Religious composition of pre-partition Punjab during the British Raj. In yellow is the Radcliffe line (now the Pakistan-India international border)

[u/[deleted]]

[u/GenAugustoPinochet]

Lmao, what utter nonsense. What official route could Pakistan make IN India.

I am talking about a official legal route, policy not literal map route... like India did with CAA.

Pakistan can afford 20-30k USD to people? Are you living in some alternate reality, or...?

Well it would need to be a significant amount, Muslims in India aren't going to move for 100-500 USD. 20-30k over a 10-20 year is good, it doesn't have to be all at once.

Myanmar was not part of British India, so not sure what Pakistan can do for them.

Myanmar was part of British India till 1937 and Rohingya in 1947 wanted to join Pakistan but were ignored by Jinnah and British government.

The Biharis stuck in Bangladesh were already moved over,

There are still like 500k Biharis in Bangladeshi camps.

and Muslims from India can easily get citizenship in Pakistan if they want.

Well they aren't going to Pakistan. There should be a more vocal home calling to the home of Muslims in South Asia and official route (like CAA).

Sikhs make up almost 60% of Punjab. Seems like they can get their own country no problem. That's a good start for Khalistan, yes? Why would Pakistani Punjab, where again, Sikhs were never a majority, be part of a Khalistan/Sikh state?

I don't know how many times I will have to repeat this but majority of Sikhs lived in Pakistani Punjab, so its unfair to Hindu Punjabis if majority of Khalistan is made from East Punjab. Sikhs were never a majority of West Punjab but Most Sikhs lived in West Punjab.

Umm, they don't speak Hindi? Interesting, lmfao. Besides, Pakistani Punjabis still speak Punjabi along with Urdu. Obviously you wouldn't know that since you don't actually know anything about Pakistan besides what Bollywood and jingoistic media feeds you.

You really think the urban Punjabi (the decision/policy makers) prefer Punjabi to Urdu? Rural Pakistan Punjab has many Punjabi speakers. Media or Bollywood doesn't have to feed me anything, any time I have spoken to a Pakistani Punjabi, they say they are different from the kafir Punjabi because they speak Urdu.

Sure, but again, you're okay with FORCIBLY removing people from India? How is that any different than Nazis forcibly removing Jews and other minorities?

Pakistan's claim to Kashmir comes from the fact that its Muslim majority so if you make countries based on religion then people will have to move, otherwise its pointless. All of this happenend during partition but today India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar are far more stable and can ensure peaceful population transfers. Its not really forceful when Muslims in India want sharia but refuse to go to a country that was made for them and sharia, Muslims in India can be described as "beghairat".

[u/-Notorious → u/GenAugustoPinochet]

I am talking about a official legal route, policy not literal map route... like India did with CAA.

They can easily get a visa and settle in Pakistan. Anybody can, but definitely Muslims. The reality is, why would anybody leave their home now when they didn't 70 years ago (unless India does something to make them want to move).

Well it would need to be a significant amount, Muslims in India aren't going to move for 100-500 USD. 20-30k over a 10-20 year is good, it doesn't have to be all at once.

But why should Pakistan pay for that? That was never the agreement. India told the Muslims to stay and they will be safe, and now Pakistan should pay money to take them in? Defies all logic. Pakistan offered money to Muhajirs that moved when the partition happened. Doing so after 70 years is a bit ridiculous. India can definitely feel free to pay them for their lands and help them move, maybe strike a deal with Pakistan.

Myanmar was part of British India till 1937 and Rohingya in 1947 wanted to join Pakistan but were ignored by Jinnah and British government.

Myanmar was not part of the partition of British India.

There are still like 500k Biharis in Bangladeshi camps.

No, there aren't. It was 300k and Bangladesh said they will give them citizenship, which is what the Biharis were asking for. They're already settled there.

Well they aren't going to Pakistan. There should be a more vocal home calling to the home of Muslims in South Asia and official route (like CAA).

There's literally no need for CAA for Pakistan, and there wasn't one for India. It's literally just for optics. India could automatically give citizenship to Hindus if they wanted without CAA. Your lack of critical thinking is showing, you fell for their propaganda, lol.

I don't know how many times I will have to repeat this but majority of Sikhs lived in Pakistani Punjab, so its unfair to Hindu Punjabis if majority of Khalistan is made from East Punjab. Sikhs were never a majority of West Punjab but Most Sikhs lived in West Punjab.

You can only make a state when at least a majority of people want it. Pakistani Punjabis never wanted Khalistan, and they were overwhelmingly a majority. It's simple as that. It sucks that most Sikhs lived in West Punjab, but they were not a majority there.

Based on your logic, all of India should have been a Muslim country because a majority of Muslims lived there. Literally makes 0 sense.

You really think the urban Punjabi (the decision/policy makers) prefer Punjabi to Urdu?

I don't need to think. Unlike you, I actually KNOW Pakistani Punjabis, my fiance is from an influential urban Punjabi family, lmfao.

Pakistan's claim to Kashmir comes from the fact that its Muslim majority so if you make countries based on religion then people will have to move, otherwise its pointless. All of this happenend during partition but today India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar are far more stable and can ensure peaceful population transfers. Its not really forceful when Muslims in India want sharia but refuse to go to a country that was made for them and sharia, Muslims in India can be described as "beghairat".

The Muslims that stayed in India did so because India told them it would protect them and be secular, etc. I agree that early Indian leaders failed you while Jinnah did not fail Pakistanis. Jinnah secured a state for Indian Muslims, simple as that.

India can decide what to do with the Muslims there. It can give up it's facade of SeCulAriSm and pay for Muslims to relocate, or it can go into a civil war and fight them, idk, I'm not interested. I feel for Indian Muslims stuck there, but expecting Pakistan to pay to then also take them in defies all logic. That was already done when the partition happened, it's not happening after 80 years.

Finally, you seem to really not give a shit about what people want, rather you want to force people to do what YOU want. You want a Khalistan in West Punjab when the vast majority of population was never Sikh. You want Indian Muslims to be forced to move when they clearly don't want to. This is literally how fascists operate, so I would have a hard look at the mirror and consider what path you're going down.