I read it and I come to the conclusion that the author has poor understanding of the history of India's independence. The 'dominion' status was just a mechanism to facilitate Indian Independence Act 1947, adopted in the light of the communal situation. It was envisaged that if both the countries will have common Governed Generals then the partition and power transfer will be smooth, even though both were empowered to legislate and remove that position. India obliged but Jinnah was too power hungry and retained that position for himself. The British monarch had to cast aside 'Emperor of India' title because India was an independent nation. And the British chief of Army and Navy were retained only because we did not have anyone trained enough to lead those forces. This article caters to jingoistic tendencies
@sam thats just his personal view by twisting the facts to satisfy his childish agenda. You should try to understand the difference between Independence Day and Republic Day-both have their own significance. Independence Day is August 15th 1947 when we brought down British Union Jack and hoisted India Flag on the ramparts of Red Fort. Jai Hind!!!
Comments
Read this: http://www.dailyo.in/politics/august-15-independence-day-dominion-nehru-mountbatten-king-george-vi-republic-day-constitution/story/1/5680.html
The British monarch had to cast aside 'Emperor of India' title because India was an independent nation. And the British chief of Army and Navy were retained only because we did not have anyone trained enough to lead those forces. This article caters to jingoistic tendencies