Afg General Abdul Raziq spewing venom against Pakistan

[Shabaz Sharif]

He is just making up things. Like you can see in the passage i quoted from Marozzi's book, Temur invaded what is today Pakistan and ravaged the people there, they did not join his army, lol, that is just nonsense. Those 100.000 slaves were rounded up from Temur's campaign in what is now Pakistan before they were marched to the gates of Delhi and massacred. Doesnt matter what their religion was, that is irrelevant.
.

history professor tell me why would Timur take 100,000 men from Pakistan and kill them in Delhi? Are you that fucking dumb? And another thing the only historical accepted account of forced conversions happened in Iran. When state forcefully converted majority of Iranis from sunnis to Shia not many centuries ago. No such a thing happened in Pakistan.

So Iranis are forcefully converted Shias.

Safavid conversion of Iran to Shia Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A shame really.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Good question....Sultan Mahmoud in particular was an Afghan of Turk origin, from Ghazni (as are many Ghilzai Pashtuns). He brutally repressed and massacred people across today's Pakistan and forcefully converted them into Suni Islam. Afghans naturally revere him for serving our region well, but the mind boggles as to why Pakistanis glorify him today. They do the same with the Ghorids, who built the last Tajik spawned empire and the same with the Abdalis, with Ahmed Shah Abdali - a Kandahari



That maybe so, but in his Baburnama the Mughul ruler clearly expressed his racist disdain for India's natives as well as the general climate therein, with his motivation - as with all Central Asian rulers (including Afghans) – being loot and plunder. Nostalgic historical revisionism will neither help the Indians, Pakistanis nor greater Central Asia. We must all acknowledge brutal injustices for what they were, if we’re ever going to evolve into something better. Wrong is wrong, not matter if carried out by “Muslims” or any other people...

ghurids were not tajiks
Ghurids were Pashtuns

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

history professor tell me why would Timur take 100,000 men from Pakistan and kill them in Delhi? Are you that fucking dumb? And another thing the only historical accepted account of forced conversions happened in Iran. When state forcefully converted majority of Iranis from sunnis to Shia not many centuries ago. No such a thing happened in Pakistan.

So Iranis are forcefully converted Shias.

Safavid conversion of Iran to Shia Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A shame really.

Persia got occupied by hotak tribe of pashtuns for this reason, safavids tried to forcibly convert people of kandahar into shiaism. ................Hotaks taught them a brutal lesson, safavids ki hamesha k liye chutti ho gai.

 

[anonymus]

@anonymus
aap mirchi kyun kar rahe ho,,,,,,pehle se hi ek ne,,,,

AAG mein ghee dalana upna kartavya hai.

 

[ghoul]

Another pervert. Stop talking about skin colour and rape, those are just your sad little fantasies that make other people feel dirty to even communicate with you on the net. You clearly have some serious mental problems and a strange fixation on women being raped and tyring to big up Pakistani gypsy people that nobody has ever heard of. Piss off. I can argue with nationalists, but not with perverts.



So remind me what we were talking about and what your other ID was.

You just can't accept reality that your country is known for foreigners raping its women, and that the men being too cowardly to defend their women from lusty hordes. And how am I a pervert for stating the bitter truth? And how did you "own" our arses? I told you your country's history and you accused me of pervertedness. Trust me, I don't perv after Persian women. I don't want them shedding hair all over my body

And "gypsy" people killed your beloved Tajik, Muhammad of Ghaur. So that's a really great achievement in my opinion.

 

[ghoul]

Talking out of your brown hole again.

This is from page 264 of Marozzi's book on Temur:

"The first skirmish came when Temur's reconnaissance party of seven hundred cavalry was attacked by the forces of Mallu Khan, who was then ruling Delhi through Sultan Mahmud Khan. The Tatars held off the Indians and returned safely to camp, but there were importance consequences. First, Temur had managed to tempt Mallu into battle, albeit little more than a scuffle. This augured well. After the interminable siege of Multan, Temur was minded to take Delhi as quickly as possible. He did not want to be forced to sit and wait for the city to surrender from starvation. Far better to lure Mallu into a pitched battle and settle the issue without delay. Second, the rush of troops against the Tatars had been met by roars of approval from the hundred thousand Hindus taken prisoner en route to Delhi. Such was the fervour of their reaction, born out of hopes of liberation, that Temur, fearing a rebellion in his rearguard, gave orders for each and every one to be killed on the spot".

And we dont care how Shi'a Islam came to Iran because Islam came to Iran by war from the very beginning so it doesnt matter. It took over 300 years for Iranians to tilt towards being a Muslim majority people because Iranians kept rebelling against Islam until they finally made it their own on their own terms. I thank God anyway that Shi'a Islam did come to Iran which has helped us to stay free from the mindless jihadism and Arabism you see today in places like Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Somalia, Pakistan etc



No they didnt. Afghans only captured Esfahan and stayed there for several years before being kicked out and massacred while they were retreating. Nader Shah then invaded Balochuestan and slaughtered thousands of Balouchis for collaborating with Afghan rebels against the Safavids. Nader Shah then invaded Afghanistan and tottally destroyed the Abdali who were forced to submit to him and send their men to fight as his front line auxiliary. Nader Shah then crushed the Ghilzai Afghans and went on to invade Pakistan crushed them too, and ended up sacking Delhi and giving the Moghals a mortal blow they never recovered from.

You people are so full of your own spicy curry your brain cells have been fried.

So how are the defenders of Delhi related to modern day Pakistanis and Punjabis for that matter?

Talking out of your brown hole again.

This is from page 264 of Marozzi's book on Temur:

"The first skirmish came when Temur's reconnaissance party of seven hundred cavalry was attacked by the forces of Mallu Khan, who was then ruling Delhi through Sultan Mahmud Khan. The Tatars held off the Indians and returned safely to camp, but there were important consequences. First, Temur had managed to tempt Mallu into battle, albeit little more than a scuffle. This augured well. After the interminable siege of Multan, Temur was minded to take Delhi as quickly as possible. He did not want to be forced to sit and wait for the city to surrender from starvation. Far better to lure Mallu into a pitched battle and settle the issue without delay. Second, the rush of troops against the Tatars had been met by roars of approval from the hundred thousand Hindus taken prisoner en route to Delhi. Such was the fervour of their reaction, born out of hopes of liberation, that Temur, fearing a rebellion in his rearguard, gave orders for each and every one to be killed on the spot".

And we dont care how Shi'a Islam came to Iran because Islam came to Iran by war from the very beginning so it doesnt matter. It took over 300 years for Iranians to tilt towards being a Muslim majority people because Iranians kept rebelling against Islam until they finally made it their own on their own terms. I thank God anyway that Shi'a Islam did come to Iran which has helped us to stay free from the mindless jihadism and Arabism you see today in places like Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Somalia, Pakistan etc



No they didnt. Afghans only captured Esfahan and stayed there for several years before being kicked out and massacred while they were retreating. Nader Shah then invaded Balochuestan and slaughtered thousands of Balouchis for collaborating with Afghan rebels against the Safavids. Nader Shah then invaded Afghanistan and tottally destroyed the Abdali who were forced to submit to him and send their men to fight as his front line auxiliary. Nader Shah then crushed the Ghilzai Afghans and went on to invade Pakistan, crushed them too, and ended up sacking Delhi and giving the Moghals a mortal blow they never recovered from.

You people are so full of your own spicy curry your brain cells have been fried.

Nadir Shah was a turk. You are accusing us of being proud of having collaborated with foreign rulers, yet you are being proud of a turkic ruler of Persia? I mean how confused and self contradictory are you?

And Nadir Shah was supported by Sultan Muqarrab Khan Gakhar of Potohar in his Delhi campaign, after the Gakhar sultan was assured by Nadir Shah that he won't get attacked. Nadir Shah awarded Sultan Muqarrab the title of "nawab".

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Talking out of your brown hole again.

This is from page 264 of Marozzi's book on Temur:

"The first skirmish came when Temur's reconnaissance party of seven hundred cavalry was attacked by the forces of Mallu Khan, who was then ruling Delhi through Sultan Mahmud Khan. The Tatars held off the Indians and returned safely to camp, but there were important consequences. First, Temur had managed to tempt Mallu into battle, albeit little more than a scuffle. This augured well. After the interminable siege of Multan, Temur was minded to take Delhi as quickly as possible. He did not want to be forced to sit and wait for the city to surrender from starvation. Far better to lure Mallu into a pitched battle and settle the issue without delay. Second, the rush of troops against the Tatars had been met by roars of approval from the hundred thousand Hindus taken prisoner en route to Delhi. Such was the fervour of their reaction, born out of hopes of liberation, that Temur, fearing a rebellion in his rearguard, gave orders for each and every one to be killed on the spot".

And we dont care how Shi'a Islam came to Iran because Islam came to Iran by war from the very beginning so it doesnt matter. It took over 300 years for Iranians to tilt towards being a Muslim majority people because Iranians kept rebelling against Islam until they finally made it their own on their own terms. I thank God anyway that Shi'a Islam did come to Iran which has helped us to stay free from the mindless jihadism and Arabism you see today in places like Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Somalia, Pakistan etc



No they didnt. Afghans only captured Esfahan and stayed there for several years before being kicked out and massacred while they were retreating. Nader Shah then invaded Balochuestan and slaughtered thousands of Balouchis for collaborating with Afghan rebels against the Safavids. Nader Shah then invaded Afghanistan and tottally destroyed the Abdali who were forced to submit to him and send their men to fight as his front line auxiliary. Nader Shah then crushed the Ghilzai Afghans and went on to invade Pakistan, crushed them too, and ended up sacking Delhi and giving the Moghals a mortal blow they never recovered from.

You people are so full of your own spicy curry your brain cells have been fried.

Nadir shah afshar was not effeminate persian, he was turk.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Rubbish. Pakistanis on average are much weaker, skinnier and lighter-boned than Middle Eastern, European and African peoples.

And Iranians dont commit suicide. They'd rather fight and win, or fight and be martyred. We are not cowards like you that just surrender or commit suicide at the first sign of trouble like you just admitted your ancestors did, lmao...

Pakistanis are shorter then North Europeans on average for exemple. But arabs and iranis? You most be smoking some good shit there. While Iranis quickly converted to Shia Islam forcefully because Iranis are meek and cowards. I don't doubt for a second that Israel can turn you guys in to jews if they wanted.

Millions of non-muslims were living in Pakistan before 47, still many millions do. Unlike just 125,000 zorostrians left in the world, and 80% of them in South Asia. Akbar also wanted to impose his own religion called Deni Ellahi, but he quickly had to forget about his plans. I bet he would have been succefull in Iran.

Pakistani muslims are converted by sufis, did invasions played role? Yes they did, they allowed Islamic sufis to preach freerly. Even then many millions still stayed non-muslims because preaching only go so far. While when state forces religion on its meek and coward population then results are there for everyone to see. Another exemple is Pakistani christians, did British forced them to convert? Nope, but if British had not occupied then i doubt christians would have been allowed to preach.

 

[KingMamba]

You're Indians that were converted to Islam and became a new country only after World War 2, everybody knows this.

Do not project your forced conversion to Shiasm by Turks on us, Sufi shrines litter every village in our country we chose to convert whereas your ancestors cowered like the pathetic insects they were. Not one instance of any Persian resisting forced conversion to Shia Islam, in fact your nation tends to produce more runners than fighters from the Parsis of India who chose to run instead of fight the Arabs to the political refugees who ran as your Shah did. In fact I would not be surprised if you were yourself a political refugee or at least your parents, most of you bloated in the head Iranians are.

You're a Pakistani, your people have never been rulers of their own land until the British created your country and "partitioned" you from India. Your country didnt even exist until 1947. Before that you were the most conquered and defeated part of India, always losing to invaders and being ruled by foreigners that you now try to identify with because you are ashamed about historically being the losers among Indians.

Samma Dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hindu Shahis
Baluch have always been ruled by their tribe leaders
Rai dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
King Porus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ruled over the Paurava Kingdom which was entirely in modern Pakistan

Again keep your bigoted ignorance to yourself.

You were the slaves and servants of the Moghals, not their equals. Babur wrote in his own autobiography that he hated the subcontinent and that your people were ugly and filthy. I dont know why you think you can lie to other people across the internet and act like these foreign empires are apart of your peoples' past achievements when they are not. Moghals have nothing to do with Pakistanis. They were Timurid Turks came from Fergana in what is now Uzbekistan.

About 10 years ago i was sent a copy of Babur's autobiography as a gift and have read through it twice. There wasnt any place called "Punjab" in his day, that name was given to northwest India by a different Moghal king over a century later, and Babur insulted and did not respect the natives that lived in northwest India in his book. Babur wrote about putting to death and beheading many Afghans and Indians in what is now Pakistan and building towers of skulls there as a warning to people not to resist the Turks invasion and to terrorize the locals into submission.

I have the original hardback version of his book from OUP but you can buy the re-released paperback edition here and read it all for yourself: The Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor (Modern Library Classics): W.M. Thackston Jr.: 9780375761379: Amazon.com: Books

Yes maybe those Pashtun and Punjabis of what is now modern day Pakistan should have ran away like your forefathers and sought asylum in Myanmar or something instead right? Sorry that we did not inherent the inherent Iranian coward trait that you guys have exhibited since being subjugated by the Great Caliph Omar RA. Even today your two Supreme leaders were of foreign origin namely Khameini being an Azeri if not a Syed like he claims and Khomeini ironically having Indian origins.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

@ای ایران

Again i will never understand Irani telling us about being converted. I mean history is proof of who was forcefully converted because Iranis are meek and cowards. Mullahs have brainwashed them to the point that they believe shia-suni is result of Persian-Arab rivalry. World also knows how Mongols treated Iranis like dogs, compare that with when they invaded Pakistan region.

The fact is only 3 centuries ago majority of cowards Iranis were sunnis before forcefully being converted in to Shia islam. I personally was very shocked to learn this, because sunnis are not like that. But as i said even Israel can convert them in to jews if they wanted.

 

[ghoul]

The defenders might not be, but the 100,000 slaves Temur's army murdered there were taken from Pakistan.



He was an Afshar Turcoman from Khorasan, who are Iranians. Half of his army was Persian, the rest were Iranian Turcomans, Kurds, Lurs, Bakhtiaris and Georgians. His later auxiliaries included Turkmens (foreign ones), Abdali Afghans and some North Caucasians.



I dont give a shit about how Pakistanis became Muslim or Christians or anything else like that. Dont try to compare your peoples crappy and unimportant history to Iran. Everybody knows that Pakistanis are converted from Hendus for two reasons. 1) because you have a caste system and you were at the bottom of it so wanted out, and 2) because for about 1000 years Turks and Afghans kept invading and looting Pakistan and demolishing your temples, kidnapping thousands of you as slaves (hence the name "Hendu kosh" mountains which means "Hendu killer" in Persian) and generally making your ancestors lives miserable because you are such little weaklings that you couldnt resist, ever. So piss off with your curried-up rubbish.

They were and are not ethnic "iranian". They are Oghuz Turks. They are as foreign to Iran as the mughals were and are to India. I don't understand what you're trying to get across.

And why are you so proud of Timur's killing of 100,000 hindu slaves? I mean it's not like you Iranians were better. After all, he killed everyone in Isfahan didn't he? And also, how's some "Pozzi" guy reliable. Where are you primary sources?

And by Pakistanis, I get you mean Punjabis right? They were mostly converted by Sufi missionaries, that's why most Punjabis are chishti/naqshbandi today. And we couldn't resist ever? Where do you read your history from? Read the history of Rohtas fort to know what real resistance is, which you Iranian are incapable of putting up.

You've made several racist comments against Indians in the past too without provocation. Lol at "Curried up chimpanzee". The only chimpanzee here is you. Don't insult Indians again you understand you little hairy troll?

The funny thing is that he believes he's winning this internet argument He accused me of being perverted after I told him that his country's women were raped by Greeks and Arabs en mass.

 

[ghoul]

It is problem of Pakistanis not Indians. You people always try to trace roots in Arabia and Persia and end up becoming laughing stock. Arabs and Persian trample on you because you have no pride for your ancestry.

You people are so engrossed with fake history that you people name your missile as ghauri and ghaznavi, people who traumatized current Pakistan. None of them has gone south of Delhi.

If you people want to name a missile, name it as Aurangzeb or Malik Kafur which actually have penetrated deep into India. Ghaznavi and Ghori worship just shows inferiority complex driven Stockholm Syndrome.

Don't make sweeping generalizations. A lot of Pakistanis are proud of their ancestry. Baloch are proud of being Baloch, Pashtuns are proud of being Pashtuns. Jatts are proud of being jatts. And Arabs and Persians look down upon Indians as well, but unlike you Indians, we Pakistanis don't seek approval of these foreigners, neither do we need to. We're content at being Pakistanis. Period.

And I also disagree with the naming of missiles.

 

[mughal arslan shah mirza]

^^^@anonymus
Which history are you reading?
Ghaurids went all the way to Bengal through their turkic generals like Aibak. You're playing with semantics lol. Moreover where's somnath once again? Oh yeah it's in Gujarat.
As far as tracing roots is concerned you have hindu fascist parties that are built on 'Aryan' worship lol. Many of you oppress each other based on the gradations of 'Aryan-ness'. You sill have untouchables. You should be the last person to talk about complexes.
And which pakistanis are you talking about? They're a minority. Majority of jatts,gujjars, rajput etc. are proud to be whoever they are.

 

[MadDog]

It is problem of Pakistanis not Indians. You people always try to trace roots in Arabia and Persia and end up becoming laughing stock. Arabs and Persian trample on you because you have no pride for your ancestry.

You people are so engrossed with fake history that you people name your missile as ghauri and ghaznavi, people who traumatized current Pakistan. None of them has gone south of Delhi.

If you people want to name a missile, name it as Aurangzeb or Malik Kafur which actually have penetrated deep into India. Ghaznavi and Ghori worship just shows inferiority complex driven Stockholm Syndrome.

I have written on this forum a hundred times, Ghaznavi, Ghauri and Abdali were Pushtuns..Pakistan's second biggest ethnicity...there are 28 mill pushtuns in Pakistan ...twice the number in Afghanistan which is 12 mill....so Pakistan has every right to use that name...they are ancestors of the second biggest ethnic group in Pakistan..just the way Ranjit singh is a brave and respectable warrior of Punjab...and the land of Pakistan...and no we don't trace any roots in Persia..this is your misconception...as far as Arabic names are concerned...they are religious in nature...rather than cultural...we don't use names of any kings..and royal families..we use the names of companions of Prophets ..etc..eg Al Khalid based on Khalid Bin waleed..or recent operation Zarb-e-Azb...Azb being the sword of Prophet (S.A.W)....zarb meaning strike..so strike of azb..so kindly do your research before speaking out what you have been misinformed by people online.

 

[KingMamba]

Probably because he is telling truth and this is the reason that Pakistani could not put up any defence.

Pakistanis tries to trace their mythical ancestry to Persia or Arabia while the truth is that most of them have origin in Punjab for all of recorded history. If you go back enough you could always trace foreign roots like Persian if you go 3500 years back, Central asian if you go 4000 years, East European if 8000 and Northern European if 20,000 years and African if you go back 80,000 years.

But it only shows inferiority complex if you do so.

Really because some Pakistanis do have foreign roots, I am a Syed myself and I have gotten genetic tests done that show that my origins are indeed foreign although whether or not I descend from the Prophet himself perhaps God alone knows best. In Sailkot my family members tombs are venerated as shrines by the descendants of those who turned to Islam because of their influence who will attest that they came from outside of Punjab before settling down to spread Islam.

Likewise many others have similar origins and history records that the Muslim dynasties used to invite Turks, Arabs, and Persian to Bharat to settle for a large variety of regions. These became the "Ashraf" upper class of many of these empires. Another example would be the Ghilzais who while are Pashtun today are said to have descended from the Ghorids so why can't Pakistan name their its missile after the Ghorids when we have people who look up to them? Or the Abdalis for that matter since we have more Pashtuns on this side of the Durand than Afghanistan itself.

It shows no inferiority complex because Pakistanis have come to terms with the dark parts of their past, we know we were ruled over by outsiders for large periods but we also know that we are the masters of our own destiny today. If anything you Indians especially your Hindutva bunch need to get over it so worry about them not us. It is your problem.