History Full Length Answers !!!!

[Ruman Wajih]

ANS FROM O/A LEVEL.COM...... NOT ENOUGH

Oh k...than please send me the link and i'll myself compare my answer with the website's one as according to me i have written this answer on my own....

Provide an evidence before criticizing dear '

 

[Ruman Wajih]

Ok

 

[Ruman Wajih]

dear than why i have the same ans

please specify ............. who have posted this ans first: you or me.

if you have then plz show and stop arguing plz.

 

[Irfan Atique]

please specify ............. who have posted this ans first: you or me.

if you have then plz show and stop arguing plz.

U DID N I JUST POSTED MY REPLY TO UR ANS.... ANS TO ANS LETS C OTHERS OPINIONS

 

[khurrum]

guys i need answers of the following:

1.why do you think jinnah decided to support the idea of creating a seperate 'pakistan'? [7]

2.was the creation of the new state the greatest achievement jinnah made to the pakistan movement? give reasons. [14]

3.why was the kashmir issue a problem for pakistan? [7]

4.why was the british able to expand its control of the subcontinent in the period 1750-1850

5.why were the three confrences held between 1930 and 1932? [7]

6.how important was the development of regional language to pakistan between 1947 and 1988? [14]

 

[starship]

las

Q : Why were the British able to replace the Mughals as the dominant force in the sub-continent by 1850? [7].

[Military Superiority] : The British were successful in gaining control over India because of their military superiority. They fought a series of bloody wars and defeated a number of strong local rulers like Siraj-ud-Daulah in the battle of Plassy, Tipu Sultan in the battle of Maysure, the Marathas and the Sikhs. They had latest warfare tools, efficient communication for quick deployment of troops and sound financial resources for fighting costly wars in the far-flung areas. They had well-trained army and good planners of war strategies. They were also expert in bribing and conspiring with the key persons like Mir Jafar and Mir Sadiq with the help of whom they defeated their strong rivals in the battlefields.

[Dealing Skills] : The British were very skilled diplomatic experts. They gained the support of a number of local rulers. They were shrewd in purchasing the loyalties of influential Indians. They signed “subsidiary alliances” with local rulers under which the rulers were granted protection by the British troops. In return, they paid the salaries of the soldiers and provided residence to a British advisor. These were lucrative deals and control on the affairs!

[Indian Disunity] : Indians were not united as a single nation. They were divided along religious, linguistic and ethnic lines. Local rulers were interested only to their own territories. Some princely states even supplied troops to the British when they were fighting against their countrymen. It was very easy for the strong British army to conquer them one after the other. Majority of the well-off Indians stayed away from the wars. They were making profits by trading with the English merchants. They were also happy with the infrastructure the British were developing including schools, hospitals, roads, railway networks and irrigation systems.

[Doctrine of Lapse] : The doctrine of lapse, introduced in 1852, was a land-grabbing law. If the ruler of a princely state would pass away without having a direct heir, his kingdom would become property of the British. A number of states were seized under this law.

last reason of doctrine cannot be added because its states til '1850' and doctrine came in 1852 by delhousie

 

[Lilly2318]

Why did Jinnah leave the Congress ?

 

[Lilly2318]

why did jinnah leave congress ?

 

[A star]

main reasons
1) nehru conference
2)rejection of jinnahs 14 points
3)i am not sure but its simon commision
4)the salt march

 

[A star]

las


last reason of doctrine cannot be added because its states til '1850' and doctrine came in 1852 by delhousie

you can add
internall struggle by nobles for power in this. you can give examples for this which are ample
taking britishers as friends rather then enemies
battle of plassey ( the loss marked the end of mughal control and start of british superiority)

 

[Irfan Atique]

why did jinnah leave congress ?

because of nehru report, do the reading n ul find out

 

[Irfan Atique]

guys i need answers of the following:

1.why do you think jinnah decided to support the idea of creating a seperate 'pakistan'? [7]

2.was the creation of the new state the greatest achievement jinnah made to the pakistan movement? give reasons. [14]

3.why was the kashmir issue a problem for pakistan? [7]

4.why was the british able to expand its control of the subcontinent in the period 1750-1850

5.why were the three confrences held between 1930 and 1932? [7]

6.how important was the development of regional language to pakistan between 1947 and 1988? [14]

Dear Khurrum ask Ruman he is a genius..........

 

[zohra`xo]

Why did Jinnah leave the Congress ?

main reasons
1) nehru conference
2)rejection of jinnahs 14 points
3)i am not sure but its simon commision
4)the salt march

because of nehru report, do the reading n ul find out

You're both wrong, sorry.

Jinnah left Congress in 1921. That was before Simon commision, Nehru report, fourteen points and the salt march. So they can't be the reason why.

I can't give you a thorough reason on the spot, but I think it was mainly because Jinnah didn't support the Non-cooperation movement and Congress' tactics.

 

[A star]

You're both wrong, sorry.

Jinnah left Congress in 1921. That was before Simon commision, Nehru report, fourteen points and the salt march. So they can't be the reason why.

I can't give you a thorough reason on the spot, but I think it was mainly because Jinnah didn't support the Non-cooperation movement and Congress' tactics.

yes he left the congress earlier then these things but still worked to join both PML and congress untill the 14 points rejection

 

[zohra`xo]

yes he left the congress earlier then these things but still worked to join both PML and congress untill the 14 points rejection

Ahan, yeah I get what you meaan, but I guess it was a roundabout way of answering

 

[A star]

Ahan, yeah I get what you meaan, but I guess it was a roundabout way of answering

well as i said i am not sure in my answer
and i was explaining the reason which will lead to an answer

 

[zohra`xo]

well as i said i am not sure in my answer
and i was explaining the reason which will lead to an answer

Here we go!

By 1918, Mohandas Gandhi had become one of the main leaders of the Congress Party. Gandhi took a line of non-violent protest for gaining self-government for India. Jinnah took a different line. He wanted constitutional struggle to gain the self-government for India. Jinnah also opposed Gandhi’s support for the Khilfat movement. Gradually, many differences between them had arisen. In 1920, Jinnah left the Congress party.

 

[A star]

Here we go!

By 1918, Mohandas Gandhi had become one of the main leaders of the Congress Party. Gandhi took a line of non-violent protest for gaining self-government for India. Jinnah took a different line. He wanted constitutional struggle to gain the self-government for India. Jinnah also opposed Gandhi’s support for the Khilfat movement. Gradually, many differences between them had arisen. In 1920, Jinnah left the Congress party.

i think tagging others for this post would be better i gave my paper two years ago only here to help great explaination nonetheless

 

[zohra`xo]

Ohhh lol, okay sorry hah.
Lilly2318

 

[Irfan Atique]

You're both wrong, sorry.

Jinnah left Congress in 1921. That was before Simon commision, Nehru report, fourteen points and the salt march. So they can't be the reason why.

I can't give you a thorough reason on the spot, but I think it was mainly because Jinnah didn't support the Non-cooperation movement and Congress' tactics.

NON-COOPERATION MOVEMENT 1921 RIGHT... AND HERE IS THE THROUGH REASON....

In 1913 the Quaid-i-Azam joined the All India Muslim League without abandoning the membership of the Congress of which he had been an active member for some years. But this membership of the two organizations ended in December 1920. On the occasion of the special session at Nagpur the Congress adopted a new creed which permitted the use of unconstitutional means and decided to resort to non-violent non-co-operation for the attainment of self-government. The new policy and programme in essence envisaged withdrawal of the students from schools and colleges, boycott of law-courts by lawyers and litigants as well as the impending elections to the legislatures under the Government of India act 1919 either as voters or as candidates.1 The new philosophy of the Congress had been shaped almost entirely under the influence of Gandhi who had, by then, emerged as a commanding figure in Congress politics. Although there were many prominent Congressmen such as C.R. Das and Lala Lajpat Rai who did not subscribe to the programme of non-co-operation2, Jinnah was the only one in a crowd of several thousand people who openly expressed serious disagreement.

A constitutionalist by conviction he was unable to endorse, what he called, a sterile programme that the Congress intended to pursue. He was not opposed to agitation or, even putting stronger, pressure on the Government but he distrusted the ‘destructive methods which did not take account of human nature, and which might slip out of control at any time’3. He was convinced and he did not hesitate to tell Gandhi directly that ‘your way is the wrong way: mine is the right way – the constitutional way is the right way’4. But his voice of practical statesmanship was not heeded and Jinnah walked away not only out of the Congress session but from the Congress Party as well. Commenting on Jinnah’s courage as the solitary opponent of the Boycott resolution Col. Wedgwood, who was present in the Congress session as a fraternal delegate of the British Labour Party, observed that if India had only a few more men of Jinnah’s convictions she would not have to wait for long for her independence.5

Jinnah’s rupture with the Congress has been variously interpreted. Jawaharlal Nehru in his Autobiography is of the view that “Temperamentally he did not fit in at all with the new Congress. He felt completely out of his element in the Khadi-clad crowd demanding speeches in Hindustani”.6 In a later work he has reiterated that Jinnah left the Congress ‘because he could not adapt himself to the new and more advanced ideology and even more so because he dislike the crowds of ill-dressed people talking in Hindustani, who filled the Congress’7. This is hardly a convincing explanation of Jinnah’s breach with the Congress. During his fourteen year old8 association with the body he had freely mingled with the ‘Khadi-clad’ and ‘ill-dressed’ crowd at its meetings. This criticism, moreover, does not appear to reckon with the fact that the people whom Jinnah led in later years – the Muslims – were even poorer and less educated than Hindus who swelled the Congress gatherings and felt completely at home among them. It is of course true that the wilderness of unconstitutionalism had no appeal for him. There was nothing mealy-mouthed about it. He was convinced that Gandhian methodology for the solution of political problems would do great harm than good to India and especially the Muslims, as indeed it did. The Moplahs, the descendants of Arab sailors living along the Malabar Coast, rose in revolt against the British in August 1921 as partners in the non-co-operation movement and lost no less than 10,000 lives9. The Chauri-Chauri tragedy in the district of Gorakhpur, in February 1922, where twenty two policemen were overpowered and brutally burnt alive in the adjoining police station by a frenzied mob was also a sequel of Gandhi’s civil disobedience movement. Whether it was on account of excess such as these or some other unexplained factors, Gandhi realised his mistake at this stage; calling it a Himalayan blunder he called off the movement.