pakistan’s trajectory and setting the stage for future reliance on foreign aid.

In today’s world Islamization means staying backward. That backwardness leads to perpetual conflicts. That is the root cause of much of the trouble in the Islamic world.

 

[Miss Firing]

4 killed in clash over control of Ijtema ground

The clash erupted between the followers of Zobayer and Saad around 3:00am, the Tongi West Police Station's OC said

www.thedailystar.net

Pump up the numbers.

 

[Blademaster]

Supreme leader's foreign policy is always wait and watch. It has paid dividends. First Pakis screwed themselves, then Sri Lanka, and Maldives. The later two came running to India for debt relief. Maybe, he is trying the same shit here which I believe they do not deserve. The sledge hammer should have come down on them instead what we see is Supreme leader following the same script. Granted this leverage can be used in near future, Kanglus after all can't feed themselves. But it is time to act on them and screw over them. He can't act like nothing is happening in Manipur or Bangladesh.

I will wait and see, but I have become pessimistic with his foreign policy. Let us see what he is going to do after Trump is in office. Kanglus should run helter skelter. Giant hammer should come over their heads and teach the subhumans a lesson they won't forget.

You have to take notice of the law of unintended consequences. He's playing the slow game because it is a cheap effective way for him to keep control of the situation and not let it go out of control. If you interfere too much sure it provides instant gratification but what of the long term consequences? What is the overall strategy and how will it play out?

 

[The Juggernaut]

 

[Screambowl]

Meanwhile, Bangladesh, once a secular Muslim country, has recently begun Islamization.

Majority of Bangladesh was never secular. It was only a secular leader ruling there with handful of moderate people.

 

[Cheepek]

my guess would be that beedi advisors want to use GoI as stepping stone to remain in power i.e delay elections till they form their own political outfit, hence the constant provocations. these folks think in binaries, they probably calculated that since GoI is pro-SHW, so GoI would condemn their interim govt.

they didn't realise that even pakiland uses this tactic every few years, that GoI does not recognise pak as a country. our response is India has an embassy in your country, what more legitimacy do you want.

their original plans were probably dashed when modi invited their chief advisor to represent beedi in voice of global south conference, invitation meant GoI is not going to publicly oppose their interim govt.

i would be reading their provocations as desperation. more the provocations, more the desperation within their advisors.

historically usurpers are insecure and have a tendency to over play their hand.

There needs to be a broader discussion on how to deal with belligerent neighbors.

Should our foreign policy and/or foreign relations remain hostage to whims of the government of that country forever?
Or should there be a consensus among them that becoming hostile to India will harm them and make their own governance untenable.

If you want the former, then whatever is happening now is the right way. Keep increasing tolerance of the humiliation fetish we have, earlier from bigger powers; now from dirty shitholes too.

But if you want the latter, then you have to show danda. You have to prove that being hostile to India has costs attached and it will make their own governance untenable. Let any government that comes to power in Bangladesh have it in their own strategic calculation automatically. Just like we have to deal with them, they too have to deal with us.

If there are no consequences now, there is a bigger probability whosoever comes to power next barring Hasina, will continue the same. Because at the end of day it's a 90% jihadi population country. (Being anti-India sells like hot cakes)
No amount of appeasement will change that, just like it did not change the nature of jihadi population in Maldives. The government changed it's mood, & that's all we want.

It can turn out to be a strategic blunder on our part if we let this government's belligerence go unchecked.

We have to get over this feeling that since we have spent 15+ years with a seemingly pro-India Bangladesh, we are going to rock the apple cart if we start showing danda. Our policies should be dynamic, no heavens will fall if we deal with an anti-India Bangladesh as is required.

I am not even asking to go full bazooka, just a graded response, we have so many strings that we can pull. Start with protests on the land ports and block them for ~2-3 months. Notice their behaviour. They have double digit food inflation. Let their government whine abba dabba jabba when people notice the cost of their plates increasing. Inflation is one sure shot method to make any government unpopular! Make it costly for every anti-India government that comes to power.





What are the risks attached? At max, they will start fomenting terrorism in India.

But if they are fomenting terrorism inside India just because we don't want to send food items, are we even doing trade or paying jizya to them?

 

[Blademaster]

There needs to be a broader discussion on how to deal with belligerent neighbors.

Should our foreign policy and/or foreign relations remain hostage to whims of the government of that country forever?
Or should there be a consensus among them that becoming hostile to India will harm them and make their own governance untenable.

If you want the former, then whatever is happening now is the right way. Keep increasing tolerance of the humiliation fetish we have, earlier from bigger powers; now from dirty shitholes too.

But if you want the latter, then you have to show danda. You have to prove that being hostile to India has costs attached and it will make their own governance untenable. Let any government that comes to power in Bangladesh have it in their own strategic calculation automatically. Just like we have to deal with them, they too have to deal with us.

If there are no consequences now, there is a bigger probability whosoever comes to power next barring Hasina, will continue the same. Because at the end of day it's a 90% jihadi population country. (Being anti-India sells like hot cakes)
No amount of appeasement will change that, just like it did not change the nature of jihadi population in Maldives. The government changed it's mood, & that's all we want.

It can turn out to be a strategic blunder on our part if we let this government's belligerence go unchecked.

We have to get over this feeling that since we have spent 15+ years with a seemingly pro-India Bangladesh, we are going to rock the apple cart if we start showing danda. Our policies should be dynamic, no heavens will fall if we deal with an anti-India Bangladesh as is required.

I am not even asking to go full bazooka, just a graded response, we have so many strings that we can pull. Start with protests on the land ports and block them for ~2-3 months. Notice their behaviour. They have double digit food inflation. Let their government whine abba dabba jabba when people notice the cost of their plates increasing. Inflation is one sure shot method to make any government unpopular! Make it costly for every anti-India government that comes to power.


View attachment 18878


What are the risks attached? At max, they will start fomenting terrorism in India.

But if they are fomenting terrorism inside India just because we don't want to send food items, are we even doing trade or paying jizya to them?

I would modify the right side of the flowchart to say that you can do anything that won’t hurt India or Hindus.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

There needs to be a broader discussion on how to deal with belligerent neighbors.

Should our foreign policy and/our foreign relations remain hostage to whims of the government of that country forever?
Or should there be a consensus among them that becoming hostile to India will harm them and make their own governance untenable.

If you want the former, then whatever is happening now is the right way. Keep increasing tolerance of the humiliation fetish we have, earlier from bigger powers; now from dirty shitholes too.

But if you want the latter, then you have to show danda. You have to prove that being hostile to India has costs attached and it will make their own governance untenable. Let any government that comes to power in Bangladesh have it in their own strategic calculation automatically. Just like we have to deal with them, they too have to deal with us.

If there are no consequences now, there is a bigger probability whosoever comes to power next barring Hasina, will continue the same. Because at the end of day it's a 90% jihadi population country. (Being anti-India sells like hot cakes)
No amount of appeasement will change that, just like it did not change the nature of jihadi population in Maldives. The government changed it's mood, & that's all we want.

It can turn out to be a strategic blunder on our part if we let this government's belligerence go unchecked.

We have to get over this feeling that since we have spent 15+ years with a seemingly pro-India Bangladesh, we are going to rock the apple cart if we start showing danda. Our policies should be dynamic, no heavens will fall if we deal with an anti-India Bangladesh as is required.

I am not even asking to go full bazinga, just a graded response, we have so many strings that we can pull. Start with protests on the land ports and block them for ~2-3 months. Notice their behaviour. They have double digit food inflation. Let their government whine abba dabba jabba when people notice the cost of their plates increasing. Inflation is one sure shot method to make any government unpopular! Make it costly for every anti-India government that comes to power.


View attachment 18878


What are the risks attached? At max, they will start fomenting terrorism in India.

But if they are fomenting terrorism inside India just because we don't want to send food items, are we even doing trade or paying jizya to them?

The bolded **IS** the only risk India is afraid of, but its a lose lose - dont do anything leads to the terrorism threat, do too much too soon & it also leads to the terrorism threat.

And reality of the situation is, due to Mumtaz Banu in power in Bongoshithole for so long, the BSF there is utterly corrupt & useless, they are more interested in hobknobbing with trinamul party people at dinners than listening to dilli diktat and India is vulnerable to jihadi terrorism due to porus border.

And most of it will come to the rest of bongoland and hindi heartland, because our Assamiya & Tripuri bros are not complete retards at the border like us bongs and meghalaya border protects itself due to terrain alone and can easily be fortified.

But our main problem from bangladesh isnt murgi ki gardan, thats like saying USA's main vulnerability to Iran is its Qatar air base (lol !!) but its the porous bengal border that we have to finish fencing off and replace all the BSF jawaans and utterly MUST WIN the next bengal election to set forth, before we get all tough on Bongoland. The centre i think by now also knows the extent of the bengal border problem - the precise problem that these kanglu jihadis are aware of and have a sense of 'gotchu by the balls bitch' mentality towards us. But are kinda powerless to do anything about it because ultimately BSF in bengal is significant in numbers and replacing them all but not replacing TMC will lead to the same corruption problem in the BSF bengal postings 10 years down the road and all you have done is made BSF more corrupt in general by addition.


That is the play here from our govt in terms of whatever BDs do in BD land, short of actual 1971 genocide part-2.
Only once W.Bengal border is safe - which means Momta gone + BSF there replaced, do we take a tougher stance of danda directly for bongoland in terms of what they are peddling re: India PR inside their country.

The one thing we should NOT underestimate the kanglus for, is their potential for terrorism in India : they may be too much pussies to make actual jihadi battalions & psuedo-militias like LeT or Jaish, but steady stream of palestine style solo suicide bomber jihadi ? yep, they are capable of that and they are capable of that more so than Pakistan due to level of BD border porosity.

But that is also the silver lining in a sense - the only threat BD poses to India, it poses on BD's western border, aka border with India's heartland and not peripherial 7 sisters. So the problem is also solvable, even if we take Indian babudom approach.


T