# A Statue for A Pakistani Punjabi Hero.....Porus



## Rafi

My ancestral family village is in Jhelum - close to the site of the historical battle of Hydaspes River with Alexander the Great, our Jatt village is known for producing Warriors for generations, we have oral tradition of fighting in the battle against Alexander, right up to the modern day, when we send our sons and daughters to fight for the Pakistani Armed Forces. 

To cut a long story short, our village is thinking of erecting two statues and a monument to Alexander and Porus. To pay tribute to the two great warriors of their times, one a Greek Macedonian and the other a Pakistani Punjabi 

It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## Veeru

Rafi said:


> My ancestral family village is in Jhelum - close to the site of the historical battle of Hydaspes River with Alexander the Great, our Jatt village is known for producing Warriors for generations, we have oral tradition of fighting in the battle against Alexander, right up to the modern day, when we send our sons and daughters to fight for the Pakistani Armed Forces.
> 
> To cut a long story short, our village is thinking of erecting *two statues* and a monument to Alexander and Porus. *To pay tribute *to the two great warriors of their times, one a Greek Macedonian and the other a Pakistani Punjabi
> 
> It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.


 
1. In a Islamic nation????

2. What is "Jatt" ?? i was in impression that Islam and pakistan don't belive in jaat-paat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

Yes in a Islamic Nation.

Jat is my koum, yeah so what.????????

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Avatar

IMO it's a great initiative if carried out without twisting facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

I don't know what you mean by twisting facts, it would consist of a base, with two statues on each side - one of Porus and Alexander, in stylized poses, with a lion in between, and a flag pole for the Pakistani National Flag, with a plaque describing the battle and our villages participation in those historical events. We are also looking at making a website and interactive media. All the funds will Inshallah be raised by our village Pancheyat.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Masterchief

Avatar said:


> IMO it's a great initiative if carried out without twisting facts.


 both indians and pakistanis have an equal claim on the man's legacy, lets stop this tera-mera attitude brother.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## FreekiN

Rafi said:


> I don't know what you mean by twisting facts, it would consist of a base, with two statues on each side - one of Porus and Alexander, in stylized poses, with a lion in between, and a flag pole for the Pakistani National Flag, with a plaque describing the battle and our villages participation in those historical events. We are also looking at making a website and interactive media. All the funds will Inshallah be raised by our village Pancheyat.


 
Organize a fundraiser. 

I know Pakistanis dont do this stuff because they are fearful that the fundraiser organizer will just steal the money for himself, but its a way to get started, i guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Masterchief

Rafi said:


> I don't know what you mean by twisting facts, it would consist of a base, with two statues on each side - one of Porus and Alexander, in stylized poses, with a lion in between, and a flag pole for the Pakistani National Flag, with a plaque describing the battle and our villages participation in those historical events. We are also looking at making a website and interactive media. All the funds will Inshallah be raised by our village Pancheyat.


 I think instead of a lion it would be good if you keep the flag in the centre, porus on the right and alexander on left, (just a suggestion)

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Truth Teller

Masterchief said:


> both indians and pakistanis have an equal claim on the man's legacy, lets stop this tera-mera attitude brother.


 
You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own. 

We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history. 

Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history. If you feel you dont have anything to be proud of, then dont try to claim other's history as your own for god's sake.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## jayron

Rafi said:


> Yes in a Islamic Nation.
> 
> Jat is my koum, yeah so what.????????


 
Do you guys believe in erecting statues? Isn't it non islamic?


----------



## gubbi

Truth Teller said:


> You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own.
> 
> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history.


 
Lol desperately pandering to the Sikhs?

This happens to be a common theme amongst many members here. They try to portray that "they" sympathize with the Sikhs and their "plight" in India!! This when in the past Indo-Pak wars, Sikhs have been........

Anyhow, erect whatever statues you want, claim whatever version of history you want. That aint gonna change History or what highly educated and experienced academics consider to be facts.

Btw, isnt Idolatry considered a sin in Abrahamic religions?

Reactions: Like Like:
14


----------



## Masterchief

Truth Teller said:


> You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own.
> 
> We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history.
> 
> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history. If you feel you dont have anything to be proud of, then dont try to claim other's history as your own for god's sake.


 before partition that part where he fought was in India, he was a gandhar kshytriya, which means he was a hindu warrior, there are no kshytriyas in present day pakistan, so we have an equal claim on him, stop your rants.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Truth Teller

Masterchief said:


> before partition that part where he fought was in India, he was a gandhar kshytriya, which means he was a hindu warrior, there are no kshytriyas in present day pakistan, so we have an equal claim on him, stop your rants.


 
1st) india was created on 15th August 1947. Your country was created a day after Pakistan.

2nd) Why does his religious beliefs matter? Just because I'm Muslim does this mean i should try to claim the history of egyptians, persians, arabs, kurds, afghans, turks, ect, as my own histroy? Of course not.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## Truth Teller

gubbi said:


> *That aint gonna change History or what highly educated and experienced academics consider to be facts.*

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rafi

Lets not get bogged down in mutual hostility, what I think Truth Teller was referring to was, that indian Punjabi's only constitute 3% of india's population. 

By the way, the oral history of my family states that Manga (my ancestor) was one of the commanders in Porus's army - who was pardoned by Alexander because of his valor. Which is also the sign of Alexander's greatness, because at that time in history, the vanquished would expect no quarter in defeat.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rafi

Masterchief said:


> before partition that part where he fought was in India, he was a gandhar kshytriya, which means he was a hindu warrior, there are no kshytriyas in present day pakistan, so we have an equal claim on him, stop your rants.



*Muslims of Khatri origin*

*Following invasions by Turkic tribes from Afghanistan and the North West Frontier Province from the 11th century onwards, there were conversions of Hindus to Islam from among various Punjabi communities, including Khatris. Generally they retained their tribal and clan affiliations, as has been the norm in the region. Similarly, the Khatris who converted to Islam continue to retain a strong social identity.
Pakistan continues to have a prominent community of Khatris. Some Muslim Khatris like the Sahgal family, Aftab Ahmed Vohra, and Najam Sethi of Pakistan are examples of well-known and successful Muslim Khatris.*

*Khawajas

When Khatri traders from the western districts of the Punjab like Sargodha, Jhang, Jehlum, Chakwal, Faisalabad accepted Islam, they called themselves Khawaja and adopted Shaikh as their title. They are thus called Khawaja Shaikh. Some of them have also adopted Mian as a title. In recent years traders from the small town of Chiniot, in the Chiniot District, became prominent due to their contribution in the industries of Pakistan. These traders are known as Chiniotis or Chinioti Shaikhs. The trading family of Sahgals, Sahgal Khatris of Chakwal, are known simply as Punjabi Shaikh instead of Khawaja Shaikh. They use "Mian" as a title.
The first censuses of the Punjab were conducted by Denzil Ibbetson and Edward Maclagan in 1883 and 1892. According to their reports, the Khawajas of Bhera in Shahpur, Sargodha District were converted from Khatris, and those from Jhang were said to be converted from Aroras. At Chiniot, the majority of the Khawajas are Khatris, and some are Arora. They reported the following sections (gotras) of Khatris from Chiniot: Sahgal, Wadhaun (or Vadhavan), Talwar, Puri, Topra. One gotra of Arora was reported from Chiniot: the Goruwala.
The gotras of Khawajas from Bhera were reported as follows: Vohra, Sahgal, Kapur, Sethi, Duggal, Nanda, Mehndru, Chadha, Suri. These are all Khatri gotras.
The Khawajas of Layyah have following Khatri sections: Kapur, Puri, and Tandan
*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rajput Warrior

From wat i have read Raja Porus was a Rajput Punjabi not a Jatt.
It has been recorded that the Pandava tribe ruled the region of Punjab and specifically Jhelum during the era of Alexander the Great.

&#8220; The Punjabi ruler was Raja Porus, said to be a direct descendant of the Pandava kings &#8221; 
&#8212;City of Legends

Ptolemy recorded the presence of the Pandoouoi (Greek transliteration of Pandava) clan in the geographic location noted by Greek writers of King Porus's kingdom in Punjab where he fought Alexander the Great.


----------



## gubbi

Rafi said:


> Lets not get bogged down in mutual hostility, what I think Truth Teller was referring to was, that indian Punjabi's only constitute 3% of india's population.


 
I do like your posts - especially those which make logical sense, about the rest, lets leave them. I really find it amusing how some members here go all out "showing sympathy" to the Indian Sikhs, Dalits, Maoists etc. Some even calling for an independent state of Kahlistan. But then when (IIRC) Abir put forth the idea of an independent Kahlistan with Lahore as its capital each and every one of those sympathizers fell silent! We Indians show no such phony support for Pakistani Hindus or other minorities. I am sure they are as patriotic about Pakistan as your other country men following Islam. So his comment about only Sikhs reserving the right to celebrate Porus as one of them is very hollow and pretentious, not to mention what constitutes as pandering! Same goes for others who exhibit such artificial sympathies.
Quoting you, what if Sikhs constitute only 3% of Indian population? They are as proud to be Indian as any other proud Indian. And every Indian is proud of the Sikh community and their contributions.

That being said, your family history is fascinating! So you are a descendent of Porus' Commander Manga. Do you have any information about the commander? And about the comment that the vanquished expecting no quarter in defeat is IMHO an over exaggeration. Havent there been numerous instances about captured warriors being spared their lives even sometimes defeated Generals or Kings being given their kingdoms back? Porus earned Alexander's admiration thorough his feats on the battlefield, and being as shrewed as he was, Alexander saw an opportunity to control the territories through Porus and collect revenue. That makes sense in Alexander's decision to spare Porus.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Gubbi dude dont talk abt punjabis... ur not even a punjabi urself(nor am i).... Just coz 2-3% punjabis live in india doesnt make india somehow the owner of the whole punjabi history.. or the historic stuff tht happened in wat is today Pakistan... Its like claiming tht the father of some guy frm jehlum is also the grand daddy of a indian guy sitting in delhi or mumbai.
P.S=According to Firdusi(Irans national poet) Porus actually won the battle thts why alexander returned to greece........ Its also a well known fact tht he almost died in the battle.

@Rafi=Bro Hope u know Porus was 7 ft tall......So good luck.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Water Car Engineer

> Hope u know Porus was 7 ft tall. n Not a Jatt.



Theres no way in hell he was 7 foot, maybe 6 foot. 6 foot back then was like 7 foot know.

And Porus was sadly defeated.






Nice video


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Liquid said:


> Theres no way in hell he was 7 foot, maybe 6 foot. 6 foot back then was like 7 foot know.
> 
> Wat r u talkin abt?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Porus was sadly defeated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice video
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do u believe everything Hollywood says?n not an ancient Persian historian who recorded the battle.
Click to expand...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Safriz

Rafi said:


> My ancestral family village is in Jhelum - close to the site of the historical battle of Hydaspes River with Alexander the Great, our Jatt village is known for producing Warriors for generations, we have oral tradition of fighting in the battle against Alexander, right up to the modern day, when we send our sons and daughters to fight for the Pakistani Armed Forces.
> 
> To cut a long story short, our village is thinking of erecting two statues and a monument to Alexander and Porus. To pay tribute to the two great warriors of their times, one a Greek Macedonian and the other a Pakistani Punjabi
> 
> It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.


 
Dude forget about statues on which birds will poop for years to come and it wont look good..Instead buy good quality metal detectors...Legend says the area is littered with ancient artifacts specially from the battle..Legend say that Alexander also buried a big pile of gold and treasures along the river Jhelum..
If with the help of professional treasure hunting detectors you and your fellow villagers comb the area .. you might get lucky...That will be a more creative investment....

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rafi

gubbi said:


> I do like your posts - especially those which make logical sense, about the rest, lets leave them. I really find it amusing how some members here go all out "showing sympathy" to the Indian Sikhs, Dalits, Maoists etc. Some even calling for an independent state of Kahlistan. But then when (IIRC) Abir put forth the idea of an independent Kahlistan with Lahore as its capital each and every one of those sympathizers fell silent! We Indians show no such phony support for Pakistani Hindus or other minorities. I am sure they are as patriotic about Pakistan as your other country men following Islam. So his comment about only Sikhs reserving the right to celebrate Porus as one of them is very hollow and pretentious, not to mention what constitutes as pandering! Same goes for others who exhibit such artificial sympathies.
> Quoting you, what if Sikhs constitute only 3% of Indian population? They are as proud to be Indian as any other proud Indian. And every Indian is proud of the Sikh community and their contributions.
> 
> That being said, your family history is fascinating! So you are a descendent of Porus' Commander Manga. Do you have any information about the commander? And about the comment that the vanquished expecting no quarter in defeat is IMHO an over exaggeration. Havent there been numerous instances about captured warriors being spared their lives even sometimes defeated Generals or Kings being given their kingdoms back? Porus earned Alexander's admiration thorough his feats on the battlefield, and being as shrewed as he was, Alexander saw an opportunity to control the territories through Porus and collect revenue. That makes sense in Alexander's decision to spare Porus.


 
I think it was the exception rather than the rule. In ancient times if you lost a battle - you were basically summarily executed. Regarding Alexander - his greatness must have been his charisma, think about it, he inspired his troops to travel from Greece to half way around the world. 

Regarding Manga he was a cavalry commander - in our oral tradition he received more than 30 wounds not 1 of them on his back - which shows that he never turned his back on the Greeks, in our tradition it is the horse archers of the Macedonians that carried the day for Alexander as the Punjabi's cavalry could not compete.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Dude this was like 300 BC. Its crazy enough finding a 7 foot guy in our modern age. I bet he was like 6,4 or something, which is like a giant I am sure back then. Its not hollywwod that says that he was defeated, but educated historians all over the world. I know Indians and Pakistans would disagree, but he was defeated.

http://i52.tinypic.com/21bp5bc.jpg

This is a modern picture. With heights that are average to western nation's citizens. Dont be supprised when they find out Alexander was like 5'5 and not like 6 foot like in the movies too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

safriz said:


> Dude forget about statues on which birds will poop for years to come and it wont look good..Instead buy good quality metal detectors...Legend as the area must be littered with ancient artifacts specially from the battle..Legend say that Alexander also buried a big pile of gold and treasures along the river Jhelum..
> If with the help of professional treasure hunting detectors you and your fellow villagers comb the area .. you might get lucky...That will be a more creative investment....


 
Veer - we have to teach the next generation about our history, and occasionally tv crews come and film in the area, so it would be nice to have a monument, here is an example.






Vercingetorix = this guy was a Gaul (ancestors of the French) he was defeated by Caesar, but the French have erected a statue to honor him.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gubbi

Pakistani Nationalist said:


> Gubbi dude dont talk abt punjabis... ur not even a punjabi urself(nor am i).... Just coz 2-3% punjabis live in india doesnt make india somehow the owner of the whole punjabi history.. or the historic stuff tht happened in wat is today Pakistan... Its like claiming tht the father of some guy frm jehlum is also the grand daddy of a indian guy sitting in delhi or mumbai.


 
Where did I ever claim "ownership"? History is history - recorded, studied by highly educated, experienced academics and scholars. Hearsay, rumors and mere wishes dont change what happened. Every story is scrutinized and studied before being established as a fact. Today Pakistan is a fact. It wasnt, in any form, before 1947 - give it whatever wild spin you want. Thats all. 
About me, you assume too much.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Safriz

Rafi said:


> Veer - we have to teach the next generation about our history, and occasionally tv crews come and film in the area, so it would be nice to have a monument, here is an example.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Vercingetorix = this guy was a Gaul (ancestors of the French) he was defeated by Caesar, but the French have erected a statue to honor him.


 
And the cost will be?

Did you know that birds specially pigeons get diarrhea as soon as they see a statue?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Rafi said:


> I think it was the exception rather than the rule. In ancient times if you lost a battle - you were basically summarily executed. Regarding Alexander - his greatness must have been his charisma, think about it, he inspired his troops to travel from Greece to half way around the world.
> 
> Regarding Manga he was a cavalry commander - in our oral tradition he received more than 30 wounds not 1 of them on his back - which shows that he never turned his back on the Greeks, in our tradition it is the horse archers of the Macedonians that carried the day for Alexander as the Punjabi's cavalry could not compete.


 
Horse archers of the Makedonians? What horse archers? Do you know the composition of the Makedonian army and its various formations? there were Scythian archers and they were auxiliaries, not part of the Makedonian army.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Joe Shearer

Liquid said:


> Dude this was like 300 BC. Its crazy enough finding a 7 foot guy in our modern age. I bet he was like 6,4 or something, which is like a giant I am sure back then. Its not hollywwod that says that he was defeated, but educated historians all over the world. I know Indians and Pakistans would disagree, but he was defeated.
> 
> http://i52.tinypic.com/21bp5bc.jpg
> 
> This is a modern picture. With heights that are average to western nation's citizens. Dont be supprised when they find out Alexander was like 5'5 and not like 6 foot like in the movies too.


 
Is it just I or is this thread weird? 

It is well-established that Alexander was short-statured, like most other Greeks of his time, not in excess of 5'6'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## twoplustwoisfour

Truth Teller said:


> You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own.
> 
> We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history.
> 
> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history. If you feel you dont have anything to be proud of, then dont try to claim other's history as your own for god's sake.


 
I am a Punjabi Hindu whose family was thrown out of Pakistan at the time of Partition. I have an equal right on Punjabi history as you Bigots.

Add to it the fact that you have turned your back on the Sikhs by calling yourself an Islamic nation, therefore, you have no right to claim Sikh history as your own.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## mehru

Rafi! I must applaud you and your village for taking such a bold initiative. Very nice gesture i must say.


----------



## KS

Oh no ! Not again, not this subject.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ajtr

Rafi said:


> My ancestral family village is in Jhelum - close to the site of the historical battle of Hydaspes River with Alexander the Great, our Jatt village is known for producing Warriors for generations, we have oral tradition of fighting in the battle against Alexander, right up to the modern day, when we send our sons and daughters to fight for the Pakistani Armed Forces.
> 
> *To cut a long story short, our village is thinking of erecting two statues and a monument to Alexander and Porus. *To pay tribute to the two great warriors of their times, one a Greek Macedonian and the other a Pakistani Punjabi
> 
> It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.


I thought erecting statues in pakistan is considered as haram.A fatwa was passed on this 3-4 years back (citation needed.)


----------



## Rafi

ajtr said:


> I thought erecting statues in pakistan is considered as haram.A fatwa was passed on this 3-4 years back (citation needed.)


 
Erecting a statue for worship is definitely haraam, we are erecting it as a historical monument to a famous battle that our ancestors took part in. Regarding our history - we are like the Persians and Egyptians - whereas we are proud of our past, and also proud of our Islamic civilization.


----------



## Rafi

punit said:


> Nice to see children of converted hindus moving back to original cultural /religion. erecting a statue is a nice gesture. Porus also used to do yagya, worship nature etc.. hope that will be followed


 
You are a troll - there is zero chance of us - going back to worshiping anything but Allah - regarding Porus and his soldiers, we do not know for sure what religion, if any he followed - he was most likely Buddhist as the areas that constitute Pakistan were followers of the Buddha.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## jha

West has always argued that Porus was defeated which has been accepted widely in subcontinent also..I am not really in position to decide..
However one thing is clear a BIHARI DID DEFEAT ALEXANDER's ARMY..CHANDRAGUPTA MAURYA..

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## rockstarIN

mehru said:


> Rafi! I must applaud you and your village for taking such a bold initiative. Very nice gesture i must say.



Great Initiative,

I would suggest a statute like this depicting the both.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

^^^^^^^^^
Thats just not true, his troops refused to march beyond the Punjab - as they were tired of fighting.


----------



## rockstarIN

jha said:


> West has always argued that Porus was defeated which has been accepted widely in subcontinent also..I am not really in position to decide..
> However one thing is clear a BIHARI DID DEFEAT ALEXANDER's ARMY..CHANDRAGUPTA MAURYA..


 
I second that, I do not believe Porus was defeated. Also Alexander was so fearful of 'Bihari Army'


----------



## rockstarIN

Rafi said:


> ^^^^^^^^^
> Thats just not true, his troops refused to march beyond the Punjab - as they were tired of fighting.


 
He said Alexander's army,. not Alexander. Nanda Dynasty was in power when Alexander was in Indian area..


----------



## Rafi

rockstar said:


> He said Alexander's army,. not Alexander. Nanda Dynasty was in power when Alexander was in Indian area..



Yeah but if not for Porus, and my ancestor Manga - who's courageous resistance had not exhausted the Greeks, they would have likely made mince meat of the Nanda's - remember that.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## IND151

* porus was student of chanakya.* chanakya suggested to king ambhi, another student of him, that ambhi should fake to surrender before Alexander and host him so porus will get time to gather army to fight Alexander.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jha

rockstar said:


> He said Alexander's army,. not Alexander. Nanda Dynasty was in power when Alexander was in Indian area..



Chandragupta Maurya made Alexander's army look like minions when he conquered Macedonian territories at the age of 20 and later defeated Seleucus who then offered his daughter to Chandragupta..

BTW Chanakya was my ancestor..and i am very proud that i am a Descendant of one of the wisest man this world has ever seen..


----------



## punit

*there is zero chance of us - going back to worshiping anything but Allah - regarding Porus and his soldiers*, 
no one knows the future .. so wait and watch 
*we do not know for sure what religion, if any he followed - he was most likely Buddhist as the areas that constitute Pakistan were followers of the Buddha*. 

buddhism is a also indian religion. or u can go further back and follow Indus valley civ. and their proto pashupati


----------



## Truth Teller

punit said:


> *there is zero chance of us - going back to worshiping anything but Allah - regarding Porus and his soldiers*,
> no one knows the future .. so wait and watch
> *we do not know for sure what religion, if any he followed - he was most likely Buddhist as the areas that constitute Pakistan were followers of the Buddha*.
> 
> buddhism is a also indian religion. or u can go further back and follow Indus valley civ. and their proto pashupati



Buddhism is said to have come from Nepal. Not india.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Spring Onion

Rafi said:


> I don't know what you mean by twisting facts, it would consist of a base, with two statues on each side - one of Porus and Alexander, in stylized poses, with a lion in between, and a flag pole for the Pakistani National Flag, with a plaque describing the battle and our villages participation in those historical events. We are also looking at making a website and interactive media. All the funds will Inshallah be raised by our village Pancheyat.


 
what material you want to use for making the statues ? i guess it wont need a big money .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

We were looking at different materials Jana - but if we want a monument that will last for a long time, then you can't get better than stone, we are also looking at sculpture but that would be very expensive.


----------



## Spring Onion

twoplustwoisfour said:


> Why should I try and convince you?
> 
> Edit: Anyways, my family is from Layyah, Dera Ghazi Khan. If you want to believe it, do so. If not, I don't care


 
ok we believe you. you are from saraiki belt which you believe holds a punjabi accent  and read DG Khan

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Spring Onion

Rafi said:


> We were looking at different materials Jana - but if we want a monument that will last for a long time, then you can't get better than stone, we are also looking at sculpture but that would be very expensive.


 
you must contact students of NCA and also Lok Virsa they will be happy to lend a helping hand in making the sculpture .

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

punit said:


> *there is zero chance of us - going back to worshiping anything but Allah - regarding Porus and his soldiers*,
> no one knows the future .. so wait and watch
> *we do not know for sure what religion, if any he followed - he was most likely Buddhist as the areas that constitute Pakistan were followers of the Buddha*.
> 
> buddhism is a also indian religion. or u can go further back and follow Indus valley civ. and their proto pashupati


 
Know this indian - we are proud of our religion ISLAM, and we will follow this beautiful religion to the day of Judgement INSHALLAH. We still honor the Sufi that conquered our hearts, with the beauty of the Quran and the Noble Prophet's life, and the story of Imam Hussain and the Imams and also the Saints. 

Regarding the Indus Valley we do not know their religion - but they ate beef, and had no temples. And Buddhism was wiped out in bharat - but flourished in Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Rafi

Jana said:


> you must contact students of NCA and also Lok Virsa they will be happy to lend a helping hand in making the sculpture .


 
Yes Jana that is a beautiful idea, we are in the initial process - all will go well Inshallah.


----------



## Birruna

Rafi said:


> Know this indian - we are proud of our religion ISLAM, and we will follow this beautiful religion to the day of Judgement INSHALLAH. We still honor the Sufi that conquered our hearts, with the beauty of the Quran and the Noble Prophet's life, and the story of Imam Hussain and the Imams and also the Saints.
> 
> Regarding the Indus Valley we do not know their religion - but they ate beef, and had no temples. And Buddhism was wiped out in bharat - but flourished in Pakistan.


 
I think you guys should name your next missile after Porus. Atleast you would have named one missile after somebody who actually was a legend from the Pakistani region.


----------



## Rafi

On a lighter note - I think our next missile should be named after the famous tribe and cricket player Afridi.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Thank you for wanting to erect a monument in honor of Raja Porus Pandayadeva. You may all elect not to believe this but my family has traced and is acknowledged to be the direct descendants of Raja Porus. We skipped to Delhi during partition. Respect would have it that we be asked for our input before erecting any monument in honour of our ancestor. The intent however is noble. Ps we are hindus and therefore must assume that Raja Porus was also hindu and not buddhist since our family crest has always been the Aum

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## KS

^^^ Sounds fair to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

IMO he was Buddhist, but we are doing this - because our ancestor and people were directly involved in the battle, to also honor Baba Manga.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Rafi said:


> IMO he was Buddhist, but we are doing this - because our ancestor and people were directly involved in the battle, to also honor Baba Manga.


 
Sorry Rafi. Just got off the phone with my gramps in Delhi. He says that there was never anything but a Pandaya Hindu influence on our family so you have to accept that Raja Porus was Hindu. Apparently the people of your area were well known for their military organisation and skill and are referred to in various parts of the vedic literature. I am certain that your ancestor Baba Manga was no different. My gramps talks fondly of the Khewra salt mines.


----------



## Spring Onion

PlanetWarrior said:


> Thank you for wanting to erect a monument in honor of Raja Porus Pandayadeva. You may all elect not to believe this but my family has traced and is acknowledged to be the direct descendants of Raja Porus. We skipped to Delhi during partition.* Respect would have it that we be asked for our input before erecting any monument *in honour of our ancestor. The intent however is noble. Ps we are hindus and therefore must assume that Raja Porus was also hindu and not buddhist since our family crest has always been the Aum


 
 madhuri's distant relatives should be asked before putting her posters at shops and other places in Pakistan

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Spring Onion

Rafi said:


> On a lighter note - I think our next missile should be named after the famous tribe and cricket player Afridi.


 
 name one after me too

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Jana said:


> madhuri's distant relatives should be asked before putting her posters at shops and other places in Pakistan


 
I mentioned that our *input* should be asked for and not our permission. In fact we are in possession of many relics and artifacts and military material which belonged to kings from that area. My grandfather commenced dialogue with somebody from the Indian government some years ago to return some of those artifacts to the Pakistani government of the area but I have no idea what became of that. Hence my suggestion that our input be sought since we have paintings, military artifacts and weapons and various other items which can be used in erecting the monument

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Spring Onion

PlanetWarrior said:


> I mentioned that our *input* should be asked for and not our permission. In fact we are in possession of many relics and artifacts and military material which belonged to kings from that area. My grandfather commenced dialogue with somebody from the Indian government some years ago to return some of those artifacts to the Pakistani government of the area but I have no idea what became of that. Hence my suggestion that our input be sought since we have paintings, military artifacts and weapons and various other items which can be used in erecting the monument



Input is always welcomed. Asking for permission was something too much

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

PlanetWarrior said:


> Sorry Rafi. Just got off the phone with my gramps in Delhi. He says that there was never anything but a Pandaya Hindu influence on our family so you have to accept that Raja Porus was Hindu. Apparently the people of your area were well known for their military organisation and skill and are referred to in various parts of the vedic literature. I am certain that your ancestor Baba Manga was no different. My gramps talks fondly of the Khewra salt mines.


 
We can agree to disagree, because there are many Buddhist artefact's that have been discovered in Jhelum - But regarding Porus because some of his descendants are Hindu does not necessarily mean he was, I'm sure he even has Muslim descendants, who currently live in Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Jana said:


> name one after me too



Defo - that Missile will be extremely accurate, and very very lethal, it will totally have the enemy in shock and awe


----------



## Rafi

Jana ji - I'm sure Porus's descendants also live in Pakistan and are Muslim - so no need for permission from any one.


----------



## Rafi

PlanetWarrior said:


> I mentioned that our *input* should be asked for and not our permission. In fact we are in possession of many relics and artifacts and military material which belonged to kings from that area. My grandfather commenced dialogue with somebody from the Indian government some years ago to return some of those artifacts to the Pakistani government of the area but I have no idea what became of that. Hence my suggestion that our input be sought since we have paintings, military artifacts and weapons and various other items which can be used in erecting the monument



PW - we also are in possession of some artefact's of the era, and our village is located near where many archeologists believe the battle took place. 






Many people like the historian Michael Woods - were curious as to why there was no monument to this historical battle. In this vid is a Pakistani Army General retd who knows alot about the battle.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## harsh1488

Rafi said:


> Know this indian - we are proud of our religion ISLAM, and we will follow this beautiful religion to the day of Judgement INSHALLAH. We still honor the Sufi that conquered our hearts, with the beauty of the Quran and the Noble Prophet's life, and the story of Imam Hussain and the Imams and also the Saints.
> 
> Regarding the Indus Valley we do not know their religion - but they ate beef, and had no temples. And Buddhism was wiped out in bharat - but flourished in Pakistan.


 
i dont know where you get the info. that hindus are forbidden from eating beef,hindus can eat anything they want nothing is forbidden only dog meat is considered as lowest for consumption and there is no specific importance given to temples in the vedas.

as far as the history is concerned india as well as pakistan didnt exist before 15 and 14 august 1947 and people should understand that we share the history irrespective of the geography

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

harsh1488 said:


> i dont know where you get the info. that hindus are forbidden from eating beef,hindus can eat anything they want nothing is forbidden only dog meat is considered as lowest for consumption and there is no specific importance given to temples in the vedas.
> 
> as far as the history is concerned india as well as pakistan didnt exist before 15 and 14 august 1947 and people should understand that we share the history irrespective of the geography



My friend I would very strongly disagree , in my opinion the valley of the Indus is a separate civilization in itself from modern india - which is based upon the Ganges civilization. Also if beef can be consumed, why is their laws against slaughter of cows in india.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

Regarding the IVC there are strong indications it was not Hindu - the houses are not separated due to caste, there are no temples, and many beef bones have been found showing signs of human consumption.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harsh1488

the law are for sentiments of people like your blasphemy law and as far as civilization is concerned their decendents have spread out over the subcontinent as the ivc settlements were abandoned ie thepeople migrated or disappeared

and please show where in vedas it is written that consuming beef is forbidden


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Rafi said:


> PW - we also are in possession of some artefact's of the era, and our village is located near where many archeologists believe the battle took place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Many people like the historian Michael Woods - were curious as to why there was no monument to this historical battle. In this vid is a Pakistani Army General retd who knows alot about the battle.


 
I dont know who the General (retd) is but he seems to be an authority on the battle. In fact here in Botswana I met two officers from the Pakistani armed forces who also were quite knowledgeable about the battle and tactics employed by both Alexander and the Maharaj. i didnt ask them whether those tactics are reflected upon in training by the Pakistani army but am curious now whether it is. 

During Desert Storm the US tank formation apparently adopted Alexander's attack formation when they realised that the Iraqi army based in Kuwait had positioned its infantry and tank positions on silmilar lines to that of Porus. History apparently repeated itself when the Iraqi formation was defeated by the Allies. 

Having said that our area is rich with historical military insight . We have many many artefacts not only related to Rajah Porus but also to other noble kings who were our ancestors. On the issue of Rajah Porus and given the incredible military battle which was fought in the area and the consequences of the battle (some even suggesting that Alexandra faced his first defeat at the hands of a Punjabi king ) , a monument is definately befitting to both the Macedonian and the Punjabi kings. It would be an honor to my family to be asked to contribute to this exercise. In fact we have always held the view that much of the invaluable memorabilia and artefacts which we have in our possession belong to the people of the area and must be returned to a museum or a government of the area

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

harsh1488 said:


> the law are for sentiments of people like your blasphemy law and as far as civilization is concerned their decendents have spread out over the subcontinent as the ivc settlements were abandoned ie thepeople migrated or disappeared
> 
> and please show where in vedas it is written that consuming beef is forbidden



They did not disappear, in all of human history a population has not vanished, their descendants are modern day Proud Pakistanis

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

We also have in our possession many artefact's related to the time, if you do wish to return some things, I suggest you contact the Pakistani Ministry of Culture. 

http://www.culture.gov.pk/


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Rafi said:


> Regarding the IVC there are strong indications it was not Hindu - the houses are not separated due to caste, there are no temples, and many beef bones have been found showing signs of human consumption.


 
Rafi , you can be well assured that there is no prohibition against the eating of beef or meat in Hindu scriptures. In fact vegetarianism is a Jain influence on Hindus. No prohibition against the eating of beef is contained in any scripture. The vedas never imposes as a duty upon any follower to attend a temple. It discusses the importance of sathsangh (discourse on God and one's duty as a good human being) but does not impose a rule that such sathsangh must be held at a designated area such as a temple. The caste system which you observe in present India and most of Sth Asia has nothing to do with hinduism or sanathan dharma. It is purely a cultural system which was created to subjugate and control. Hence when the so called "lower castes" convert to Christianity or Islam, in most cases they remain ostractized by their communities as being of 'inferior birth".


----------



## Rafi

Regarding Alexander's tactics they are still taught in the Staff College Quetta, and other institutions world wide, it is a tribute to Alexander that his ideas of war are still being taught a couple of thousand years after his death. 

Major General (retd) Shafgat is well known local personality of the area.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Rafi said:


> We also have in our possession many artefact's related to the time, if you do wish to return some things, I suggest you contact the Pakistani Ministry of Culture.
> 
> http://www.culture.gov.pk/



Thanks for the advise but we started the process in the early 1970s. We unfortunately had to undergo the process via the Indian government. But some stuff has been earmarked to be returned and hopefully a museum will eventually be dedicated in the area to the military machine of Punjab and its splendid royalty of the early days

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Yes - even the British knew of the areas martial process, our people have been soldiers for generations, you even see that warrior tradition in the young children as they play with swords and guns, it is similar to the martial prowess of the Pashtun people.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Rafi said:


> Yes - even the British knew of the areas martial process, our people have been soldiers for generations, you even see that warrior tradition in the young children as they play with swords and guns, it is similar to the martial prowess of the Pashtun people.


 
Yes the land and its people have a rich military history. I am told that many current day Pakistani armed forces heroes come from that area. Considering its rich military history, a military museum should be establised as soon as possible together off course with monuments to kings Alexander and Porus as you mentioned earlier. My family will definately be a major contributor to such a project


----------



## Beacon

Statue for a pakistani punjabi hero.... it is a good initiative... 

I wanted to check whether he was pakistani or punjabi or something else... my old friend wikipedia lists only a long list of sources providing varying groups laying claim of the fame...

He might be punjabi or afghan or jat or brahmin or buddhist.. But I also have an illusion that he was born in south india or srilanka and shifted to punjab.. 

Whatever be it, he was a hero and definitely deserves to have something - statue or museum exhibits....

great job u guys


----------



## twoplustwoisfour

Jana said:


> ok we believe you. you are from saraiki belt which you believe holds a punjabi accent  and read DG Khan


 
Naah, my accent is pure dilliwala. Born and raised here.


----------



## punit

> Buddhism is said to have come from Nepal. Not india.



Nepal at the time of buddha .funny thing is they deny the existance of India in ancient times


----------



## Peshwa

Rafi said:


> Regarding the IVC there are strong indications it was not Hindu - the houses are not separated due to caste, there are no temples, *and many beef bones have been found showing signs of human consumption*.



HAHAHA....

No offence BUT..Im seriously starting to doubt your lineage story given the poor display of simple history and common sense in the post above...

You sir believe in "oral tardition" as a form of propogation of history (something that is universally considered unreliable as well as exaggerated), yet voice doubts over verified and documented instances of history?

If you knew your history, you would have known that the IVC is the birthplace of modern Hinduism....a fact verified by historians much more reputed than yourself...LOL!

Religion like all things changes over time.....so comparing the Vedic religion (forerunner) of modern hinduism to the religion in its present form and drawing parallels of caste system and culinary practices is simply assinine.....

Secondly....your proof that IVC was not Hindu is based off Beef bones....LOL!
Is there any way for you to prove to me that the bones found were consumed by Humans and not wild animals, dogs etc....
Besides...nowhere is it said that Hindus of the past never ate beef...YET your bone theory was quite laughable to say the least!

Last but not the least.....the seal of Pashupati (shiva) has been found in IVC indicating a direct parallel to the evolution of Hinduism in these lands....this has been well documented by multiple historans....especially those that discovered and extensively studied the ruins, relics and remnants of the IVC

Now please research before posting anymore on IVC and its people.
See below....

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

I agree with planet warrior Raja Porus was a Hindu Rajput frm Jehlum.


----------



## Truth Teller

Rafi said:


> Regarding the Indus Valley we do not know their religion - but they ate beef, and had no temples. And Buddhism was wiped out in bharat - but flourished in Pakistan.


 
The people of IVC were also known to bury their dead. So there's very little chance they were hindu.

Rafi, look's like your Thread/Posts are hurting the hearts of many

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Hulk

I don't believe in religion defining what their follower would be like. Their is more chance people with same region have similar views. I know of what Muslim girl, who has no similarity to any Muslim in Pakistan. Same thing applies to Hindus too. So what religion people follow.


----------



## harsh1488

Truth Teller said:


> The people of IVC were also known to bury their dead. So there's very little chance they were hindu.
> 
> Rafi, look's like your Thread/Posts are hurting the hearts of many


 
i would say hinduism was formed from the practices of IVC 

you people also ignore the fact that cremation was practiced in later IVC,they were idolters and they used to pray to shiva or whatever they called it then

and as far as abandoning is concerned why would the leave a well planned advanced city and go an stay in karachi or lahore which is in the same belt of indus river


----------



## Joe Shearer

Truth Teller said:


> The people of IVC were also known to bury their dead. So there's very little chance they were hindu.
> 
> Rafi, look's like your Thread/Posts are hurting the hearts of many


 
Many Hindus bury their dead.

I wish fanboys would keep away from passing opinions on all sorts of matters without a shred of knowledge about them. For instance, beef-eating; for instance, vegetarianism; for instance, the origin of Buddhism; for instance, the spread and fall of Buddhism in India.

On these, it is clear that you have not the slightest knowledge, but just parade your prejudices from time to time.

This is really irritating. There has been enough written about all these subjects on PDF for you not to be able to pretend that you don't know because you never got a chance to learn. But even if you haven't read these posts, it's all right. It's all right not to know everything about everything; when you don't know about something, why don't you try the experiment of keeping your mouths shut?

Keep to the subject of building a statue to Porus and we can all get on with our lives. Stray into these areas and start talking rubbish and you're asking for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
10


----------



## KS

Rafi said:


> My friend I would very strongly disagree , in my opinion the valley of the Indus is a separate civilization in itself from modern india - which is based upon the Ganges civilization. *Also if beef can be consumed, why is their laws against slaughter of cows in india.*


 
You do realise that Beef can be eaten without killing a single 'cow' ?


----------



## Veeru

There are many ethnic Hindu tribes and groups who bury their dead. Even in so called upper caste Vaishyas/Brahmins etc. dead Infants are burred in the earth or in the river.

As for cow bones, In Gujarat and Tamilnadu there are thousands of Dinosaurs bones have been found that doesn't mean Indians used to eat dinosaurs.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## IND151

harsh1488 said:


> i would say hinduism was formed from the practices of IVC
> 
> *you people also ignore the fact that cremation was practiced in later IVC,they were idolters and they used to pray to shiva or whatever they called it then*
> 
> and as far as abandoning is concerned why would the leave a well planned advanced city and go an stay in karachi or lahore which is in the same belt of indus river



i think they called Shiva *pashu pati.
*


----------



## IND151

Veeru said:


> There are many ethnic Hindu tribes and groups who bury their dead. Even in so called upper caste Vaishyas/Brahmins etc. dead Infants are burred in the earth or in the river.
> 
> As for cow bones, In Gujarat and Tamilnadu there are thousands of Dinosaurs bones have been found that doesn't mean Indians used to eat dinosaurs.


 you are right. *Hindus who live in Himalayan mountain dont give agni to dead. *they lack wood hence they throw body in river which flows through deep Vally. they throw body from upper part of Vally in river. *they call it gangarpan. * i dont know whether this practice is still on.


----------



## tallboy123

funny,was there any land called pakistan at that time..
and when did king *Paurava (Hindu)*(in Greek Porus) became a muslim..
twisting the facts...


people should atleast read some histroy before opening these type of threads...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Porus


----------



## Hulk

IND151 said:


> you are right. *Hindus who live in Himalayan mountain dont give agni to dead. *they lack wood hence they throw body in river which flows through deep Vally. they throw body from upper part of Vally in river. *they call it gangarpan. * i dont know whether this practice is still on.


 
If this practice is still on, we should stop it. They are polluting the river.


----------



## Truth Teller

tallboy123 said:


> funny,was there any land called pakistan at that time..
> and when did king *Paurava (Hindu)*(in Greek Porus) became a muslim..
> twisting the facts...
> 
> 
> people should atleast read some histroy before opening these type of threads...
> 
> King Porus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Nobody is calling him Muslim. Why are you bringing his religious beliefs into this. And even if he was hindu, this doesn't mean you can take credit for him. There are many arab, turk, afghan, ect. warriors who were Muslims, should i try to claim them as my own? Well, i dont have to claim other's history as my own.. because i have my own history to be proud of.

Porus was a Punjabi King. Punjabi history is shared between all Punjabi (Muslim, Sikh, Hindu Punjabis). Punjabi history belongs to Punjabis... nobody else can claim over our history.

Your a south indian. Stick to your own south indian history.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## twoplustwoisfour

Truth Teller said:


> And even if he was hindu, this doesn't mean you can take credit for him. .


 
And you can't take credit for him just because part of the territory ruled by him falls in your country.


----------



## Truth Teller

twoplustwoisfour said:


> And you can't take credit for him just because part of the territory ruled by him falls in your country.



Don't be jealous. 

That's like saying the people of modern-day iran can't take credit for the persian empire. Or people of modern-day Turkey can't take credit for the Ottoman empire, ect.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rafi

Wow, indian inferiority complex at it's best, I will repeat my observation - we do not know the religion of the IVC people - their language has not been deciphered - I think it is more wishful thinking, and a yearning to claim an ancient civilization as their own, that feverishly occupies indian minds. 

Regarding my ancestry - Porus, Manga are part of our land, they are our ancestors - and we take credit for him - modern indian attempts to claim our virsa are pathetic.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Rafi

Truth Teller said:


> Don't be jealous.
> 
> That's like saying the people of modern-day iran can't take credit for the persian empire. Or people of modern-day Turkey can't take credit for the Ottoman empire, ect.



That's 100% right brother, our people have always lived on the land, it's just like Egyptians claiming the Pyramids.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## PlanetWarrior

Rafi said:


> That's 100% right brother, our people have always lived on the land, it's just like Egyptians claiming the Pyramids.


 
Whilst I am in agreement with you that Maharaj Porus became a Pakistani treasure after partition, I suggest that you do a bit of reading on the IVC before discarding claims that it was a hindu civilisation. Artefacts discovered there includes evidence which indicates that the civilisation was an early hindu civilisation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

PlanetWarrior said:


> Whilst I am in agreement with you that Maharaj Porus became a Pakistani treasure after partition, I suggest that you do a bit of reading on the IVC before discarding claims that it was a hindu civilisation. Artefacts discovered there includes evidence which indicates that the civilisation was an early hindu civilisation.


 
PW my friend, all I am suggesting is until their language is dis ciphered, all theories are conjecture. Some artefact's may suggest it is, whereas others suggest otherwise. Regarding Porus he also belongs to you, as you have sadly emigrated from this land of kings. But always remember "you can take the Punjabi, out of the Punjab, but you can never take Punjab out of the Punjabi.

Thank you, for your kind words, my wish to claim the history of my land - is always taken by some indians as some kind of threat, believe me it is not out of hate for them, but out of love for me and mine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

A little of the Punjabi Virsa to remind you of home.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rig Vedic

Rafi said:


> Regarding the Indus Valley we do not know their religion - but they ate beef, and had no temples. And Buddhism was wiped out in bharat - but flourished in Pakistan.



For your information, Buddhism remained localized in the UP-Bihar area until it was adopted by Ashoka ... this was well after Alexander and Chandragupta Maurya.



Rafi said:


> Know this indian - we are proud of our religion ISLAM, and we will follow this beautiful religion to the day of Judgement INSHALLAH. We still honor the Sufi that conquered our hearts, with the beauty of the Quran and the Noble Prophet's life, and the story of Imam Hussain and the Imams and also the Saints.



You should consider putting a monument to your blasphemy laws between the statues of Porus and Alexander.


----------



## MastanKhan

Rafi,

Alexander was a ruthless man---I don't think that you need to put up his statue----I wouldnot mind that of Porus----as he is your ancestor.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

As you are a foreigner your suggestion will remain that, a suggestion. Regarding the position on the blasphemy law, I believe it should be repealed, or very seriously amended, in it's current form is not satisfactory at all. 

Regarding my quote I remain proud of my history and my religion, and also of the great Sufi Saint that enabled us to become followers of One of the Great Religions of the World. 






This is Kalaam of Baba Bulleh Shah this and other Great Sufi's that inspired the Conversion to Islam

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Rafi

MastanKhan said:


> Rafi,
> 
> Alexander was a ruthless man---I don't think that you need to put up his statue----I wouldnot mind that of Porus----as he is your ancestor.


 
Regarding Alexander or Sikander, Mastan he was a man of his time, it was a brutal time - where this sort of war fare was winner take all. Even though he was responsible for the defeat of my ancestor, does not change the fact that he was a brilliant and great General. 

To paraphrase Gen Maximus "What we do in life, echo's in eternity" LoL

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## true_indian

Rafi said:


> Regarding the IVC there are strong indications it was not Hindu - the houses are not separated due to caste, there are no temples, and many beef bones have been found showing signs of human consumption.


 
Beef bones mean consumption? You gotta be kidding me? Why can't they be animal ruins?


----------



## Rafi

true_indian said:


> Beef bones mean consumption? You gotta be kidding me? Why can't they be animal ruins?



Hahahahahahaha

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## punit

> Wow, indian inferiority complex at it's best, I will repeat my observation - we do not know the religion of the IVC people - their language has not been deciphered - I think it is more wishful thinking, and a yearning to claim an ancient civilization as their own, that feverishly occupies indian minds.
> 
> Regarding my ancestry - Porus, Manga are part of our land, they are our ancestors - and we take credit for him - modern indian attempts to claim our virsa are pathetic.



Pakistani claim over IVC is as funny as Yankees declaring themselves as descendants of Mayans


----------



## Rafi

And india's attempt to claim IVC is the same as France claiming the British Empire.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## punit

we are not calming it .. its ours , if its urs why u are not following it . u an start by declaring Pashupati as national deity and Ox symbol as national symbol

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history.



I hope you don't get offended, but I have a few questions to ask.

You claim that Pakistanis/Punjabis don't claim other peoples' history. 

But why did Pakistan name its warship after Tipu Sultan?
Tipu Sultan was a South Indian. He was not a Punjabi.

Why did Pakistan name its cruise missile after Babur?
Babur is from Ferghana, in Uzbekistan. He was not a Punjabi.

Why did Pakistan name its SRBMs after the Ghaznavids?
Mahmud of Ghazni was a Turk. He was not a Punjabi.

Why did Pakistan name its ballistic missile after Ghauri?
Shahabuddin Muhammad Ghauri was an Afghan. He was not a Punjabi.

Why did Pakistan name its main battle tank after Khalid bin al-Waleed?
Mr. Khalid is from Arabia. He was not a Punjabi.

Those are just a few examples, I can find many more if you wish.

And please don't tell me that Pakistanis are the true descendants of South Indians and Arabs and Turks and Uzbeks and Afghans and Russians and Chinese...




> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history.


 
Indeed....

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## Water Car Engineer

GodlessBastard said:


> I hope you don't get offended, but I have a few questions to ask.
> 
> You claim that Pakistanis/Punjabis don't claim other peoples' history.
> 
> But why did Pakistan name its warship after Tipu Sultan?
> Tipu Sultan was a South Indian. He was not a Punjabi.
> 
> Why did Pakistan name its cruise missile after Babur?
> Babur is from Ferghana, in Uzbekistan. He was not a Punjabi.
> 
> Why did Pakistan name its SRBMs after the Ghaznavids?
> Mahmud of Ghazni was a Turk. He was not a Punjabi.
> 
> Why did Pakistan name its ballistic missile after Ghauri?
> Shahabuddin Muhammad Ghauri was an Afghan. He was not a Punjabi.
> 
> Why did Pakistan name its main battle tank after Khalid bin al-Waleed?
> Mr. Khalid is from Arabia. He was not a Punjabi.
> 
> Those are just a few examples, I can find many more if you wish.
> 
> And please don't tell me that Pakistanis are the true descendants of South Indians and Arabs and Turks and Uzbeks and Afghans and Russians and Chinese...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed....


 

Ironically Ghauri, Babur, Ghaznavids, etc INVADED and SLAUGHTER the Punjabis in modern India and Pakistan and others also.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GodlessBastard

Liquid said:


> Ironically Ghauri, Babur, Ghaznavids, etc INVADED and SLAUGHTER the Punjabis in modern India and Pakistan and others also.


 
It is a common phenomenon among people with identity crisis to worship their oppressors.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Truth Teller

Liquid said:


> Ironically Ghauri, Babur, Ghaznavids, etc INVADED and SLAUGHTER the Punjabis in modern India and Pakistan and others also.


 
Ghauri was killed by a Punjabi tribe.


@Godlessbastard.. No point in asking asking me. i didn't choose the names of the Pakistani missiles. And trust me, i dont want to claim south indian,uzbek/turk, afghan or arab history as my own... nor would most Punjabi's aruge their history belongs to us.


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> @Godlessbastard.. No point in asking asking me. i didn't choose the names of the Pakistani missiles. And trust me, i dont want to claim south indian,uzbek/turk, afghan or arab history as my own... nor would most Punjabi's aruge their history belongs to us.


 
Well, this is actually quite interesting for me. I am asking you because I do not know any Pakistanis in real life, so I do not have the opportunity to personally find out what Pakistanis/Punjabis think about this matter.

And since most Pakistanis seem to highly adore the armed forces, I considered their opinions to be in line with the general population's feeling.


----------



## Rafi

The names of missiles are named after noted and famous Islamic Warriors - but not all Pakistani Missiles are named like that, for example the Shaheen series is named after the eagle, and the Raad Air Launched Cruise Missile means Thunder.

Regarding the Armed Forces - yes the vast majority do adore their Armed Forces.


----------



## Manas

Here is nice song about Porus the movie *"Sikandar E Azam*" 






PS: Irrespective of his ethnicity we love Porus(Purushotham), a Hindu warrior who fought against Greek invaders.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manas

Truth Teller said:


> Nobody is calling him Muslim. Why are you bringing his religious beliefs into this. And even if he was hindu, this doesn't mean you can take credit for him. There are many arab, turk, afghan, ect. warriors who were Muslims, should i try to claim them as my own? Well, i dont have to claim other's history as my own.. because i have my own history to be proud of.
> 
> *Porus was a Punjabi King. Punjabi history is shared between all Punjabi (Muslim, Sikh, Hindu Punjabis). Punjabi history belongs to Punjabis... nobody else can claim over our history.*



Who is next ??

We can't admire Shivaji since he was maratha,

Or MahaRana Pratap for being a Rajput from Rajastan,..

Or Rani Laxmi Bai of Jhansi as she was from Madhya Pradesh. ,

and the list continues....

Finding logic in your posts is bothersome sum as searching for water in a desert.


----------



## Rafi

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

But that history is based in modern india, whereas Porus, IVC, and other things are based in a separate civilization and state of Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rockstarIN

Rafi said:


> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> But that history is based in modern India, whereas Porus, IVC, and other things are based in a separate civilization and state of Pakistan.


 
Where is the separation? After Alexander's withdrawal, Maurya dynasty captured those lands.


----------



## Rafi

But over the millennia - that has been the exception rather than the rule, in fact the present day borders of india and Pakistan have been the de facto border of the Indus and Ganges based civilizations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GodlessBastard

Rafi said:


> The names of missiles are named after noted and famous Islamic Warriors - but not all Pakistani Missiles are named like that, for example the Shaheen series is named after the eagle, and the Raad Air Launched Cruise Missile means Thunder.



Why would someone name a country's most valuable defence assets after *foreigners*? Especially foreigners that invaded the land you presently occupy? What other country does this?

I am only mentioning this because some people said that India cannot claim the history of its ancient civilization, just because the borders of present-day India do not conform to the borders of ancient India. But apparently, Pakistan can claim the history of any Muslim, whether they be Arabs, Uzbeks, Turks, or Afghans....

Double standards at their worst.




> Regarding the Armed Forces - yes the vast majority do adore their Armed Forces.


 
That's what I thought. Thanks for verifying.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GodlessBastard

Rafi said:


> But over the millennia - that has been the exception rather than the rule, in fact the present day borders of india and Pakistan have been the de facto border of the Indus and Ganges based civilizations.


 
No, it was only starting in the 18th century, with the collapse of the Mughal Empire and central authority, that a cultural drift between the people of the Indus and the Ganges emerged. The Durranis and tribal factions in AfPak region took advantage of the Mughal decline to exert their influence over present-day Pakistan, and the long-term effects of this power struggle are still felt today. 

However, before that time the Indus and Ganges shared much the same civilization. You could call this civilization anything you want, but most historians call it as _dharmic_ civilization because of the ideals of _dharma_, which were represented in three main religions: Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. 

Starting with Chandragupta in the 4th century B.C.E., most Indian empires had their *base* in the Ganges and their *borders* on the Indus/Afghanistan.
A few examples:

Maurya Empire, 320-185 B.C.E.
Base of power is *Pataliputra*, in the Ganges. Boundaries extended to *Afghanistan.*







Gupta Empire, 320-600 C.E.
Base of power is *Pataliputra*, on the Ganges. Boundaries extended to the *Indus.*






Pala Empire, 750 C.E. - 900 C.E.
Base of power is *Pataliputra*, on the Ganges. Boundaries extended to *Afghanistan.*






Delhi Sultanate, 1200-1500 C.E.
Base of power is *Delhi*, on the Gangetic Plain. Boundaries extended to the *Indus.*






Mughal Empire, 1526-1800s C.E.
Base of power is *Agra*, on the Gangetic Plain. Boundaries extended to *Afghanistan.*






Do you see a pattern here?

The Indus Valley, for most of its history, has been within the cultural, economic, and sociopolitical orbit of Ganges-based states.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## metro

GodlessBastard said:


> Why would someone name a country's most valuable defence assets after *foreigners*? Especially foreigners that invaded the land you presently occupy? What other country does this?



not only naming thier defence assets by thier names but actually glorifying them as if they were some prophets.
they glorify those same people who happned to have killed and murdered thier own forefathers, raped their mothers and sisters. (sorry for my language).
any respectful human being having an iota of dignity would not glorify those animals who murdered his own parents and people.
if i come across a person who happend to have murdered and raped my people and my women, i will rip that person at once, forget about treating him as a messiah and glorifying him.

but then u see, its too late for them now.
they have to keep glorifying them, there is no falling back now.
They fool no one but themselves but that is the whole idea.
They have nothing left to fall back. They despise their ancestral culture. They have to cling to this glorification of invaders at all cost.
they just have to somehow convince themselves that they were liberated by the invaders, they have to take pride in being assaulted by the invaders.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## MyPakistan1947

What are indians pissed off about? The fact we dont want to share our history with you guys?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GodlessBastard

metro said:


> but then u see, its too late for them now.
> they have to keep glorifying them, there is no falling back now.
> They fool no one but themselves but that is the whole idea.
> They have nothing left to fall back. They despise their ancestral culture. They have to cling to this glorification of invaders at all cost.
> they just have to somehow convince themselves that they were liberated by the invaders, they have to take pride in being assaulted by the invaders.


 
As a lover of history, what pisses me off the most is how Pakistanis *selectively* chose certain aspects of their history to glorify themselves, while ignoring the rest.

For example, they claim the IVC just to claim that they had an ancient civilization, and they claim Purushotam just to show they defeated Alexander. Their view of history is inconsistent and nonsensical.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> For example, they claim the IVC just to claim that they had an ancient civilization, and they claim Purushotam just to show they defeated Alexander. Their view of history is inconsistent and nonsensical.


 
Brother, Pakistan did have an ancient civilization - The Indus Valley Civilization - The oldest Civilization of the face of this Earth - 5000 year old history. 
Sure the people of North West india can claim IVC as their own, but certianly not the vast majority of indians. Whilst the vast majority of Pakistanis have every right over IVC.

Claiming the IVC belongs to the whole of south Asia is like saying the whole of the middle east can take credit for Persian Empire/Civilization because modern-day Iran happens to apart of middle east. 

And regarding King Porus - He was a Punjabi king/warrior, and all and only modern-day Punjabis have a right over him.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> Brother, Pakistan did have an ancient civilization - The Indus Valley Civilization - The oldest Civilization of the face of this Earth - 5000 year old history.
> Sure the people of North West india can claim IVC as their own, but certianly not the vast majority of indians. Whilst the vast majority of Pakistanis have every right over IVC.
> 
> Claiming the IVC belongs to the whole of south Asia is like saying the whole of the middle east can take credit for Persian Empire/Civilization because modern-day Iran happens to apart of middle east.
> 
> And regarding King Porus - He was a Punjabi king/warrior, and all and only modern-day Punjabis have a right over him.


 
I don't care what history you claim, just stick to your beliefs and be consistent.

You can't claim Porus and the Ghaznavids and Babur too. They were all completely different people, who happened to rule parts of present-day Pakistan at different parts of history. Stick to one, or none.


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> You can't claim Porus and the Ghaznavids and Babur too. They were all completely different people, who happened to rule parts of present-day Pakistan at different parts of history. Stick to one, or none.


 
I'm not claiming ghaznavids, babur, ect. as my own. I dont give a damn for them.

I have every right to claim Porus as my own. I'm a Punjabi. King Porus fought for my land and people. Just because Punjab is apart of the subcontinent doesn't give every other ethnic group in south Asia, the right to claim Punjabi history as their own. 

I dont want to share my history and identity with you.


----------



## Rafi

And indians don't get a say on what we name our missiles, trying to derail this thread, lay off our history. And all the history in our country belongs to us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rockstarIN

Rafi said:


> And indians don't get a say on what we name our missiles, trying to derail this thread, lay off our history. And all the history in our country belongs to us.


 
So is Gupta,Maurya, nanda Dynasties..If you claim, claim the whole, no probs....


----------



## Rafi

rockstar said:


> So is Gupta,Maurya, nanda Dynasties..If you claim, claim the whole, no probs....


 
Yeah but what is exclusively on our territory is ours and ours alone.


----------



## The HBS Guy

Rafi said:


> Yeah but what is exclusively on our territory is ours and ours alone.


 
What is your territory today, was not yours before 1947.

Even Pakistan's name did not exist before 1940's. 

Your nation was formed out of the blue. Overnight. Just like that.


----------



## NALANDA

Rafi said:


> Yeah but what is exclusively on our territory is ours and ours alone.


 
Rafi....not with retrospective effect....you can only claim all the stalwarts post 1947 ( creation of Pakistan).....I am sure no other country dare claims all the heroes that you have producing and which you are globally known as exporters.

Don't be so delusional....tomorrow you will claim Guru Nanak, Hindu Gods and all Hindu & Other Faiths stalwarts coz they were born there before your country birth.,...

why not claim Advani and Manmohan Singh...Can we claim Late Jinnah, if you do not have the copyright?

I do not intend to flame....all that we want to say is everything in South Asia belongs to every body, Tajmahal , Lal Quila, QutabMinar ..these are always a symbol of India and can be claimed by Paksitansi and Bangladeshis too..why not...


----------



## rockstarIN

Rafi said:


> Yeah but what is exclusively on our territory is ours and ours alone.


 
There is no exclusiveness, there were no boundaries in pre-Pakistan period that time..

It is all Indian Sub continent. Name your next missile Chandragupta, or Porus, it will be nice...


----------



## Rafi

rockstar said:


> There is no exclusiveness, there were no boundaries in pre-Pakistan period that time..
> 
> It is all Indian Sub continent. Name your next missile Chandragupta, or Porus, it will be nice...


 
Well I would prefer the missile to be called Manga after my ancestor lol - 

Regarding the sub-continent it was never a nation - it is too culturally and ethnically diverse to be 1 civilization. It is not out of hatred that we love what is ours and mine, but the complete opposite.


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> I'm not claiming ghaznavids, babur, ect. as my own. I dont give a damn for them.
> 
> I have every right to claim Porus as my own. I'm a Punjabi. King Porus fought for my land and people. Just because Punjab is apart of the subcontinent doesn't give every other ethnic group in south Asia, the right to claim Punjabi history as their own.
> 
> I dont want to share my history and identity with you.


 
You can choose to divide the subcontinent according to ethnicity if you wish, that's your choice. But I would prefer not to.

Modern-day India is a union of many different ethnicities, but our basic culture is still the same. I do not have to be a Punjabi to claim Porus, I can claim him because I am Indian and he was an Indian too. Simple as that.


----------



## Rafi

GodlessBastard said:


> You can choose to divide the subcontinent according to ethnicity if you wish, that's your choice. But I would prefer not to.
> 
> Modern-day India is a union of many different ethnicities, but our basic culture is still the same. I do not have to be a Punjabi to claim Porus, I can claim him because I am Indian and he was an Indian too. Simple as that.


 
No he did not see himself as indian, he saw himself as a king of a Punjabi kingdom - defending it from all comers, whether from anywhere.


----------



## The HBS Guy

Rafi said:


> No he did not see himself as indian, he saw himself as a king of a Punjabi kingdom - defending it from all comers, whether from anywhere.


 
And he told you that...


----------



## Truth Teller

The HBS Guy said:


> And he told you that...


 
He didn't see himself as an "indian". "indian" is a word coined together by the British. "india" was used to describe the geographic location of south Asia - nothing more. But you indians decided to name your country after this name "indian" which was given to you by your British masters.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## The HBS Guy

Truth Teller said:


> He didn't see himself as an "indian". "indian" is a word coined together by the British. "india" was used to describe the geographic location of south Asia - nothing more. But you indians decided to name your country after this name "indian" which was given to you by your British masters.


 
Ever heard of Bharat or Bharatvarsh, kiddo?

lol and what's with 'your British Masters' ???


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> You can choose to divide the subcontinent according to ethnicity if you wish, that's your choice. But I would prefer not to.
> 
> Modern-day India is a union of many different ethnicities, but our basic culture is still the same. I do not have to be a Punjabi to claim Porus, I can claim him because I am Indian and he was an Indian too. Simple as that.


 

He was a Punjabi King. He would view south indians like you as inferior. Just look at how indian Punjabis view south indians.They view south indians as total out-castes.

But as you yourself said before, people with an identity crisis look upto their oppressors.

And you claiming Punjabi history as your own, is like me claiming Persian, Arab, Kurdish, history as my own. It makes no sense.


----------



## Truth Teller

The HBS Guy said:


> Your nation was formed out of the blue. Overnight. Just like that.


 
This is what all you indians say. But your Country was also created in 1947 - the same year as modern-day Pakistan. You forget this huge fact so easily.


----------



## The HBS Guy

Truth Teller said:


> This is what all you indians say. But your Country was also created in 1947 - the same year as modern-day Pakistan. You forget this huge fact so easily.


 
Fact!  Yeah right!


----------



## Truth Teller

The HBS Guy said:


> Fact!  Yeah right!


 
Seeing your another indian who can't comprehend the basic facts about your own Country, I wont bother to reply to you after this


----------



## The HBS Guy

Truth Teller said:


> I wont bother to reply to you after this


 
Good for you! No need to take extra trouble at sleep time.


----------



## rockstarIN

> Rafi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well I would prefer the missile to be called Manga after my ancestor lol -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be nice, I support that..!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regarding the sub-continent it was never a nation - it is too culturally and ethnically diverse to be 1 civilization. It is not out of hatred that we love what is ours and mine, but the complete opposite
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Go thru the dynesties and the maps which already posted here. There were no different culture that time.. How did you think that by sitting at present day patna(Magada's capital) the king ruled almost all present day India, Pakistan & Afgan?, they depute their close relatives as governers into that area to rule and if there is any rebel movements, would send their army to opress. What did you think, even after defeating Porus(doubtful) why did Alaexander did not go forward? he fed up with Porus 200 war elephants, and Porus explained to Alexander in front of his cammanders that Nanda's army consists more than 6000 elephants + 200,000 army. Who wants to fight in a foreign land to such a massive army?, The point I'm saying is the rulers are always from this side in the history.
Click to expand...


----------



## rockstarIN

Truth Teller said:


> He didn't see himself as an "indian". "indian" is a word coined together by the British. "india" was used to describe the geographic location of south Asia - nothing more. But you indians decided to name your country after this name "indian" which was given to you by your British masters.


 
There were no British at the time of Porus, but some tribes in the place..

And by logic there is no Greek Army, its always Sprtans, Macidonians etc etc...but as a whole they are greeks..!!


----------



## rockstarIN

Truth Teller said:


> *He was a Punjabi King. He would view south indians like you as inferior. Just look at how indian Punjabis view south indians.They view south indians as total out-castes.*But as you yourself said before, people with an identity crisis look upto their oppressors.
> 
> And you claiming Punjabi history as your own, is like me claiming Persian, Arab, Kurdish, history as my own. It makes no sense.


 
Who told you that??? Did any 'ancient Punjabi ever invaded South India?

Better you do not speak about where you have only very little knowledge..


----------



## Rig Vedic

Rafi said:


> And indians don't get a say on what we name our missiles, trying to derail this thread, lay off our history. And all the history in our country belongs to us.



Rafi, I have some bad news for you.

For most of the past 2500 years, from the Mauryas to the British, the Indus Valley has been ruled from places in the Gangetic Valley like Patna, or Delhi, or Agra.

In 1947, Pakistan was created as a Bengali-majority nation on the basis of the two nation theory.


----------



## DesiGuy

gubbi said:


> Lol desperately pandering to the Sikhs?
> 
> This happens to be a common theme amongst many members here. They try to portray that "they" sympathize with the Sikhs and their "plight" in India!! This when in the past Indo-Pak wars, Sikhs have been........
> 
> *Anyhow, erect whatever statues you want, claim whatever version of history you want. That aint gonna change History or what highly educated and experienced academics consider to be facts.*
> 
> Btw, isnt Idolatry considered a sin in Abrahamic religions?


 


To the Point!


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> He didn't see himself as an "indian". "indian" is a word coined together by the British. "india" was used to describe the geographic location of south Asia - nothing more. But you indians decided to name your country after this name "indian" which was given to you by your British masters.


 
The Greeks coined the term "India", not the British.
There is another thread which explains, in depth, the Greek perception of ancient India.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/91714-indika-ancient-greek-description-india.html

No one in India called themselves "Indians". The native name of the land is Aryavarsha. But the Greeks called the land as "India", and Porus an "Indian", and the inhabitants of the entire subcontinent as "Indians".

That is the basic fact of history. Whether you accept it or deny it is up to you, it is not my job to make deaf people hear.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Veritas

Rafi said:


> No he did not see himself as indian, he saw himself as a king of a Punjabi kingdom - defending it from all comers, whether from anywhere.


 
They why did he asked the Kingdoms on Indo-gangetic plains for help. He warned them, if he falls they would fall after him. No, India always acted like confederation from times known. They had their own small kingdoms but they considered themselves part of higher abstract entity very likely "Bharat". Just to top icing on the cake, it is very unlikely if Porus has spoken Punjabi, he would very likely speak Pali or Sanskritic dialict.


----------



## GodlessBastard

The name "Punjab" didn't even exist until the Mughal times. In Porus' time the region was called "Gandhara".

The modern Punjabi language didn't exist back then either. Modern Punjabi has a lot of Persian, Arab, and Turkish influence, which didn't exist in 300 B.C.E.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manas

Those who Don't know real facts about Porus and Pakistan's history .... Its time to listen to a Pakistani professor of History. 

*Go to 2.02M*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harsh1488

Truth Teller said:


> This is what all you indians say. But your Country was also created in 1947 - the same year as modern-day Pakistan. You forget this huge fact so easily.


 
not modern day but only pakistan,you should start taking history education as no one called the region pakistan but the term bharat and india were used for a long time to describe this land


----------



## harsh1488

Truth Teller said:


> Brother, Pakistan did have an ancient civilization - The Indus Valley Civilization - The oldest Civilization of the face of this Earth - 5000 year old history.
> Sure the people of North West india can claim IVC as their own, but certianly not the vast majority of indians. Whilst the vast majority of Pakistanis have every right over IVC.
> 
> Claiming the IVC belongs to the whole of south Asia is like saying the whole of the middle east can take credit for Persian Empire/Civilization because modern-day Iran happens to apart of middle east.
> 
> And regarding King Porus - He was a Punjabi king/warrior, and all and only modern-day Punjabis have a right over him.


 
so where did people from IVC go after leaving their well planned cities ? please name specific location


----------



## Rafi

They did not go anywhere they were obsorbed into Punjab, Pukhtankwa, Sindh, Baluchistan, Kashmir

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

^^^^^^^^^^

Regarding Mr Nisar, he is a fierce critic, what I love about my country is, he can go on to national tv, and do his critic and no one bats an eye lid, that is the part of the Pakistan that india has no understanding of, and that is why this country will rise again, we have an ancient civilization - a brave well equipped armed forces, a hard working industrious people, a free media, and large well educated diaspora.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## rockstarIN

Rafi said:


> ^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Regarding Mr Nisar, he is a fierce critic, what I love about my country is, he can go on to national tv, and do his critic and no one bats an eye lid, that is the part of the Pakistan that india has no understanding of, and that is why this country will rise again, we have an ancient civilization - a brave well equipped armed forces, a hard working industrious people, a free media, and large well educated diaspora.


 
In that sense, you have the same from 1947 arn't you?


----------



## Rafi

1947 and back thousands of years.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aakash_2410

Zero was discovered in Pakistan, Name India should be actually Pakistan's name, Ancient Indian civilisation is actually Pakistan's legacy and now PAKISTANI punjabi hero??!! Yes he did rule over modern day Pakistan and was punjabi but Pakistani?!

NO FLIPPING WAYY!!

King Porus fighting Alexander at the Battle of the Hydaspes River. An early 18th-century Russian lubok.
Reign 340&#8211;317 BC

Birthplace unknown

Died 317 BC

Place of death Punjab region

Successor Malayketu (Porus' son)

Royal House Paurava Puru Dynasty [1][2][3] Yaduvanshi [4][5]

Religious beliefs Hinduism

King Porus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## IndianArmy

The next comedy I expect would be "Great wal of Pakistan" was shifted to China as a Gesture of Friendship and Hence renamed it "Great wall of China" .. I wouldnt be surprised even if I get to hear it.... I expect it any day....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Truth Teller

aakash_2410 said:


> Zero was discovered in Pakistan, Name India should be actually Pakistan's name, Ancient Indian civilisation is actually Pakistan's legacy and now PAKISTANI punjabi hero??!! Yes he did rule over modern day Pakistan and was punjabi but Pakistani?!
> 
> NO FLIPPING WAYY!!
> 
> King Porus fighting Alexander at the Battle of the Hydaspes River. An early 18th-century Russian lubok.
> Reign 340317 BC
> 
> Birthplace unknown
> 
> Died 317 BC
> 
> Place of death Punjab region
> 
> Successor Malayketu (Porus' son)
> 
> Royal House Paurava Puru Dynasty [1][2][3] Yaduvanshi [4][5]
> 
> Religious beliefs Hinduism
> 
> King Porus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


 

Yes, he will be classied as a Pakistani Punjabi today. He was said to have been born in Jhelum (Pakistan's Punjab).

Wikipedia is not a reliable source. No Pakistani here would consider it a reliable source. The whole of wikipedia is infested by indians.

Pakistanis are claiming what is ours, what belongs to our own land. I think the whole (except you insecure indians) world will agree we are right about this.


----------



## Truth Teller

IndianArmy said:


> The next comedy I expect would be "Great wal of Pakistan" was shifted to China as a Gesture of Friendship and Hence renamed it "Great wall of China" .. I wouldnt be surprised even if I get to hear it.... I expect it any day....



Nobody is going to claim this.


----------



## IndianArmy

Truth Teller said:


> Nobody is going to claim this.


 
Then the great wall is safe with its history ... Thank you


----------



## aakash_2410

Truth Teller said:


> Yes, he will be classied as a Pakistani Punjabi today. He was said to have been born in Jhelum (Pakistan's Punjab).
> 
> Wikipedia is not a reliable source. No Pakistani here would consider it a reliable source. The whole of wikipedia is infested by indians.
> 
> Pakistanis are claiming what is ours, what belongs to on our own land. I think the whole world will agree we are right about this.


 
You do realise there was no thing as Pakistan back then?? From Afghanistan to Kanya Kumari there was one country INDIA!!

He was not pakistan! Then why do historians from other countries call him 'ancient indian ruler' and not a pakistani??

They only things/persons left for you guys to claim is first king ever to rule WHOLE "Bharat" King Bharat the great , Ashoka the great, Akbar the great, nalanda university, aryabhatta [oh wait you've already claimed zero], Sushrupta [indian surgeon who had an equipment which can tear a human hair apart vertically], Panini [mother of sanskrit, which is said to be mother of all the indo-european languages oh wait you'll call it pak-european languages wouldn't you?], and soon you'll call all the indian religions [hinduism, buddhism, jainism and sikhism] pakistani religions??
What about our president Manmohan Singh since he was born there? 

Why don't you guys just go and claim the name "India"??


----------



## Truth Teller

aakash_2410 said:


> You do realise there was no thing as Pakistan back then?? From Afghanistan to Kanya Kumari there was one country INDIA!!


 
india was a word used to describe the geographic location of South Asia. Just as how "middle east" is used to describe the geographic location of south-west and western Asian countries. 

Modern-day republic of india was created on 15th August 1947. Just because you kept the name "india" for your newly-formed/british-made country in 1947, to try and hold a dominance over all other south Asian countires, doesn't mean we are going to allow you Dravdians, to hold a dominance on us.

Please wake up, and come back to reality.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## aakash_2410

Truth Teller said:


> india was a word used to describe the geographic location of South Asia. Just as how "middle east" is used to describe the geographic location of south-west and western Asian countries.
> 
> Modern-day republic of india was created on 15th August 1947. Just because you kept the name "india" for your newly-formed/british-made country in 1947, to try and hold a dominance over all other south Asian countires, doesn't mean we are going to allow you Dravdians, to hold a dominance on us.
> 
> Please wake up, and come back to reality.


 
OMG! This is so flabbergasting!! India is not a word to describe the geographic location!! It has always been a country but some muslims who didn't wanna live with dirty kafirs of india created own country with majority of muslims!!

And at least the world knew about india or hindia or bharat! Bur are you telling me ANYONE in the whole world had heard of word ''pakistan'' before "the partition of INDIA"??

And btw I'm from central India so I'm "Indo-Aryan" not dravidian! Anyone who speaks hindi, gujarati, marathi, bihari, bhojapuri, rajasthani [indo-aryan languages] are indo-aryans!

"Indo-Aryan is an ethno-linguistic term referring to the wide collection of peoples united as native speakers of the Indo-Aryan branch of the Indo-Iranian family of Indo-European languages. Today, there are over one billion native speakers of Indo-Aryan languages, most of them native to South Asia, where they form the majority."

There are 830 million indo-aryans in India!!
Indo-Aryan peoples - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And is being Dravidian supposed to be a bad thing? No wonder we devided, there was no way on earth we could have lived peacefully with such people who believe in race colour, ethnicity, religion so much!! And its about time you wake up and smell the coffee kiddoo!!


----------



## Truth Teller

aakash_2410 said:


> OMG! This is so flabbergasting!! India is not a word to describe the geographic location!! It has always been a country but some muslims who didn't wanna live with dirty kafirs of india created own country with majority of muslims!!
> 
> And at least the world knew about india or hindia or bharat! Bur are you telling me ANYONE in the whole world had heard of word ''pakistan'' before "the partition of INDIA"??



I dont know if your saying this from ignorance or insecurities?

"india" was a word to describe the geographic location of south Asia. Just as how "Middle East" is used to describe the geographic location of south-west and western Asian countires. There was never a united nation known as "india" untill 1947. Simple as that.

When they British came to south Asia, there were hundreds of independent states, and they lumped all these states together under their Empire. 

The world didn't hear about the name "Pakistan" before 1947, because we Pakistanis, chose our own name for our own Country. 

Unlike you indians who gave this name "india" to your country, which was given by foreigners/invaders. But the main reason your ancestors chose the name "india" for your country was so they could keep a dominance over all of south Asia.

When people refer to partition of "india", they refer to partition of "British india" (i dont refer to it as partition at all, there was no partition. since both Pakistan and india were created in 1947, only Punjab was "partitioned" in 1947). 

From the CIA Factbook:

"The separation in 1947 of British India into the Muslim state of Pakistan (with West and East sections) and largely Hindu India"

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/pk.html


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller why do you insist on making a fool out of yourself when you know nothing about history.

I have studied many ancient documents (the actual sources, not Wikipedia) and I use those to form my understanding of history. I have even posted some of those documents on PDF so everyone can read and learn from them. I suggest that you do so as well.

Do not try to fabricate your own version of history to suit your own flawed agenda.


----------



## Ali.009

He dsnt have to be a freaking ' Punjabi' Hero ! Pakistani hero is enough, - sub nationalist traitors!


----------



## harsh1488

Truth Teller said:


> I dont know if your saying this from ignorance or insecurities?
> 
> "india" was a word to describe the geographic location of south Asia. Just as how "Middle East" is used to describe the geographic location of south-west and western Asian countires. There was never a united nation known as "india" untill 1947. Simple as that.
> 
> When they British came to south Asia, there were hundreds of independent states, and they lumped all these states together under their Empire.
> 
> The world didn't hear about the name "Pakistan" before 1947, because we Pakistanis, chose our own name for our own Country.
> 
> Unlike you indians who gave this name "india" to your country, which was given by foreigners/invaders. But the main reason your ancestors chose the name "india" for your country was so they could keep a dominance over all of south Asia.
> 
> When people refer to partition of "india", they refer to partition of "British india" (i dont refer to it as partition at all, there was no partition. since both Pakistan and india were created in 1947, only Punjab was "partitioned" in 1947).
> 
> From the CIA Factbook:
> 
> "The separation in 1947 of British India into the Muslim state of Pakistan (with West and East sections) and largely Hindu India"
> 
> https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/pk.html


 
yes there was no pakistan before 14 aug 1947 so there were no pakistanis before 14 aug 1947 the region was called bharatvarsh and then india by the greeks and the arabs so he cannot be a pakistani modern or ancient and please dont reply with there was no india before 15 aug 1947 we already know that


----------



## Rafi

harsh1488 said:


> yes there was no pakistan before 14 aug 1947 so there were no pakistanis before 14 aug 1947 the region was called bharatvarsh and then india by the greeks and the arabs so he cannot be a pakistani modern or ancient and please dont reply with there was no india before 15 aug 1947 we already know that



*Pakicetid*

*Pakicetids or Pakicetidae are a carnivorous mammal family of the suborder Archaeoceti which lived during the Early Eocene to Middle Eocene (55.8 mya&#8212;40.4 mya) in Pakistan and existed for approximately 15.4 million years.[1]*
As Cetacea, Pakicetidae precede the whales and dolphins in transition from land. Because their fossils were found near bodies of water, they are presumed to have spent part of their life in water.
*Pakicetus was the first discovered in 1983 by Philip Gingerich, Neil Wells, Donald Russell, and S. M. Ibrahim Shah, and all species are known only from a few sites in Pakistan, hence the name of the first genera and the family as a whole. The region is believed to have been coastal to the Tethys Sea when the pakicetids lived, some 53 million years ago.*
The pakicetids are presumed to be ancestors of modern whales because of the three following features unique to whales: peculiarities in the positioning of the ear bones within the skull, the folding in a bone of the middle ear, and the arrangement of cusps on the molar teeth. The current theory is that modern whales evolved from archaic whales such as basilosaurids, which in turn evolved from something like the amphibious ambulocetids, which themselves evolved from something like the land-dwelling pakicetids. Since pakicetids are the distant relatives of whales, they have similar features to the Mesonychid.








Pakicetid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When this animal was discovered as the ancestor of all whales and dolphins, indian scientists lobbied very hard to name it after india, but Pakistani scientists managed to convince the international fraternity of scientist to recognise Ancient Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GodlessBastard

Rafi said:


> *Pakicetid*
> 
> *Pakicetids or Pakicetidae are a carnivorous mammal family of the suborder Archaeoceti which lived during the Early Eocene to Middle Eocene (55.8 mya40.4 mya) in Pakistan and existed for approximately 15.4 million years.[1]*
> As Cetacea, Pakicetidae precede the whales and dolphins in transition from land. Because their fossils were found near bodies of water, they are presumed to have spent part of their life in water.
> *Pakicetus was the first discovered in 1983 by Philip Gingerich, Neil Wells, Donald Russell, and S. M. Ibrahim Shah, and all species are known only from a few sites in Pakistan, hence the name of the first genera and the family as a whole. The region is believed to have been coastal to the Tethys Sea when the pakicetids lived, some 53 million years ago.*
> The pakicetids are presumed to be ancestors of modern whales because of the three following features unique to whales: peculiarities in the positioning of the ear bones within the skull, the folding in a bone of the middle ear, and the arrangement of cusps on the molar teeth. The current theory is that modern whales evolved from archaic whales such as basilosaurids, which in turn evolved from something like the amphibious ambulocetids, which themselves evolved from something like the land-dwelling pakicetids. Since pakicetids are the distant relatives of whales, they have similar features to the Mesonychid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakicetid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> When this animal was discovered as the ancestor of all whales and dolphins, indian scientists lobbied very hard to name it after india, but Pakistani scientists managed to convince the international fraternity of scientist to recognise Ancient Pakistan.


 
LOL so now you are basing your identity off dinosaurs?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## jayron

Rafi said:


> *Pakicetid*
> 
> *Pakicetids or Pakicetidae are a carnivorous mammal family of the suborder Archaeoceti which lived during the Early Eocene to Middle Eocene (55.8 mya&#8212;40.4 mya) in Pakistan and existed for approximately 15.4 million years.[1]*
> As Cetacea, Pakicetidae precede the whales and dolphins in transition from land. Because their fossils were found near bodies of water, they are presumed to have spent part of their life in water.
> *Pakicetus was the first discovered in 1983 by Philip Gingerich, Neil Wells, Donald Russell, and S. M. Ibrahim Shah, and all species are known only from a few sites in Pakistan, hence the name of the first genera and the family as a whole. The region is believed to have been coastal to the Tethys Sea when the pakicetids lived, some 53 million years ago.*
> The pakicetids are presumed to be ancestors of modern whales because of the three following features unique to whales: peculiarities in the positioning of the ear bones within the skull, the folding in a bone of the middle ear, and the arrangement of cusps on the molar teeth. The current theory is that modern whales evolved from archaic whales such as basilosaurids, which in turn evolved from something like the amphibious ambulocetids, which themselves evolved from something like the land-dwelling pakicetids. Since pakicetids are the distant relatives of whales, they have similar features to the Mesonychid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakicetid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> When this animal was discovered as the ancestor of all whales and dolphins, indian scientists lobbied very hard to name it after india, but Pakistani scientists managed to convince the international fraternity of scientist to recognise Ancient Pakistan.


 
What is your point? This animal was discovered in 1983 and named after that. If anything, You can be proud that a pre historic animal is named after Pakistan . Thats it. This animal is not a proof of any of your claims.


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> Truth Teller why do you insist on making a fool out of yourself when you know nothing about history.
> 
> I have studied many ancient documents (the actual sources, not Wikipedia) and I use those to form my understanding of history. I have even posted some of those documents on PDF so everyone can read and learn from them. I suggest that you do so as well.
> 
> Do not try to fabricate your own version of history to suit your own flawed agenda.


 
This is so typical of you indians. 

I gave you simple facts, which is hard for you to cope with.

I even gave you quote from the CIA Factbook (which is considered by many to be the most reliable source on the internet).

There was no united Country known as "india" untill 1947. Before 1947"india" use to refer to geographic location of south Asia. 

Anybody with a simple common sense can search this, and work it out for themselves.


----------



## Truth Teller

Rafi said:


> *Pakicetid*
> 
> *Pakicetids or Pakicetidae are a carnivorous mammal family of the suborder Archaeoceti which lived during the Early Eocene to Middle Eocene (55.8 mya40.4 mya) in Pakistan and existed for approximately 15.4 million years.[1]*
> As Cetacea, Pakicetidae precede the whales and dolphins in transition from land. Because their fossils were found near bodies of water, they are presumed to have spent part of their life in water.
> *Pakicetus was the first discovered in 1983 by Philip Gingerich, Neil Wells, Donald Russell, and S. M. Ibrahim Shah, and all species are known only from a few sites in Pakistan, hence the name of the first genera and the family as a whole. The region is believed to have been coastal to the Tethys Sea when the pakicetids lived, some 53 million years ago.*
> The pakicetids are presumed to be ancestors of modern whales because of the three following features unique to whales: peculiarities in the positioning of the ear bones within the skull, the folding in a bone of the middle ear, and the arrangement of cusps on the molar teeth. The current theory is that modern whales evolved from archaic whales such as basilosaurids, which in turn evolved from something like the amphibious ambulocetids, which themselves evolved from something like the land-dwelling pakicetids. Since pakicetids are the distant relatives of whales, they have similar features to the Mesonychid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakicetid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> When this animal was discovered as the ancestor of all whales and dolphins, indian scientists lobbied very hard to name it after india, but Pakistani scientists managed to convince the international fraternity of scientist to recognise Ancient Pakistan.



Rafi, you should start a seperate thread about this to make more Pakistanis aware.


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> This is so typical of you indians.
> 
> I gave you simple facts, which is hard for you to cope with.
> 
> I even gave you quote from the CIA Factbook (which is considered by many to be the most reliable source on the internet).
> 
> There was no united Country known as "india" untill 1947. Before 1947"india" use to refer to geographic location of south Asia.
> 
> Anybody with a simple common sense can search this, and work it out for themselves.


 
Truth Teller, have you ever heard of the Mauryan Empire? Kushanas? Satavahanas? Guptas?

Do you know what name the Greeks gave to the Mauryan Empire and its lands? What name did the Romans and Parthians give to the Kushanas and Satavahanas and their lands?

Guess


----------



## CardSharp

Mauryan Mauryan ... irrelevant mighty empire.... irrelevant mighty empire.....




ggrrrrrrr

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## GodlessBastard

CardSharp said:


> Mauryan Mauryan ... irrelevant mighty empire.... irrelevant mighty empire.....
> 
> ggrrrrrrr


 
If you have nothing to contribute to this discussion, please go back to trolling some other thread.

Mauryan India is as irrelevant as Han China. In fact in your sad "logic" it would be considered even more "irrelevant".

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harsh1488

Rafi said:


> *Pakicetid*
> 
> *Pakicetids or Pakicetidae are a carnivorous mammal family of the suborder Archaeoceti which lived during the Early Eocene to Middle Eocene (55.8 mya40.4 mya) in Pakistan and existed for approximately 15.4 million years.[1]*
> As Cetacea, Pakicetidae precede the whales and dolphins in transition from land. Because their fossils were found near bodies of water, they are presumed to have spent part of their life in water.
> *Pakicetus was the first discovered in 1983 by Philip Gingerich, Neil Wells, Donald Russell, and S. M. Ibrahim Shah, and all species are known only from a few sites in Pakistan, hence the name of the first genera and the family as a whole. The region is believed to have been coastal to the Tethys Sea when the pakicetids lived, some 53 million years ago.*
> The pakicetids are presumed to be ancestors of modern whales because of the three following features unique to whales: peculiarities in the positioning of the ear bones within the skull, the folding in a bone of the middle ear, and the arrangement of cusps on the molar teeth. The current theory is that modern whales evolved from archaic whales such as basilosaurids, which in turn evolved from something like the amphibious ambulocetids, which themselves evolved from something like the land-dwelling pakicetids. Since pakicetids are the distant relatives of whales, they have similar features to the Mesonychid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pakicetid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> When this animal was discovered as the ancestor of all whales and dolphins, indian scientists lobbied very hard to name it after india, but Pakistani scientists managed to convince the international fraternity of scientist to recognise Ancient Pakistan.


 
wow you serious man  so you are saying that pakistan existed because a 53m year old dino fossil discovered in 1983 was given name based on pakistan,so according to you the dino had the name 53m years and had been called that since it was a baby 53m years and surely not 28 years ago

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harsh1488

CardSharp said:


> Mauryan Mauryan ... irrelevant mighty empire.... irrelevant mighty empire.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ggrrrrrrr



ok so same goes for ancient china,IVC,egypt,greeks,romans,arabs,mayans,etc


----------



## Rafi

harsh1488 said:


> wow you serious man  so you are saying that pakistan existed because a 53m year old dino fossil discovered in 1983 was given name based on pakistan,so according to you the dino had the name 53m years and had been called that since it was a baby 53m years and surely not 28 years ago


 
The Geographic Area corresponding to Pakistan has existed since time immemorial, this area corresponds to Ancient Pakistan. 

But we are digressing - This is about valiant warriors that were born and bred in the Jhelum region, that is known as the nursery of warriors. A Pakistani region that has produced hero's such as Porus and my ancestor Manga.


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> Truth Teller, have you ever heard of the Mauryan Empire? Kushanas? Satavahanas? Guptas?
> 
> Do you know what name the Greeks gave to the Mauryan Empire and its lands? What name did the Romans and Parthians give to the Kushanas and Satavahanas and their lands?
> 
> Guess




It's not like you can change the reality.

You keep trying to twist facts like a typical insecure indian. Just be a man, and be straight foward.

Face it. india as a united country didn't exist untill 1947.

"india" itself is a name coined together by the British. British deprived the name "india" from the Indus river in Pakistan, and they applied it to describe the geographic location of south Asia. 

Pakistanis in the future can always keep a dominance over you bhartis about this fact. The fact your Country is named after a Pakistani river. 

Pecae bro.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> It's not like you can change the reality.
> 
> You keep trying to twist facts like a typical insecure indian. Just be a man, and be straight foward.
> 
> Face it. india as a united country didn't exist untill 1947.



"India" has existed for thousands of years, either as a unified empire or a collection of states. "India" refers to a civilization, not just a nation-state.

As an example, the Greeks spent most of their history as either a collection of smaller states (like Athens and Sparta) or under foreign powers. But they were still considered "Greeks" because of their shared culture. Same thing applies to India.



> "india" itself is a name coined together by the British. British deprived the name "india" from the Indus river in Pakistan, and they applied it to describe the geographic location of south Asia.



I have already provided the evidence that the name "India" existed at least since 300 B.C.E. and it referred to the whole civilization of the subcontinent, as well as its people.



> Pakistanis in the future can always keep a dominance over you bhartis about this fact. The fact your Country is named after a Pakistani river. :pakistan



Nah, we keep our name as a reminder of the fact that "Pakistan" is a fake country, and that the land occupied by "Pakistan" has historically been considered "India."

Our name is an ancient name. It was not created out of the blue in the mid-20th century like "Pakistan"


----------



## harsh1488

pakistan existed geographically for 5000 years and the current land of india just came into appeared in 1947,think before writing man.
the word pakistan didnt exist before mr jinnah came up with it,the word bharat and india existed in the time of porus so he is a bharati or indian,if pakistan conqures india tomorrow and calls it greater pakistan  i will never be a greater pakistani
indus river existed in the indian subcontinent or bharat varsha before creation of pakistan(please understand that bharat varsha is like EU but more closer since most of the customs and culture were similar and existed from south india to afghanistan and tibet)


----------



## Rafi

You know what india is the fake country, this is what old Winston thinks about that mythical state 

*India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the Equator.
Winston Churchill*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## harsh1488

Rafi said:


> You know what india is the fake country, this is what old Winston thinks about that mythical state
> 
> *India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the Equator.
> Winston Churchill*


 
hahaha look who is frustrated now and dont know why you are so obsesses with a fake country


----------



## Rafi

harsh1488 said:


> hahaha look who is frustrated now and dont know why you are so obsesses with a fake country


 
On a thread about a Pakistani hero, on a Pakistani forum - LoL look who is actually obsessed. hahahahahahahaha!!!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> "India" has existed for thousands of years, either as a unified empire or a collection of states. "India" refers to a civilization, not just a nation-state.
> 
> As an example, the Greeks spent most of their history as either a collection of smaller states (like Athens and Sparta) or under foreign powers. But they were still considered "Greeks" because of their shared culture. Same thing applies to India.
> 
> 
> 
> I have already provided the evidence that the name "India" existed at least since 300 B.C.E. and it referred to the whole civilization of the subcontinent, as well as its people.
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, we keep our name as a reminder of the fact that "Pakistan" is a fake country, and that the land occupied by "Pakistan" has historically been considered "India."
> 
> Our name is an ancient name. It was not created out of the blue in the mid-20th century like "Pakistan"


 
"india" and "indika" are two differnt words. "india" is a word coined together by the british. Why are you denying this simple fact? 

Your name may not have been created in the 20th century. It was created in the 18th century. It was a name given you by the British, who ruled over your ancestors for over 200 years.

I dont think you can change your country's name anyways. Its too late for that. So we will keep a dominance over you about the fact your Country is named after a Pakistani river, for many future generations to come. 

And the only time the land of Pakistan was considerd "india" was under British rule for 100 years. But our ancestors didnt refer to themselves as "indians", this is what the British referd to our ancestors as. They didnt accpet this name "indian". As you can see Pakistanis still to this day refuse to accept the name "indian".... Maybe because we dont have a pathetic suck up's slave mentality. We have dignity and self-respect.

Pakistan is a reality. You people will have to live with this reality for future generations to come. The reality Pakistanis rejected to live with you, and still to this day reject you people.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

Truth Teller said:


> "india" and "indika" are two differnt words. "india" is a word coined together by the british. Why are you denying this simple fact?
> 
> Your name may not have been created in the 20th century. It was created in the 18th century. It was a name given you by the British, who ruled over your ancestors for over 200 years.
> 
> I dont think you can change your country's name anyways. Its too late for that. So we will keep a dominance over you about the fact your Country is named after a Pakistani river, for many future generations to come.
> 
> And the only time the land of Pakistan was considerd "india" was under British rule for 100 years. But our ancestors didnt refer to themselves as "indians", this is what the British referd to our ancestors as. They didnt accpet this name "indian". As you can see Pakistanis still to this day refuse to accept the name "indian".... Maybe because we dont have a pathetic suck up's slave mentality. We have dignity and self-respect.
> 
> Pakistan is a reality. You people will have to live with this reality for future generations to come. The reality Pakistanis rejected to live with you, and still to this day reject you people.


 
You tell them - boy - Never a more apt name than "Truth Teller" - the indian's will have to conjure up some of their own history - rather than stealing ours.


----------



## Manas

There is a saying in Odia "*Murkhara gunthi vari taana*" whose literal translational in English is "*knot of the foolish is indeed very tight*".


----------



## Rafi

Manas said:


> There is a saying in Odia "*Murkhara gunthi vari taana*" whose literal translational in English is "*knot of the foolish is indeed very tight*".


 
That might as well be Swahili for us

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> "india" and "indika" are two differnt words. "india" is a word coined together by the british. Why are you denying this simple fact?



Are you serious?  Is this the best argument you've got?

Are 'Rajastan' and 'Rajasthan' different words too? 

Indika, Indica, India, Indoi... all slightly different spellings for the same concept. All were used by Westerners for thousands of years. From where do you think the British got the idea to call the subcontinent "India"? Do you think it popped out of nowhere? 

I can't believe you are trying to deny an entire civilization its history because of one letter in a word...

Who has the truly pathetic mindset?




> I dont think you can change your country's name anyways. Its too late for that. So we will keep a dominance over you about the fact your Country is named after a Pakistani river, for many future generations to come.



Why should we change our name? We are proud of our name and the history behind it, and we have the right to be. Just like you have the right to be proud of your country's fake name.

Also, India is not the only name of this country, it is just the most recognizable name to foreigners. The Constitution of India also recognizes "Hindustan" and "Bharat" as official names.




> Pakistan is a reality. You people will have to live with this reality for future generations to come. The reality Pakistanis rejected to live with you, and still to this day reject you people.



I agree. Today, Pakistan is a reality. Talking about the past doesn't affect who we are today. But talking about the past is important to understand who we are today, and how we got here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> Are you serious?  Is this the best argument you've got?
> 
> Are 'Rajastan' and 'Rajasthan' different words too?
> 
> Indika, Indica, India, Indoi... all slightly different spellings for the same concept. All were used by Westerners for thousands of years. From where do you think the British got the idea to call the subcontinent "India"? Do you think it popped out of nowhere?


 
My whole point was there was no united country known as "india" untill 1947. You were twisting about my words, trying to confuse people.

indika, indica,india, indoi, ect, were all names used by inavders to describe the geographic location of south Asia. Just as how "middle east" is used to describe the geographic location of western Asia. And all these names are deprived from Indus River in Pakistan (not south india, where you come from). And yes, your country is named after a Pakistani river.


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> My whole point was there was no united country known as "india" untill 1947. You were twisting about my words, trying to confuse people.



The Indian people, Indian culture, and Indian civilization has existed for thousands of years. Sometimes we had political unity, sometimes we didn't. But we were always considered one comprehensive civilization. That is the basic fact, supported by piles and piles of historical evidence.



> indika, indica,india, indoi, ect, were all names used by inavders to describe the geographic location of south Asia. Just as how "middle east" is used to describe the geographic location of western Asia. And all these names are deprived from Indus River in Pakistan (not south india, where you come from).



Yes, these names came from the Indus River, which was historically a part of India. But these names don't refer to just the Indus Valley, they refer to the *entire* subcontinent.

Numerous foreigners have written books on Indian people, culture, and geography. In all of these books, the individual nations of India were mentioned (like Magahda, Kambojas, Andhras, etc.), but they were *always* considered part of the larger civilization, called 'India'.

South Asia has historically been home to just one civilization, while the Middle East has been home to many civilizations (like Egyptians, Persians, Arabs, Turks, Jews, etc.)

This is why the Middle East has always been described by foreigners seperately, while India has been described as a whole.


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> The Indian people, Indian culture, and Indian civilization has existed for thousands of years. Sometimes we had political unity, sometimes we didn't. But we were always considered one comprehensive civilization. That is the basic fact, supported by piles and piles of historical evidence.


 
The Pakistani people, Pakistani, culture, and Pakistani civilization has existed for thausands of years too.


----------



## Rafi

Truth Teller said:


> The Pakistani people, Pakistani, culture, and Pakistani civilization has existed for thausands of years too.



Hundred and ten percent right  Our Culture and Civilization is a mix of different influences that makes it unique - even in ordinary Pakistani people's faces - you see the wide range of influences. I have traveled in india, the fact is - we are completely different people, culturally speaking.


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> The Pakistani people, Pakistani, culture, and Pakistani civilization has existed for thausands of years too.


 
Can you name some "ancient Pakistani" kingdoms for me? Some "ancient Pakistani" kings? Can you describe "ancient Pakistani" culture, and their customs? Their religions?




Rafi said:


> I have traveled in india, the fact is - we are completely different people, culturally speaking.


 
The language you speak is (Urdu, Punjabi) is the same that Indians speak.

The food you eat is 95% the same as Indian food.

Same with dress, music, etc.

Don't try to pretend like you are some aliens from Mars.


----------



## Water Car Engineer

GodlessBastard said:


> Can you name some "ancient Pakistani" kingdoms for me? Some "ancient Pakistani" kings? Can you describe "ancient Pakistani" culture, and their customs? Their religions?


 
Here I will help you..


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Brahman. They probably thought it was a Brahman, and called him "*Priest*-King" with out knowing who he was.


----------



## Truth Teller

Rafi - Good luck with the statue brother.


----------



## harsh1488

i have read many times on this forum that pakistanis look different then indians,the are fairer then indians,some say that the hindu brahmins are aryans and the much darker dalits are dravidians which were the original in habitants of this region so if you think logically you dont satisfy the criteria to say that you are the descendents of IVC since the dalits are the descendents and the are dark skinned not fair
dont know if the above is termed as racist but thats the most directly i could explain,sorry
you people can claim the geographical history ie- the cities,monuments like we claim taj mahal,etc but you cannot exclusively claim the cultural history


----------



## GodlessBastard

harsh1488 said:


> i have read many times on this forum that pakistanis look different then indians,the are fairer then indians,some say that the hindu brahmins are aryans and the much darker dalits are dravidians which were the original in habitants of this region so if you think logically you dont satisfy the criteria to say that you are the descendents of IVC since the dalits are the descendents and the are dark skinned not fair
> dont know if the above is termed as racist but thats the most directly i could explain,sorry
> you people can claim the geographical history ie- the cities,monuments like we claim taj mahal,etc but you cannot exclusively claim the cultural history


 
The Pakistani obsession with "fairer skin" has no factual backing behind it. The vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have the same skin color (more or less). 

And before someone says South Indians are dark and North Indians/Paks are fair. I am South Indian and fairer than most North Indians I know, how do you explain that...

Again, the majority of subcontinentals have more or less the skin color.

Even if Pakistanis did have fairer skin, what does it matter? White, brown, or black means nothing. Only racists derive pleasure from it.


----------



## harsh1488

GodlessBastard said:


> The Pakistani obsession with "fairer skin" has no factual backing behind it. The vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have the same skin color (more or less).
> 
> And before someone says South Indians are dark and North Indians/Paks are fair. I am South Indian and fairer than most North Indians I know, how do you explain that...
> 
> Again, the majority of subcontinentals have more or less the skin color.
> 
> Even if Pakistanis did have fairer skin, what does it matter? White, brown, or black means nothing. Only racists derive pleasure from it.


 
m8 i am using the pakistani logic to explain the situation as i have seen pakistani write what i have written on this forum and many other sites its nothing against any skin types,just want to know if pakistanis accept that are not
and the have shown pictures of pakistanis who are fair to show what they mean


----------



## justanobserver

Rafi said:


> You know what india is the fake country, this is what *old Winston thinks about that mythical state *
> 
> *India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the Equator.
> Winston Churchill*



I love it when you guys quote that colonial imperialist Winston Churchill. But again, if you guys like this quote, you sure are going to like the rest of his quotes.

*Here are* *his* *views on Islam* (these are not my views and, I feel Winston was a racist but some of you guys think other wise)



> "How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.
> 
> The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must
> delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual may show splendid qualities - but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa,raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."
> 
> *-Sir Winston Churchill* (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages
> 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).
> 1 November 2005 - Australia



Do you agree with good* ol' Winston now* ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nirvana

Truth Teller said:


> It's not like you can change the reality.
> 
> You keep trying to twist facts like a typical insecure indian. Just be a man, and be straight foward.
> 
> Face it. india as a united country didn't exist untill 1947.
> 
> "india" itself is a name coined together by the British. British deprived the name "india" from the Indus river in Pakistan, and they applied it to describe the geographic location of south Asia.
> 
> Pakistanis in the future can always keep a dominance over you bhartis about this fact. The fact your Country is named after a Pakistani river.
> 
> Pecae bro.


 

man ... what bullshit you are talking about......did this was what taught to you in your school 

if you school hasnt taught you history , go through this

*HISTORY OF INDIA*

History of India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indus Valley CIvillization

Indus Valley Civilization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And 

pakistan was created on 14th aug 1947 , and india got independence from british on 15th aug 1947 .... so according to your logic India was carved out of Pakistan 

learn some history .....

our history is same .... since pakistan was once part of Indian subcontinent ...... talking about King puru , who was hindu by religion ......was an Indian king with his capital in modern day lahore.........

so you see we have a same history , an both have equal share on him.............


next time have some history lessons learnt from your teacher .....or dont start your bullshit again that pakistan as a nation existed from thousands of years ago while india was formed in 1947.


----------



## Rafi

Our land has been largely independent of bharat for millennia - are culture, language, architecture - our ethnicity are largely independent of india - we do not share anything - in fact - the only reason - British india led to two independent states was because of the major differences between us.

We do not look alike, 90% of the time - I can tell if one is Pakistani or indian by simply looking at them, that is not racist - I am not implying superiority - by that standard, but it is the simple truth. 

The Indus Saga and the Making of Pakistan: Amazon.co.uk: Aitzaz Ahsan: Books

* Drawing on primary sources, especially literature, this work endeavours to establish the separateness of Indus from India. Discarding accepted myths of Indian history, it presents a history of the political culture of the Indus region (now Pakistan) from ancient times to the modern age. It is aimed at historians and scholars as well as general readers interested in the history of the subcontinent.*

This is essential reading for all Pakistani's and indian's.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## harsh1488

Rafi said:


> Our land has been largely independent of bharat for millennia - are culture, language, architecture - our ethnicity are largely independent of india - we do not share anything - in fact - the only reason - British india led to two independent states was because of the major differences between us.
> 
> We do not look alike, 90% of the time - I can tell if one is Pakistani or indian by simply looking at them, that is not racist - I am not implying superiority - by that standard, but it is the simple truth.
> 
> The Indus Saga and the Making of Pakistan: Amazon.co.uk: Aitzaz Ahsan: Books
> 
> * Drawing on primary sources, especially literature, this work endeavours to establish the separateness of Indus from India. Discarding accepted myths of Indian history, it presents a history of the political culture of the Indus region (now Pakistan) from ancient times to the modern age. It is aimed at historians and scholars as well as general readers interested in the history of the subcontinent.*
> 
> This is essential reading for all Pakistani's and indian's.


 
you didnt recognise kasav 
and please tell me what kingdoms was there after IVC and their geographical area,i have also read that there are IVC sites in gujarat,rajasthan,haryana and punjab so why didnt the british give you that and did you forget east pakistan( now bangladesh) was also pakistan but no IVC so why was it given,please educate me a lowley hindu with your superior intellect


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> The Pakistani obsession with "fairer skin" has no factual backing behind it. The vast majority of Indians and Pakistanis have the same skin color (more or less).
> 
> And before someone says South Indians are dark and North Indians/Paks are fair. I am South Indian and fairer than most North Indians I know, how do you explain that...
> 
> Again, the majority of subcontinentals have more or less the skin color.
> 
> Even if Pakistanis did have fairer skin, what does it matter? White, brown, or black means nothing. Only racists derive pleasure from it.



You clearly do care about skin color because your talking about it here. saying "skin color doesnt matter, most Pakistanis and indians have more or less the same skintone". If you didnt care, then you wouldnt speak about it? Especially not in such a hypocritcal style.

Stop playing victim, and dont expect Pakistanis to be sympathetic towards you about this. Your being a complete hypocrite. 

Yeah, alot of Pakistanis are racist about skin color. We have never denied this.

indians are even more racist than us. Look at the fairness creams buisness in india compared to Pakistan.

Look at north indians racism towards you south indians. Many north indians dont even consider themselves to be the same race as south indians. Many of them totally look down on south indians. And even with in south india, there is racism towards tamils because they have the darkest skintone.

Stop wasting Pakistani's time on here. A Punjabi (or pashtun, or balcohis, or sindhi) will rarely accept a south indian like you, is the same as us. Your making your own south indian people feel embarrassed, and defaming them along with yourself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Truth Teller

harsh1488 said:


> you didnt recognise kasav
> and please tell me what kingdoms was there after IVC and their geographical area,i have also read that there are IVC sites in gujarat,rajasthan,haryana and punjab so why didnt the british give you that and did you forget east pakistan( now bangladesh) was also pakistan but no IVC so why was it given,please educate me a lowley hindu with your superior intellect


 
Of course the people of north west india have as much right over IVC as Pakistanis do. But majority of Pakistanis have every right over IVC, whlist vast majority of indians have no right over IVC.


----------



## harsh1488

Truth Teller said:


> Of course the people of north west india have as much right over IVC as Pakistanis do. But majority of Pakistanis have every right over IVC, whlist vast majority of indians have no right over IVC.



but as i said before the experts claim that the dravidians were the original inhabitants of IVC,the were dark skinned their writing style was near to the south indian style


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Truth Teller said:


> And even with in south india, there is racism towards tamils because they have the darkest skintone.



Being a Tamilian ,i'm hearing this for the first time. 



> Stop wasting Pakistani's time on here. A Punjabi (or pashtun, or balcohis, or sindhi) will rarely accept a south indian like you, is the same as us.


Who says we"re looking for acceptance? We are biggest when it comes to lingual chauvinism in India alone.


So spare us your local gossip and silly rumors you"ve been brought up with.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## LaBong

> Who says we"re looking for acceptance? We are biggest when it comes to lingual chauvinism in India alone.



Hey you gotta compete with us before having that title!


----------



## KS

Truth Teller said:


> Look at north indians racism towards you south indians. Many north indians dont even consider themselves to be the same race as south indians. Many of them totally look down on south indians. And even with in south india, there is racism towards tamils because they have the darkest skintone.


 
Mate,You are one of the biggest moron I have met in PDF along with those IQ peddlers. 



Bombensturm said:


> Who says we"re looking for acceptance? We are biggest when it comes to lingual chauvinism in India alone.


 


Abir said:


> Hey you gotta compete with us before having that title!


 
It is absolutely an one-sided competition

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

The interest generated in the Memorial project is gaining ground, our village diaspora settled around the world, is considering it - Pakistan Zinadabad.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GodlessBastard

Truth Teller said:


> You clearly do care about skin color because your talking about it here. saying "skin color doesnt matter, most Pakistanis and indians have more or less the same skintone". If you didnt care, then you wouldnt speak about it? Especially not in such a hypocritcal style.
> 
> Stop playing victim, and dont expect Pakistanis to be sympathetic towards you about this. Your being a complete hypocrite.
> 
> Yeah, alot of Pakistanis are racist about skin color. We have never denied this.
> 
> indians are even more racist than us. Look at the fairness creams buisness in india compared to Pakistan.
> 
> Look at north indians racism towards you south indians. Many north indians dont even consider themselves to be the same race as south indians. Many of them totally look down on south indians. And even with in south india, there is racism towards tamils because they have the darkest skintone.
> 
> Stop wasting Pakistani's time on here. A Punjabi (or pashtun, or balcohis, or sindhi) will rarely accept a south indian like you, is the same as us. Your making your own south indian people feel embarrassed, and defaming them along with yourself.


 
Instead of publicy revealing your racist mentality why don't you just answer my previous post with some kind of factual basis:



GodlessBastard said:


> Can you name some "ancient Pakistani" kingdoms for me? Some "ancient Pakistani" kings? Can you describe "ancient Pakistani" culture, and their customs? Their religions?
> 
> The language you speak is (Urdu, Punjabi) is the same that Indians speak.
> 
> The food you eat is 95% the same as Indian food.
> 
> Same with dress, music, etc.
> 
> Don't try to pretend like you are some aliens from Mars.

Reactions: Like Like:

1


----------



## Rafi

Our food is different, Punjabi is only spoken in 3% of india. - Rest of Pakistan has even less commonality with india.

---------- Post added at 03:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:09 AM ----------






Only 3% of indians are of Punjabi origin -

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Far&#299;d&#257; bhumi rang&#257;val&#299; manjhi vis&#363;l&#257; b&#257;g
Fareed, this world is beautiful, but there is a thorny garden within it.
Far&#299;d&#257; jo ta&#299;N m&#257;rani muk&#299;&#257;N tinh&#257;N na m&#257;r&#275; ghumm
Fareed, do not turn around and strike those who strike you with their fists.
Far&#299;d&#257; j&#257; lab th&#257; n&#275;hu ki&#257; lab ta k&#363;&#7771;h&#257; n&#275;hu
Fareed, when there is greed, what love can there be? When there is greed, love is false.
K&#257;l&#275; mai&#7693;&#275; kap&#7771;&#275;, k&#257;l&#257; mai&#7693;&#257; wais,
Gunah&#299;N bhariy&#257; maiN phir&#257;N, L&#333;k kahaiN darv&#275;sh
Laden with my load of misdeeds, I move about in the garb of black garments.
And the people see me and call me a dervish.
Gall&#299;N cikka&#7771; d&#363;r ghar, n&#257;&#7735; piy&#257;r&#275; n&#299;Nh,
Chall&#257;N t&#275; bhijj&#275; kambl&#299;, rah&#257;N t&#257;N &#7789;u&#7789;&#7789;&#275; n&#299;Nh.
My promise to my love, a long way to go and a muddy lane ahead
If I move I spoil my cloak; if I stay I break my word.[6]

This is our Virsa, this is what made Pakistan come into being.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Awwal hamad khuda da vird kariye
Ishq kita su jag da mool mian
Pehlaan aap hi rabb ne ishq kita
Te mashooq he nabi rasool mian

Translation: "First of all let us acknowledge God, who has made love the worth of the world, Sir,
It was God Himself that first loved, and the prophet (Muhammad) is His beloved, Sir "

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

How many non indian Punjabi's can understand this.

---------- Post added at 03:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:38 AM ----------

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Truth Teller

GodlessBastard said:


> Instead of publicy revealing your racist mentality why don't you just answer my previous post with some kind of factual basis:


 
Look, it was my fault for choosing to argue with you about history of Punjab. I'm not going to compromise with you about my identity and history. History of Punjab belongs to Punjabis. Not to the whole subcontinent. It's like saying the history of Persians belongs to the whole Middle East. 

Take pride in south indian history - Your true history.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## harsh1488

so if i cant understand a language i cannot claim my ancestors  so egyptians dont understand ancient egyptian language so the are also not descendents
like many other languages punjabi was formed later than the period you speak of and languages always keep on changing and what was the cultural difference you are talking about,porus was a hindu so he followed the same culture as many hindus
and you people ignore the more tough questions that are asked,you havent given the kingdoms and geographical areas of ancient pakistan  if you want i can give a few indian


----------



## Jackdaws

Truth Teller said:


> 1st) india was created on 15th August 1947. Your country was created a day after Pakistan.
> 
> 2nd) Why does his religious beliefs matter? Just because I'm Muslim does this mean i should try to claim the history of egyptians, persians, arabs, kurds, afghans, turks, ect, as my own histroy? Of course not.


 
Just so you know - you are wrong about your independence day. By the Indian Independence Act past by the British Parliament, both dominions came into being on 15th August 1947 - since Mountbatten could not be at both places at one, the _*ceremony*_ was conducted a day earlier in Pakistan but the actual transfer of power only happened on 15th August - sorry to burst your bubble but you guys been celebrating a date when you were still a colony.


----------



## Rafi

It has not been proven conclusively that Porus was a Hindu, because Buddhism was very prevalent in the areas that constitute that region of Punjab.


----------



## harsh1488

Rafi said:


> It has not been proven conclusively that Porus was a Hindu, because Buddhism was very prevalent in the areas that constitute that region of Punjab.


 
It has not been proven conclusively that Porus was a buddhist,anyways it is a part of dharmic religion

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Manas

Rafi said:


> It has not been proven conclusively that Porus was a Hindu, because Buddhism was very prevalent in the areas that constitute that region of Punjab.


 
He could even be Zoroastrian .

*whats the harm he being a hindu,?? Too hot to be handled by a Pakistani ego ?*?

BTW it was only after Ashoka taking up Buddist way of life ...though he had to never denounced Hindu believes ,Buddism become wide spread as ,a buddists monks were able to get royal patronage to live comfortably in Buddha bihars.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Because of the region constituting Pakistan was largely Buddhist.


----------



## Manas

Rafi said:


> Because of the region constituting Pakistan was largely Buddhist.



You forgot that they were Hindus before they became Buddhist.

Buddhism is way of life rather than a religion, hence those who become Buddhists at that time didn't mean to renounce their Hindu beliefs.

*Coming back, As i said Ashoka was the first king reportedly to take up Buddhism ,and its monk life styles .Porus came way before Ashoka's time and there historical reason to suggest that he was Buddhist.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Manas said:


> You forgot that they were Hindus before they became Buddhist.
> 
> Buddhism is way of life rather than a religion, hence those who become Buddhists at that time didn't mean to renounce their Hindu beliefs.
> 
> *Coming back, As i said Ashoka was the first king reportedly to take up Buddhism ,and its monk life styles .Porus came way before Ashoka's time and there historical reason to suggest that he was Buddhist.*


 
He was Hindu - because you asked him. 







This is Taxila - a Centre of Learning of Buddhism in Ancient Pakistan.


----------



## GodlessBastard

King Porus was a member of the Puru tribe. The Purus are a Hindu tribe, as described in the Vedas and the _Puranas_. The Macedonians also described them as such.

Considering Porus lived before Buddhism spread to Gandhara, he was undoubtedly a Hindu. I'm sorry if your ego can't handle that.




Rafi said:


> This is Taxila - a Centre of Learning of Buddhism in Ancient Pakistan.


 
Taxila was a centre of Hinduism in ancient India long before it was a center of Buddhism.

Taxila became a centre for Buddhism only after the reign of Ashoka.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Water Car Engineer

Rafi said:


> Because of the region constituting Pakistan was largely Buddhist.


 
It was mostly Hindu, Afghanistan was Buddhist and western parts of Pakistan. East of the Indus was mostly Hindus. When Islamic invaders invaded "Hindustan" which Pakistan was a part of it. Buddhist community was already small. Buddhism never really dominated South Asia other then Sri Lanka. And the rule of Ashoka.


----------



## Rafi

Liquid said:


> It was mostly Hindu, Afghanistan was Buddhist and western parts of Pakistan. East of the Indus was most Hindus. When Islamic invaders invaded "Hindustan" which Pakistan was a part of it. Buddhist community was already small. Buddhism never really dominated South Asia other then Sri Lanka. And the rule of Ashoka.


 
Buddhist Artefact's are more plentiful in Pakistan than Hindu artefact's - which suggests a higher prevalence for that faith - I do find the Buddhist philosophy a quite good way of life, whereas Hinduism is simply too archaic and baffling for me to understand.

Regarding Porus's faith it does not really matter what religion he followed, or if he followed nothing, he is our King and all people of Jhelum are proud of being associated with him.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

GodlessBastard said:


> King Porus was a member of the Puru tribe. The Purus are a Hindu tribe, as described in the Vedas and the _Puranas_. The Macedonians also described them as such.
> 
> Considering Porus lived before Buddhism spread to Gandhara, he was undoubtedly a Hindu. I'm sorry if your ego can't handle that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Taxila was a centre of Hinduism in ancient India long before it was a center of Buddhism.
> 
> Taxila became a centre for Buddhism only after the reign of Ashoka.


 
It is quite a tourist attraction in Pakistan, also contains a lot of defense oriented industry, such as Heavy Industries Taxila, which produce our heavy Tanks and Armored Vehicles.


----------



## Rafi

Ancient Buddhist Monastery Taxila Pakistan.


----------



## Rafi

*Heavy Industries Taxila (abbreviated HIT) is the backbone of Pakistan's engineering industry for the Pakistan Armed Forces, being a combination of multiple industries that has grown into a large military complex since 1980. It consists of six major production units and their support facilities, staffed by over 6500 workers. About 30% of the 6500 employees are uniformed military personnel.[1]
HIT has facilities for overhaul, rebuild and progressive manufacturing of main battle tanks (MBT), armoured recovery vehicles (ARV), armoured personnel carriers (APC) and other armoured vehicles of both eastern and western armoured vehicles. HIT has developed and currently manufactures the Al-Khalid MB*


----------



## GodlessBastard

Rafi said:


> Buddhist Artefact's are more plentiful in Pakistan than Hindu artefact's - which suggests a higher prevalence for that faith - I do find the Buddhist philosophy a quite good way of life, whereas Hinduism is simply too archaic and baffling for me to understand.



All Buddhist artifacts in Pakistan date after Porus' time. It was indeed prevalent but only after the reign of Ashoka.

Also, Buddhism and Hinduism are very similar in their philosophies and are both Indian (_dharmic_) religions.




> Regarding Porus's faith it does not really matter what religion he followed, or if he followed nothing, he is our King and all people of Jhelum are proud of being associated with him.


 
No, the people of Pakistan are prejudiced towards Hinduism and would never except a Hindu as their ancestor. That's why Pakistan prefers to name their weapons after Muslim invaders from Central Asia and Arabia rather than native Hindu rulers (like Porus and Chandragupta).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi




----------



## GodlessBastard

Ancient Hindu temple (Katasraj Temple) in Pakistan:


----------



## Rafi

GodlessBastard said:


> All Buddhist artifacts in Pakistan date after Porus' time. It was indeed prevalent but only after the reign of Ashoka.
> 
> Also, Buddhism and Hinduism are very similar in their philosophies and are both Indian (_dharmic_) religions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, the people of Pakistan are prejudiced towards Hinduism and would never except a Hindu as their ancestor. That's why Pakistan prefers to name their weapons after Muslim invaders from Central Asia and Arabia rather than native Hindu rulers (like Porus and Chandragupta).


 
*The Gandharan city of Taxila was an important Buddhist[7] centre of learning from the 5th century BC[7] to the 2nd century.*

They may have some similarities - but are essentially different religions with different philosophies - 

Regarding Pakistani missiles - they are named after Islamic Warriors, which is also part of our Civilization, you also make assumptions regarding Pakistanis, we are proud of our forefathers and also our Islamic Heritage, we are a fusion of both.


----------



## Rafi

GodlessBastard said:


> Ancient Hindu temple (Katasraj Temple) in Pakistan:


 
This is also part of our heritage  It is part of the Pakistani people's Virsa. It is on the Salt Range near Chakwal - it is not far from us, and I have actually seen that site, very spiritual place

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Rafi

*Chakwal district borders the districts of Rawalpindi and Attock in the north, Jhelum in the east, Khushab in the south and Mianwali in the west. The total area of Chakwal district is 6,609 square kilometres, which is equivalent to 1,652,443 acres (6,687.20 km2).
The southern portion runs up into the Salt Range, and includes the Chail peak, 3,701 feet (1,128 m) above the sea, the highest point in the District. Between this and the Sohan river, which follows more or less the northern boundary, the country consists of what was once a fairly level plain, sloping down from 2,000 feet (610 m) at the foot of the hills to 1,400 feet (430 m) in the neighbourhood of the Sohan ; but the surface is now much cut up by ravines and is very difficult to travel over[5].
Lying at the beginning of the Potohar plateau and the Salt Range, Chakwal is a barani district and the terrain is mainly hilly, covered with scrub forest in the southwest, and levelled plains interspaced with dry rocky patches in the north and northeast.*

*Languages

Punjabi is the native language of majority of the people of district.Other languages spoken are Hindko, Potohari and Urdu.*

*[edit]Major tribes

The tribes, clans and castes that inhabit this area are the Awans, [Salaars],[maliks],(Kahout Quresh)[Khokhar] most of them resident in Dab and Bhatti Gujjar Village,[Qazis] most of them resident in Nachindi village [Chodree] Jats (the main clans being the Khoti, Khingar, Gondal and Mekan), Bhutta, Rajputs to include Janjua, Mair Minhas, Chohan, Bhatti, Jalap & Khiwa,others are Kahuts, Mughal Kassar, Pathans, Gujars, Syeds of Chak Misri, Maliars, Kashmiris and the Punjabi Sheikhs (including the famous Sahgal family). (Tehsil Chakwal Kahout Quresh Mair Minhas,and Mughal Kassar are Major Tribe. Talagang Tehsil is almost entirely inhabited by the Awan tribe, with just a few villages of Bhatti Rajputs. Kahout, Mughal,Minhas.
The physical features of the district, its tribes, its society and its economy all combine to make Chakwal one of the main recruiting areas for the Pakistan Army and the Pakistan Air Force. Main occupation of the people are Mining. Transport and poultry business also contributes imperatively towards the revenues of the district.*


----------



## Rafi




----------



## Rafi

*Most people of the district prefer to join armed forces like Pakistan Army, Pakistan Navy and Pakistan Air Force. Chakwal has the highest proportion of it population serving in the Armed forces of Pakistan.*


----------



## harsh1488

m8 you have not given the names of kingdoms that existed in the region that is now pakistan and their geographical area since you say their culture was distinct from others in the region and dont get what problem yopu have if he was a hindu


----------



## Manas

Rafi said:


> Buddhist Artefact's are more plentiful in Pakistan than Hindu artefact's - which suggests a higher prevalence for that faith - I do find the Buddhist philosophy a quite good way of life, whereas Hinduism is simply too archaic and baffling for me to understand.



Big Hindu temple of Sindh and punjab that time were famous for their wealth and precious artefact's.

They were destroyed and their treasure looted by Muslim invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni and many others.

*Thats why, not just pakistan the whole of north india has not a single temple left that dates back before 1500AD . *

So its not big puzzle why one doesn't find many ancient Hindu temple in Pakistan.They had been destroyed and razed to the ground.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

Manas said:


> Big Hindu temple of Sindh and punjab that time were famous for their wealth and precious artefact's.
> 
> They were destroyed and their treasure looted by Muslim invaders like Mahmud of Ghazni and many others.
> 
> *Thats why, not just pakistan the whole of north india has not a single temple left that dates back before 1500AD . *
> 
> So its not big puzzle why one doesn't find many ancient Hindu temple in Pakistan.They had been destroyed and razed to the ground.


 
Yeah - but that does not explain why their are Buddhist stupa's and temples all around Pakistan, that have survived, in fact even the local word for idol "Budh" comes from statues depicting the Buddha. 

It is more anecdotal evidence that the region was largely Buddhist - before the Sufi Missionary drive converted the majority to Islam.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rig Vedic

Why not a statue for another Pakistani Punjabi hero - Maharaja Ranjit Singh?


----------



## Rafi

He is more of a controversial character - in the way he treated some people.


----------



## AsianLion

Rafi said:


> My ancestral family village is in Jhelum - close to the site of the historical battle of Hydaspes River with Alexander the Great, our Jatt village is known for producing Warriors for generations, we have oral tradition of fighting in the battle against Alexander, right up to the modern day, when we send our sons and daughters to fight for the Pakistani Armed Forces.
> 
> To cut a long story short, our village is thinking of erecting two statues and a monument to Alexander and Porus. To pay tribute to the two great warriors of their times, one a Greek Macedonian and the other a Pakistani Punjabi
> 
> It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.


 
Great work.

Punjabis are known as best managers, administrators and fighters in work. Like it.


----------



## bajwajatt1984

Truth Teller said:


> Look, it was my fault for choosing to argue with you about history of Punjab. I'm not going to compromise with you about my identity and history. History of Punjab belongs to Punjabis. Not to the whole subcontinent. It's like saying the history of Persians belongs to the whole Middle East.
> 
> Take pride in south indian history - Your true history.


 sir please stop this bullshit ....


----------



## bajwajatt1984

bro i think u have great respect for your imperial masters...Winston Churchill say lot of nasty things against islam ........do u agree with him


Rafi said:


> You know what india is the fake country, this is what old Winston thinks about that mythical state
> 
> *India is a geographical term. It is no more a united nation than the Equator.
> Winston Churchill*


----------



## bajwajatt1984

Maharaja Ranjit Singh was the only king of punjab who gave great respect to punjabi muslam before that all rulers like mughals afghans and arab don't give a damn to punjabi muslam all my pakaistani friends including those who claim to be direct generation of Porus and manga name me a single punjabi muslam who got a powerful administrator post under mughals afghans and arab rulers


Rig Vedic said:


> Why not a statue for another Pakistani Punjabi hero - Maharaja Ranjit Singh?


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

Rafi said:


> Regarding the IVC there are strong indications it was not Hindu - the houses are not separated due to caste, there are no temples, and many beef bones have been found showing signs of human consumption.



you have to understand that hindu religion is not asssociated with castes during its inception!!! Its world oldest with no date of starting !!!
The caste was assigned to people doing different kind of works and it was not by birth, but by business !!!
If i do pooja to gods i was called a brahmin, and if i became a soldier i was called kshatriya , it was so simple like that !!
But as generations went by, caste systems became rigid and became birth to this day( my generation will try to wipe this evil away) !!!
So and u said houses were not seperated, even during the guptas, nandas, cholas period houses were not build on caste lines to this day !!!
We dont have appartheid regime in india rafi !!!
ur response have no meaning sir !!!
Just lower down ur ego and accept the fact that all ur anchestors were hindus as this was the one religion that dominated ASIA before islam came !!!


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

Rafi said:


> Yeah - but that does not explain why their are Buddhist stupa's and temples all around Pakistan, that have survived, in fact even the local word for idol "Budh" comes from statues depicting the Buddha.
> 
> It is more anecdotal evidence that the region was largely Buddhist - before the Sufi Missionary drive converted the majority to Islam.



There are a lot of buddhist stupas in india !!!
Even in 6-8th century south india became vastly buddhist and jainist !!!
However Raja raja, the great and Rajendra chola who were staunch shivaites, revived hinduism by building large temples 
The tanjore big temple is an example !!!
And many artefacts are present but not maintained properly by ASI so many dont even know about the maany number of buddhist temples and stupas present !!!


----------



## Birbal

How did Porus become Pakistani? There was no Pakistan back then. The Greeks referred to him as a king in "India" (and it is because of the Greeks that we get the modern day name).


----------



## kingkobra

first of all his name was purushottama shortened as puru the king of paurava and second he must be crying where ever he is for being called as pakistani :

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ice_man

bajwajatt1984 said:


> Maharaja Ranjit Singh was the only king of punjab who gave great respect to punjabi muslam before that all rulers like mughals afghans and arab don't give a damn to punjabi muslam all my pakaistani friends including those who claim to be direct generation of Porus and manga name me a single punjabi muslam who got a powerful administrator post under mughals afghans and arab rulers



are punjabi muslims above other types of muslims??? because all i know is that moghul emprors give alot of privileges to non muslims example AKbar. & if you disagree then please understand that till date hindus outnumber muslims in india for a reason. the moghul rulers didnot carry out any genocide! 


as for mahraja ranjit singh well let's just put it this way he is forgotten to Pakistan history & world history but men like AKbar live on!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## newdelhinsa

Contrary to that claim of OP I came to know rather recognizing Porus a hindu King as son of the land, Pakistani govt. made monument for Alexander. 

Pakistani paradoxes amaze me. You guys think good, believe in good, want to do good, but still can not do good.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nalandapride

And Porous was a Pakistani is also the big Joke.


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

Truth Teller said:


> You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own.
> We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history.
> 
> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history. If you feel you dont have anything to be proud of, then dont try to claim other's history as your own for god's sake.



Wow, thank you very much for this comment brother

You make me proud to be a PUNJABI

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Rafi

We decided to institute a local langar for the poor in the name of these two legendary warriors - my ancestor though not Muslim - was fiercely proud of his local culture and area, I think he would be proud that we had achieved Pakistan.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ganymede

nalandapride said:


> And Porous was a Pakistani is also the big Joke.



And what should he be? an African? or perhaps an alien from the Andromedea galaxy. The man was born and ruled a kingdom which lies within the borders of modern day's Pakistan, which in turn makes him a son of the soil. You can close your eyes and wish as hard as you could, but the reality wouldn't change now would it?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gubbi

Rafi said:


> I think he would be proud that we had achieved Pakistan.



Looking at the recent and past history, policies and present state of affairs, I seriously doubt that!


But, yes, Langar is a very good idea.


----------



## Birbal

Truth Teller said:


> You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own.
> 
> We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history.
> 
> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history. If you feel you dont have anything to be proud of, then dont try to claim other's history as your own for god's sake.



This is the thing. You see ethnicity as the most important thing in a person's identity. We see nationality. That is the entire foundation for the concept of India. I'm an Indian first and a *M*arathi second (btw it's interesting that you capitalized Punjabi but didn't capitalize anything else). Thus, all Indian history is my history.



Ganymede said:


> And what should he be? an African? or perhaps an alien from the Andromedea galaxy. The man was born and ruled a kingdom which lies within the borders of modern day's Pakistan, which in turn makes him a son of the soil. You can close your eyes and wish as hard as you could, but the reality wouldn't change now would it?



*Modern day* Pakistan is just that. His kingdom lied within what was considered India at the time. The *Islamic* Republic of Pakistan did not exist at that time. In contrast, the region of India, which was ruled by secular governments, did exist at the time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## aakash_2410

looool! You can't have both Mohammad Bin Qasim and Porus both as your hero. If Mohammad Bin Qasim is your hero, Porus simply can't be. A guy fearlessly and fiercely fought with Alexander the great's mammoth army. Do you think some Mohmmad Bin Qasim could have beat him? and there's no way a proud king like Porus would have ever let his people convert.


----------



## Rafi

Our indian friends are showing their insecurities, Porus was a Pakistani king, because his people and his state are within the geo-graphical borders of Pakistan, and his and his troops descendants live in Pakistan.

France was known as Gaul in antiquity but the great warrior Vercingetorix is rightly admired by the modern French.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RazPaK

What Indians are failing to realize is, that it is called the Indian *Sub-continent* for a reason.

It was not one big piece of pie. There were different factions, different empires, and thus the different people, languages, and culture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ganymede

Birbal said:


> This is the thing. You see ethnicity as the most important thing in a person's identity. We see nationality. That is the entire foundation for the concept of India. I'm an Indian first and a *M*arathi second (btw it's interesting that you capitalized Punjabi but didn't capitalize anything else). Thus, all Indian history is my history.
> 
> 
> 
> *Modern day* Pakistan is just that. His kingdom lied within what was considered India at the time. The *Islamic* Republic of Pakistan did not exist at that time. In contrast, the region of India, which was ruled by secular governments, did exist at the time.



Let me address this using an analogy. The legacy of Alexander is claimed by both the modern day Greeks and Macedonians. However, In that age, both Macedonians and Greeks were "ethnically Greeks". Ancient Greece was not one kingdom, on the contrary, it was split into many different kingdoms, Macedonia, Sparta, Athens, Mycenae, Rhodes, Thrace etc etc. So the peoples of these kingdoms were called Macedonians, Athenians, Spartans, Rhodions etc. However, they were all ETHNICALLY Greek, not members of seperate races. They ALL spoke dialects of the same Hellenic language(kione, sthenian, carian etc) and used the same written script. So Alexander was Macedonion by nationality, Greek by ethnicity. So, do you see a pattern emerging? People on both sides of the mighty Punjab are ethnically the same people and speak pretty much the same language (Punjabi) Porus was ethnically an Indian, as are many in today's Pakistan, however the point to focus here is that since he was king of a land which lies in Pakistan's side of Punjab, that would make him a Pakistani by default.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

RazPaK said:


> What Indians are failing to realize is, that is called the Indian *Sub-continent* for a reason.
> 
> It was not one big piece of pie. There were different factions, different empires, and thus the different people, languages, and culture.



100% right, there is no mono-culture in South Asia, I have been to india, and been to different parts of the country, a Maratha or a Tamil though perfectly nice people - had nothing in common with me a Pakistani Punjabi, whereas in indian Punjab I was made welcome like a long lost brother, it is not that the indian Punjabi's were nice and the Tamil people were not, it was that there was a similar culture in Punjab.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RazPaK

> 100% right, there is no mono-culture in South Asia, I have been to india, and been to different parts of the country, a Maratha or a Tamil though perfectly nice people - had nothing in common with me a Pakistani Punjabi, whereas in indian Punjab I was made welcome like a long lost brother, it is not that the indian Punjabi's were nice and the Tamil people were not, it was that there was a similar culture in Punjab.



It's like if they found an ancient temple in South India; I would look retarded to go and brag about it as "my" history.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Roybot

Porus fought against foreign invaders, his so called descendants didn't and converted en masse and gave in to foreign culture. He is probably not very proud of his descendants

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Roybot

RazPaK said:


> It's like if they found an ancient temple in South India; I would look retarded to go and brag about it as "my" history.



Why do you guys name you missiles after Afghan Sultans then Why do Pakistani Punjabi feel proud about Ghazni or Ghori, who mind you sacked Pakistani cities like Multan

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RazPaK

> Why do you guys name you missiles after Afghan Sultans then Why do Pakistani Punjabi feel proud about Ghazni or Ghori, who mind you sacked Pakistani cities like Multan



Why does generalizing make Bharati trolls feel like they are intellectuals?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Roybot

RazPaK said:


> Why does generalizing make Bharati trolls feel like they are intellectuals?



I have no idea what that means?

My point is is Pakistanis can be proud of the achievement of Afghan rulers who looted and sacked cities their cities mind you, why can't Tamil or Marathi or a Bengali be proud of Punjabis. Punjabis are Indians too.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Hulk

tomorrow they will claim chanakya also.


----------



## RazPaK

> I have no idea what that means?
> 
> My point is is Pakistanis can be proud of the achievement of Afghan rulers who looted and sacked cities their cities mind you, why can't Tamil or Marathi or a Bengali be proud of Punjabis. Punjabis are Indians too.



Did you consider that many Pakistanis have Afghan lineage. Also it is Muslim history, and honestly I think the reason they named their missiles as Invaders was to terrify Bharatis. I don't have a problem with Tamils or Marathis being proud of Punjabis, but it sounds ridiculous when someone sitting in Nagpur, is like yeah IVC belongs to us.


----------



## Edevelop

Roybot said:


> I have no idea what that means?
> 
> My point is is Pakistanis can be proud of the achievement of Afghan rulers who looted and sacked cities their cities mind you, why can't Tamil or Marathi or a Bengali be proud of Punjabis. _*Punjabis are Indians too*_.



Yup, who have a population of around 27 million, living on just 30% out of the entire punjab territory, and who could not produce a single prominanet philosopher, poet, artist, etc...


----------



## Roybot

cb4 said:


> Yup, who have a population of around 27 million, living on just 30% of the entire punjab territory,* and who could not produce a single prominanet philosopher, poet, artist, etc...*



What has the population got to do with anything? Baloch people are only 3% of Pakistans population, does that mean Baloch are not Pakistanis?( I hope Baloch separatists add this argument to their propaganda). 

What you mean they have 30% of the land? Pakistani Kashmiris of 0% of the Kashmir valley, does that mean they are not Kashmiris?

Besides Punjabis live in other states too. About 3 % of the Indian population. And you must be joking about philospher, poet, and artists.

Porus was a Kshatriya and his descendants today are most probably people with *Puri* surname.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Rafi

This indian obsession with Pakistani culture and land needs to stop, our conversion to Islam, what does this have to do with india, nothing at all, so please keep your noses out of our business.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Edevelop

Roybot said:


> What has the population got to do with anything?* Baloch people are only 3% of Pakistans population, does that mean Baloch are not Pakistanis?*( I hope Baloch separatists add this argument to their propaganda).
> 
> What you mean they have 30% of the land? Pakistani Kashmiris of 0% of the Kashmir valley, does that mean they are not Kashmiris?
> 
> Besides Punjabis live in other states too. About 3 % of the Indian population. And you must be joking about philospher, poet, and artists.
> 
> Porus was a Kshatriya and his descendants today are most probably people with *Puri* surname.



 Baluchis compromise 3% of Pak's population, however, they have produced more talent than Indian Punjabis... For your knowledge, Baluchistan is not divided, so why should we give them a percent figure of amount of land?

27 million people living in 30% of punjab is very big ratio. lol, Canada has a population of 33 million, known to be the 2nd largest country in world, and yet, they have produced far more people than all Indian states combined.

Punjab land issues were resolved before partition. Don't bring Kashmir here. Its a disputed territory. Its funny, you would include Kashmiri contributions into Indian contribution, but then again, its back to square one. These people don't accept to be part of you.


----------



## Roybot

cb4 said:


> Baluchis compromise 3% of Pak's population, however, they have produced more talent than Indian Punjabis... For your knowledge, Baluchistan is not divided, so why should we give them a percent figure of amount of land?
> 
> 27 million people living in 30% of punjab is very big ratio. lol, Canada has a population of 33 million, known to be the 2nd largest country in world, and yet, they have produced far more people than all Indian states combined.
> 
> Punjab's issues were resolved before partition. Don't bring Kashmir here. Its a disputed territory. Its funny, you would include Kashmiri contributions into Indian contribution, but then again, its back to square one. These people don't accept to be part of you.



What do you mean Indian Punjabis haven't contributed anything? Our PM is an Indian Punjabi, and he is probably more educated than all your PM's combined

Indian Punjabis have their own religion, philosophy, Do Pakistani Punjabis have their own religion ?


----------



## Birbal

Rafi said:


> Our indian friends are showing their insecurities, Porus was a Pakistani king, because his people and his state are within the geo-graphical borders of Pakistan, and his and his troops descendants live in Pakistan.
> 
> France was known as Gaul in antiquity but the great warrior Vercingetorix is rightly admired by the modern French.



The analogy between France and Pakistan is a false one. France was created out of both an ethnic and geographic identity. While the ethnic identity is not shared with the Gauls, the geographic one is. Pakistan on the other hand was not created out of a geographic identity. It was created solely based on a religious identity.


----------



## crimemaster_gogo

allama ekbal was not a pakistani lol he was an Indian who thought of separate land for Muslims and died before he could see his dream come true, isn't it ? so the only noble prize winner which pakistan claims was actually an Indian before he died.

.now ridiculous is this OP's claim lol do you even claim you ppl to be the actual/indigenous inhabitants of Harappa and Mohenjidaro ? you Muslim country claiming Hindu civilisation and now our Hindu king Porus/Porushuttam/Purushuttam, you guys are so confused and delusional.


----------



## Rafi

indians crying -- priceless, no matter what you say, our land - our history, indians don't get a say.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RazPaK

> indians crying -- priceless, no matter what you say, our land - our history, indians don't get a say.



It just gets worse every month.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## crimemaster_gogo

Rafi said:


> indians crying -- priceless, no matter what you say, our land - our history, indians don't get a say.



borders of countries change constantly and nothing can change that. civilizations come and go but its our civilization which is still surviving, the mayan, Egyptian, incan, mesopotomian civilizations are long gone and zorastriasm is now a dying cult, we are still there and our civilization still remains along with the chinese, who are you ? what's your civilization ? what's your culture you taking about ? what are your roots ?


----------



## third eye

Truth Teller said:


> You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own.
> 
> We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history.
> 
> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history. If you feel you dont have anything to be proud of, then dont try to claim other's history as your own for god's sake.



Not that anyone would like ' claim' Porus.

It is worth noting that the region of punjab is inhabited by Non Muslims and Non sikhs as well then & now.

Its a good idea to erect statues. Given the fact that Islam was no where on the horizon in Punjab when Porus lived. 

Personally, given the level of radical Islam one sees in Pak its unlikley it will happen.


----------



## Rafi

LoL - we own the history on our land, and you have indian history - Pakistan is an ancient land. And it belongs to us.


----------



## RazPaK

Eh whatever. Not in the mood.


----------



## Rafi

indians should be proud of their own culture and history and leave ours alone.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Edevelop

Roybot said:


> What do you mean Indian Punjabis haven't contributed anything? Our PM is an Indian Punjabi, and *he is probably more educated than all your PM's combined*




You don't have to be educated in English if you want to be known as literate. Get that through your head and and with your inferiority complex.

PM doesn't mean anything... 

But just for the sake of your temptation: here are some with foreign degrees

Khawaja Nazimuddin: Trinity Hall, Cambrdge Univeristy

Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy: Oxford University

Feroz Khan Noon: Oxford University

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto: University of Southern California, Univeristy of California (Berkley), Oxford Univeristy

Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi: Cambridge University

Benezir Bhutto: Oxford University and Harvard University

Moeenuddin Ahmad Qureshi: Indianna University

Imran Khan: Oxford Univeristy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## RazPaK

Anything Pakistanis have, Indians want it. History, food, everything. Then they say we are the most diverse. They absorb western culture and they say they are modern. What bs.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Roybot

cb4 said:


> [/B]
> 
> You don't have to be educated in English if you want to be known as literate. Get that through your head and and with your inferiority complex.
> 
> PM doesn't mean anything...
> 
> But just for the sake of your temptation: here are some with foreign degrees
> 
> Khawaja Nazimuddin: Trinity Hall, Cambrdge Univeristy
> 
> Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy: Oxford University
> 
> Feroz Khan Noon: Oxford University
> 
> Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto: University of Southern California, Univeristy of California (Berkley), Oxford Univeristy
> 
> Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi: Cambridge University
> 
> Benezir Bhutto: Oxford University and Harvard University
> 
> Moeenuddin Ahmad Qureshi: Indianna University
> 
> Imran Khan: Oxford Univeristy



And you think Indian Punjabi's haven't achieved anything? I really can't be bothered compiling a list here but you are being naive. They are a very successful group of people. 

List of Punjabi-language poets - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Punjabi authors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Edevelop

Roybot said:


> And you think Indian Punjabi's haven't achieved anything? I really can't be bothered compiling a list here but you are being naive. They are a very successful group of people.
> 
> List of Punjabi-language poets - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> List of Punjabi authors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



This list is bs. I checked this out on Wiki and i damn sure it was edited by an Indian.
I can name 5 pages of Pakistani Punjabi poets that people have probably never even heard of in India.

---------- Post added at 11:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:22 PM ----------




RazPaK said:


> Anything Pakistanis have, Indians want it. History, food, everything. Then they say we are the most diverse. They absorb western culture and they say they are modern. What bs.



They don't bloody eat meat, and they claim that 90% of our food is Indian


----------



## Roybot

cb4 said:


> This list is bs. I checked this out on Wiki and i damn sure it was edited by an Indian.
> I can name 5 pages of Pakistani Punjabi poets t*hat people have probably never even heard of *in India.



Whats the point of such poets if no one has heard of them

Aaj kal to har gali mohalle main shayar ghoomte milte hain ab unki bhi ginti karu main?


----------



## third eye

cb4 said:


> They don't bloody eat meat, and they claim that 90% of our food is Indian



This one line alone indicates the WIDE knowledege gap that exists.


----------



## RazPaK

> This list is bs. I checked this out on Wiki and i damn sure it was edited by an Indian.
> I can name 5 pages of Pakistani Punjabi poets that people have probably never even heard of in India.



The names on list of his source have Muslims that are from Pakistan side, that have done poetry of worth. Just sayin

---------- Post added at 11:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:27 PM ----------

It's like Bulleh Shah and Waris Shah belong to Pakistan. Can't claim our Sufi saints, only Indian Punjabis can.


----------



## Edevelop

Maybe you Indians should get the hell out of this thread, cuz its about Pakistanis. In no were the title describes India.
Thanks to Roybot, he starts to bring in Indian aka fake Punjabis...


----------



## Roybot

RazPaK said:


> The names on list of his source have Muslims that are from Pakistan side, that have done poetry of worth. Just sayin
> 
> ---------- Post added at 11:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:27 PM ----------
> 
> It's like Bulleh Shah and Waris Shah belong to Pakistan. Can't claim our Sufi saints, only Indian Punjabis can.



We claim whatever we want. What you going to do about it

---------- Post added at 03:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:30 PM ----------




cb4 said:


> Maybe you Indians should get the hell out of this thread, cuz its about Pakistanis. In no were the title describes India.
> Thanks to Roybot, he starts to bring in Indian aka fake Punjabis...



You started it, I called your BS don't be mad at me


----------



## RazPaK

> We claim whatever we want. What you going to do about it



Continue to make fun of you.


----------



## Edevelop

LMAOF. who was the one to bring up the fact that "Indians are Punjabis too"??? Was that even necessary?


----------



## Roybot

RazPaK said:


> Continue to make fun of you.



Itne dino se to try kar rahe ho, koi farak nahi parta hamein We are dheet

---------- Post added at 03:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:33 PM ----------




cb4 said:


> LMAOF. who was the one to bring up the fact that "Indians are Punjabis too"??? Was that even necessary?



I said Punjabis are Indians too, time to go see an optometrist maybe?


----------



## RazPaK

> Itne dino se to try kar rahe ho, koi farak nahi parta hamein We are dheet



You are our property and we will do what we want with you.


----------



## Edevelop

@ Roybot. But this is a 'Pakistani Punjabi' Thread, Einstein...


----------



## Roybot

cb4 said:


> @ Roybot. But this is a 'Pakistani Punjabi' Thread, Einstein...



I was replying to someone. You are the one who decided to bring in your arguments that Indians Punjabis are only 27 million and all that crap.

Porus was an Indian King, deal with it

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## MilSpec

Truth Teller said:


> You indians dont have any claim over him. Only people in india who can have a claim over him are Sikhs. Why do the rest of you indians try to take pride in Punjabi history or try to claim Punjabi history as your own.
> 
> We Punjabis dont try to claim marathi, bengali, south indian, gujrati, ect. history.
> 
> Please take pride in your own ethnicity and history. If you feel you dont have anything to be proud of, then dont try to claim other's history as your own for god's sake.




to subjugate 9000 years of the history by the lines made barely 70 years ago is not just ignorant but also unfair to land, people and the generations to come... peace


----------



## Malik Usman

Veeru said:


> 1. In a Islamic nation????
> 
> 2. What is "Jatt" ?? i was in impression that Islam and pakistan don't belive in jaat-paat.



Well your thinking is wrong then.....we already have huge assests of Monju Daroo and Harapa and Buddism.
Second thing Islam don't allow Jaat-Paat in that sense to rule on other minorities and crush them like in India Hindu do with Christians and Muslims (i.e. Gujrat, Babari Mosques etc.)......In Quran Allah Says he made Tribes so peoples can recognise each other.


----------



## Birbal

Malik Usman said:


> Well your thinking is wrong then.....we already have huge assests of Monju Daroo and Harapa and Buddism.
> *Second thing Islam don't allow Jaat-Paat in that sense to rule on other minorities and crush them* like in India Hindu do with Christians and Muslims (i.e. Gujrat, Babari Mosques etc.)......In Quran Allah Says he made Tribes so peoples can recognise each other.



Bullshit. Every religion (including both Islam and Hinduism) has some adherents who are tolerant and others who are intolerant. Hindus have the Hindutva, while Muslims have the Taliban, etc. You can't say one religion is inherently more tolerant than another religion, as all religions can be interpreted to either support or oppose violence against minority religions (I can find statements in the Quran, Bible, etc. that support genocide against non-believers, but I can also find statements that support tolerance of other religions).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Bang Galore

indianrabbit said:


> tomorrow they will claim chanakya also.


 

They already do, that's why all of them go Chunkya,chunkya in their television shows.


----------



## ice_man

OH MY GOD!!!!! SO MUCH BULL from both sides!!! 

look its simple do indians claim MOHEINJODARO??? 

Mohenjo-daro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

do indians claim IQbal & Mohammed Ali Jinnah as great men??? no they don't!!! 

so its not us who are being selective about our history it is also the indians! 

the fact of the matter is that indians till date haven't accepted Pakistan as a nation with its own identity!! they still believe in "AKHAND BHARAT" dreams!!

so let them dream on and say whatever they want but that dream will never come true.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## kingkobra

pakistanis are at it again...claiming what never belonged to them...calling a great king by name given to him by greeks...shame on you guys....you claim him to be your king then at least call him by his real name...pathetic is the only word to describe such claims..


----------



## nalandapride

ice_man said:


> OH MY GOD!!!!! SO MUCH BULL from both sides!!!
> 
> look its simple do indians claim MOHEINJODARO???
> 
> Mohenjo-daro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> do indians claim IQbal & Mohammed Ali Jinnah as great men??? no they don't!!!
> 
> so its not us who are being selective about our history it is also the indians!
> 
> the fact of the matter is that indians till date haven't accepted Pakistan as a nation with its own identity!! they still believe in "AKHAND BHARAT" dreams!!
> 
> so let them dream on and say whatever they want but that dream will never come true.




We claim Indus Valley Civilization like you guys claim Tipu Sultan, Sirajuddaulah, Sher Shah Suri as Pakistan's heritage. And we also claim Great Panini of Charsadda(Pushkalawati) also.


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

I don't consider him like a pakistani punjabi

But just a PUNJABI 

Muslim or sikh, who cares ? He was just punjabi


----------



## jetti

there was no punjabi in those times.


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

jetti said:


> there was no punjabi in those times.


 

I believe that there were a land of 5 rivers ( punj ( 5 ) - ab ( river ) )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bajwajatt1984

Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar said:


> Wow, thank you very much for this comment brother
> 
> You make me proud to be a PUNJABI


 Veer ji ... came out of these fairy tales.. I am bajwa jatt sikh our ancestors came from jaisalmer in 14th century and ruled multan and fateh jang and later sialkot and narowal .......baba naro bajwa one of our ancestor establish this city of narowal bajwa jatt of sialkot and narowal help maharaja ranjit singh in Liberating Kashmir from afgans 

our other relatives

Randhawa jatt - migrate from Bikaner in 15th century 
Sidhu jatt-migrate from jaisalmer in 11th century
Ghuman jatt- migrate from delhi in 15th century
Dhillon jatt-migrate from delhi in 11th century 
Waraich jatt-migrate from central india 

I am proud punjabi jatt but But I can't forget my roots ..and never try to run away from reality

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

bajwajatt1984 said:


> Veer ji ... came out of these fairy tales.. I am bajwa jatt sikh our ancestors came from jaisalmer in 14th century and ruled multan and fateh jang and later sialkot and narowal .......baba naro bajwa one of our ancestor establish this city of narowal bajwa jatt of sialkot and narowal help maharaja ranjit singh in Liberating Kashmir from afgans
> 
> our other relatives
> 
> Randhawa jatt - migrate from Bikaner in 15th century
> Sidhu jatt-migrate from jaisalmer in 11th century
> 
> Ghuman jatt- migrate from delhi in 15th century
> Dhillon jatt-migrate from delhi in 11th century
> Waraich jatt-migrate from central india
> 
> 
> I am proud punjabi jatt but But I can't forget my roots ..and never try to run away from reality



Fer ki kehna chanda ya tu ?

Are you khali ? ( i see 1984 in your username )



---------- Post added at 03:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:36 PM ----------




tatasteel said:


> A Statue for A Pakistani Punjabi Hero.....Porus
> 
> 
> 
> My history books says Pakistan was created on 1947.
> 
> But don't know about Pakistan Version



Pakistan didn't existed
But lekin punjab did always existed because it means " the land of 5 rivers " and Porus was from there


----------



## bajwajatt1984

veer ji 1984 vich ma pada hoya se ....KHALI ...what are you trying to say ..akali


Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar said:


> Fer ki kehna chanda ya tu ?
> 
> Are you khali ? ( i see 1984 in your username )
> 
> 
> 
> ---------- Post added at 03:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:36 PM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan didn't existed
> But lekin punjab did always existed because it means " the land of 5 rivers " and Porus was from there


----------



## jetti

was he from east punjab or west punjab


----------



## tatasteel

Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar said:


> Pakistan didn't existed


Thats what i am saying........Bhai


----------



## bajwajatt1984

punjabi muslam was never a ruling class in the history of east and west punjab name me a single punjabi muslam who ruled a single piece of land in punjab........only ethical indian who ruled punjab was sikhs in last 1000 years of punjab history


jetti said:


> was he from east punjab or west punjab

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Roybot

bajwajatt1984 said:


> punjabi muslam was never a ruling class in the history of east and west punjab name me a single punjabi muslam who ruled a single piece of land in punjab........only ethical indian who ruled punjab was sikhs in last 1000 years of punjab history



Sikhs and Hindus before that. There were no Sikhs up until 15th century


----------



## ice_man

nalandapride said:


> We claim Indus Valley Civilization like you guys claim Tipu Sultan, Sirajuddaulah, Sher Shah Suri as Pakistan's heritage. And we also claim Great Panini of Charsadda(Pushkalawati) also.



& u skipped the question about jinnah and iqbal as great lawyer and the best poet out of this sub continent. because you can't claim indus valley civilization and not claim these 2 great men now can you?


----------



## bajwajatt1984

you are absolutely right...


Roybot said:


> Sikhs and Hindus before that. There were no Sikhs up until 15th century


----------



## bajwajatt1984

yes ranjeet singh deo a hindu rajput rules eastern part of sialkot and some jatt tribes in pre sikh era control small pockets of sialkot,gujjarwal,multan,nabha,Sheikhupura,moga and Patiala


Roybot said:


> Sikhs and Hindus before that. There were no Sikhs up until 15th century

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

Roybot said:


> Sikhs and Hindus before that. There were no Sikhs up until 15th century



Not in the last 1000 years

BUT after the creation of sikhism

There were maharaja gobind singh ji and maharaja ranjit singh who ruled punjab

Punjabi muslims never ruled punjab before 1947.... The only muslims who ruled punjab was the afghans and mughals ( not punjabis )

And porus was a hindu

But anyway , he was punjabi  because he was from this land with 5 rivers

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nalandapride

ice_man said:


> & u skipped the question about jinnah and iqbal as great lawyer and the best poet out of this sub continent. because you can't claim indus valley civilization and not claim these 2 great men now can you?



Allama Iqbal:- "Saare Jahan se achcha Hindustan Hamara" (we still sing this song)
Muhammad Ali Jinnah:- Gujarati from Rajkot. We study about him in our history book, he is the part of our pre-1947 History.

The thing is only difference between India and Pakistan is being Hindu and Muslim majority respectively and there is no ethnic based difference between two countries. history from 3000 BC to 1947 AD is common for both countries and this is mine not yours theory is a complete lie. 
Indus Valley also was there in Gujarat and Northern India it is also Indian heritage because back in 2500BC no nation state existed. So, when talking about Indus valley study about whole civilization including Harappa and Mohenjodaro after all when you folks study about Mughal Empire you don't restrict yourself to governor of Lahore only or the Yusufzai rebellion.


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

nalandapride said:


> Allama Iqbal:- "Saare Jahan se achcha Hindustan Hamara" (we still sing this song)
> Muhammad Ali Jinnah:- Gujarati from Rajkot. We study about him in our history book, he is the part of our pre-1947 History.
> 
> The thing is only difference between India and Pakistan is being Hindu and Muslim majority respectively and the
> re is no ethnic based difference between two countries. history from 3000 BC to 1947 AD is common for both countries and this is mine not yours theory is a complete lie.
> Indus Valley also was there in Gujarat and Northern India it is also Indian heritage because back in 2500BC no nation state existed. So, when talking about Indus valley study about whole civilization including Harappa and Mohenjodaro after all when you folk study about Mughal Empire you don't restrict yourself to governor of Lahore only or the Yusufzai rebellion.



I believe the fact that there are ethnicity diffrencies between punjabis and bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis etc. ...


----------



## nalandapride

Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar said:


> I believe the fact that there are ethnicity diffrencies between punjabis and bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis etc. ...



I too look different from my neighbours, I am an Alien.


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

nalandapride said:


> I too look different from my neighbours, I am an Alien.



Eissey mat socho bhai

Tum bihari ho, biharis , aliens nahi hote !


----------



## humanfirst

Jats were originally from sindh and they moved to punjab area only in medivial period.And porus was a punjabi rajput king in the lineage of pandavas.Then how come the op's jat family fought against alexander?


----------



## GURU DUTT

kis hoshiaar ne is thake hue thread ko dubaara khola????

kyon gare murde ukhaar rahe ho


"SIKANDER NE PORAS SE"BY MAHENDRA KAPOOR,M:MADAN MOHAN-"ANPADH-1962" - YouTube


----------



## Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar

humanfirst said:


> Jats were originally from sindh and they moved to punjab area only in medivial period.And porus was a punjabi rajput king in the lineage of pandavas.Then how come the op's jat family fought against alexander?



Some jats were from scythian ancestry....


----------



## bajwajatt1984

Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar said:


> I believe the fact that there are ethnicity diffrencies between punjabis and bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis etc. ...


..veer ji there is little bit difference in physical appearance of bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis and punjabi...but they are not ethicanly different from each other ....skin colour and physical structure change due to climate conduction and eating habits


----------



## bajwajatt1984

scythian .....these are fairy tales created by some third rated european historian .... except pakistanis nobody take these stories in series manner QUOTE=Punjabi Jattan Da Puttar;2569366]Some jats were from scythian ancestry....[/QUOTE]


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

RazPaK said:


> Did you consider that many Pakistanis have Afghan lineage. Also it is Muslim history, and honestly I think the reason they named their missiles as Invaders was to terrify Bharatis. I don't have a problem with Tamils or Marathis being proud of Punjabis, but it sounds ridiculous when someone sitting in Nagpur, is like yeah IVC belongs to us.



Ha ha havent u heard prominent debates regarding IVC?
Many archelogist believe the IVC belongs to the dravidians or tamils because we are the first people to set foot in indian sub continent !!
And the bull seal of IVC is a clinching evidence cos till now only in Tamil nadu bull taming sport or JALLIKATTU is still followed !!
By ur arguements iam sitting in chennai and still i can say IVC belonged to me !!
I am a indian first, and so i can say every indian can have rights over IVC as well as on PURUSHOTTAM or PORUS !!!


----------



## Armstrong

Hmmn, A Pakistani Punjabi Hero ? I can live with the Punjabi aspect of it because by some accounts that I've read, he appears to have belonged to the present day Punjab region; but a 'Pakistani Punjabi' - dude, he was neither a Pakistani nor an Indian, because the contemporary concept of nation-states was unheard of in those times. 

I mean there are Kurds out there that talk about Saladin as their hero because he was an ethnic Kurd, yet the scholars of Saladin, at least the ones that I've read, find not a single mention of any kind of ethno-nationalism in any account of Saladin available from his time because the Saracens were a bunch of ethnicities united by a common cause and a common faith.

I think, this Poros fellow belongs as much to India as Asoka or Buddha belong to Pakistan because these lands of ours were considered, more or less, as one body even if there wasn't any unity between the different Maharajas or Rajas of the Indian Sub-continent, hence the term 'Sub-continent', and we as its successor states can and should claim pride in each and everyone of these civilizations. I am proud of Shershah Suri for the GT road and the vision of what a good, traveler friendly road network should look like but I'm equally proud of Asoka for his concepts of what an egalitarian society in the context of those times, could be. 

Just because Pakistan was supposed to be a state that protects and further develops the Islamic ideology shouldn't do away with all that came before. There were exemplary gentlemen (and women) before the republics of Pakistan and India, who had created city-states and sometimes nation-states, though not in the contemporary sense, which are worthy of remembrance.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## jinxeD_girl

self delete


----------



## jinxeD_girl

bajwajatt1984 said:


> ..veer ji there is little bit difference in physical appearance of bengalis, biharis, tamils, gujaratis sindhis and punjabi...but they are not ethicanly different from each other ....skin colour and physical structure change due to climate conduction and eating habits



what are you talking about? why you guyz always mix ethnicity with race? You are right that majority of Indians belong to same race, but ethnically they are different.. Punjabi or Marathi is ethnicity, Indian is nationality, Caucasian etc are races (if there is such a concept). stop mixing ethnicity with nationality with race..

An ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each other, through a common heritage, often consisting of a common language, a common culture (often including a shared religion) and/or an ideology that stresses common ancestry or endogamy.[1][2][3] Another definition is "...a highly biologically self-perpetuating group sharing an interest in a homeland connected with a specific geographical area, a common language and traditions, including food preferences, and a common religious faith".[4] *The concept of ethnicity differs from the closely related term race in that "race" refers to grouping based mostly upon biological criteria, while "ethnicity" also encompasses additional cultural factors.*


----------



## jinxeD_girl

..............


----------



## Maira La

Rafi said:


> It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.



Actually, it's much more of a shame that you guys want to erect the statue of a white Western invader alongside the statue of the guy who tried to defend your land from the invader. *Sheer lack of pride I'd say (common among brown people).* Europeans would never erect statues of their Turkish or Mongol invaders, ever! And that's pride!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Armstrong

Apocalypse said:


> Actually, it's much more of a shame that you guys want to erect the statue of a white Western invader alongside the statue of the guy who tried to defend your land from the invader. *Sheer lack of pride I'd say (common among brown people).* Europeans would never erect statues of their Turkish or Mongol invaders, ever! And that's pride!



On the contrary its so far into the past that I'm not sure if many of us can relate to the nationalistic element of it, especially when there wasn't an conceptualization then of present day nation-states and by extension nationalism.


----------



## Maira La

Armstrong said:


> On the contrary its so far into the past that I'm not sure if many of us can relate to the *nationalistic element* of it, especially when there wasn't an conceptualization then of present day nation-states and by extension nationalism.



Yes there was. Alexander considered the *nations living to the "East" of Europe to be uncivilized.* However, he was impressed by the intelligence of the Persian people.


----------



## Armstrong

Apocalypse said:


> Yes there was. Alexander considered the *nations living to the "East" of Europe to be uncivilized.* However, he was impressed by the intelligence of the Persian people.



Oh bhai, I was referring to that in the context of Nationalism and Statehood. As I implied in my earlier post : If you'd talk about an Azad Kurdistan to Saladin or a Greater Afghanistan, in the sense it is talked about, to Shershah Suri, they'd think your bonkers.


----------



## devgupt

Armstrong said:


> I think, this Poros fellow belongs as much to India as Asoka or Buddha belong to Pakistan because these lands of ours were considered, more or less, as one body even if there wasn't any unity between the different Maharajas or Rajas of the Indian Sub-continent, hence the term 'Sub-continent', and we as its successor states can and should claim pride in each and everyone of these civilizations. I am proud of Shershah Suri for the GT road and the vision of what a good, traveler friendly road network should look like but I'm equally proud of Asoka for his concepts of what an egalitarian society in the context of those times, could be.



Very nice argument. Fully concur with you

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Tshering22

Boy!... I never knew there would be so much clamour for king Purushottama in Pakistan..!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Irfan Baloch

Avatar said:


> IMO it's a great initiative if carried out without twisting facts.



there is not much room for twisting facts. Alexander won in the end but the sons of Punjab fought valiantly.
the anti elephant tactics of Alexader's army proved to be a turning point.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## notsuperstitious

Irfan Baloch said:


> there is not much room for twisting facts. Alexander won in the end but the sons of Punjab fought valiantly.
> the anti elephant tactics of Alexader's army proved to be a turning point.



Calling Porus Pakistani is twisting facts.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Irfan Baloch

fateh71 said:


> Calling Porus Pakistani is twisting facts.



yea I know what you are saying and that I will agree with.
tell me what do you suggest?

this is why I didnt say Pakistani  but called him Punjabi
I hope you got no issues there?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Tshering22

Irfan Baloch said:


> there is not much room for twisting facts. Alexander won in the end but the sons of Punjab fought valiantly.
> the anti elephant tactics of Alexader's army proved to be a turning point.



Yeah.. but his generals did suffer massive defeat at Purushottama's hands first until Alexander had to come himself for the king.... only to be thrashed and kicked out by emperor Maurya. 

So much for Alexander "the great". Since Western civilization (which traces its political pride to ancient Greece) couldn't accept Alexander's defeat at the hand of an Indian emperor, they twisted history again. Alexander was as great as the scores of kings and princes that fought and lost.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## LaBong

Irfan Baloch said:


> yea I know what you are saying and that I will agree with.
> tell me what do you suggest?
> 
> this is why I didnt say Pakistani  but called him Punjabi
> I hope you got no issues there?



Can we call Ashoka a Bihari then? :/


----------



## Rafi

Porus and his troops came from the land of Pakistan, his descendants and the soldiers are Pakistani, hence Porus Pakistani Punjabi


----------



## Rajaraja Chola

Rafi said:


> Porus and his troops came from the land of Pakistan, his descendants and the soldiers are Pakistani, hence Porus Pakistani Punjabi



I doubt he will call himself pakistani or even punjabi !!!
Let the history be history..... I personaly will say that an indian has much rights over him, as much as a pakistani has !!!


----------



## Birbal

Irfan Baloch said:


> there is not much room for twisting facts. Alexander won in the end but the sons of Punjab fought valiantly.
> the anti elephant tactics of Alexader's army proved to be a turning point.



There's plenty of room for questioning the Greek version of the story. Every time Alexander won a battle, he would loot their cities and cause massive devastation. This tended to happen more so if they had provided resistance. Take for example the massacre at Maskavati (after a difficult siege and battle, Alexander allowed the mercenaries inside the city to leave the city unharmed as part of the terms of surrender. Once they were outside the city, he had his forces attack them and they killed every one of the mercenaries including their wives and children. He then enslaved the entire population of the city).

Considering that Paurava remained in control of his kingdom and Alexander did not receive any logistical assistance from him, it's far more likely that the battle ended in a peace treaty, rather than a surrender.

As for anti-elephant tactics, we're talking about only 130 elephants, probably unarmored. After all Paurava was a minor king. All the Western so called "anti-elephant tactics" would have failed miserably against an army possessing thousands of elephants, as was the case with major Indian armies.


----------



## LaBong

^ yes the supposed victory of Alex over purus has been questioned by many, we have a thread in this forum with some excellent posts, lemme find out.


----------



## kingkobra

Rafi said:


> Porus and his troops came from the land of Pakistan, his descendants and the soldiers are Pakistani, hence Porus Pakistani Punjabi



by that logic many pakistanis who were born in india should be indians but they are not 
i can bet that king puru would have chosen india over pakistan if he was alive in 1947


----------



## Rafi

kingkobra said:


> by that logic many pakistanis who were born in india should be indians but they are not
> i can bet that king puru would have chosen india over pakistan if he was alive in 1947



If he was alive - he would go with his children, and the children of his soldiers, not foreigners like indians. 

---------- Post added at 05:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:26 AM ----------

Blood is thicker than water.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

Firdousi the persian poet writes tht it was actually Porus who won the war thts why he latter also controlled the taxila kingdom.... while greeks lie...and why wouldnt theey to save their pride?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bajwajatt1984

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Rafi said:


> Porus and his troops came from the land of Pakistan, his descendants and the soldiers are Pakistani, hence Porus Pakistani Punjabi


----------



## hydapses

There should be consistency in arguments. 
If the guy who wants to build a statue in Porus' memory claims that Porus was a Pakistani Punjabi hero since his(poster's) folks belong to Porus' clan, surely he cannot refute the fact that Porus was a Hindu and therefore an Indian king as several posters have already established with references that Porus was a Hindu.
Calling Porus a Pakistani is just so much humbug and with such bigotted views of history this gentleman will never get the stautue up.
Also by claiming ancestry of Porus clan, he is also rubbishing the oft heard Pakistani claim that Pakistanis are not Indians but are of Irano-Turkic-Afghano-Arab origin.


----------



## Sedqal

Build a statute dude if Indians are to be trusted every thing from Vatican city to Kaaba is a Hindu relic  It befitting that the most famous building in India is Taj Mahal, a fine specimen of Muslim Architecture (though a state policy has been started to convert it into Tejo Mahalaya. 

Google P. N. Oak to check the intellectual level of the most popular Historain in India and get familiar with the term 'deep punning'

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ghaja

I don't get it.
Why do Pakistanis want to build a statue for Porus. Porus lost the battle against Alexander and
didn't achieve anything.
Its understandable if people from Bihar want to build a statue for Chandragupta who defeated the Greek invaders or if people from south India decide to build a statue for Pulakesi who defeated the Arab invaders in the 8th century. There should also be a statue for Skandagupta who defeated the Hun invaders in the 5th century in central India.
These kings defeated the foreign invaders and protected the major part of India but Porus 
didn't achieve anything so there shouldn't be a statue for him.


----------



## Shabaz Sharif

hydapses said:


> There should be consistency in arguments.
> If the guy who wants to build a statue in Porus' memory claims that Porus was a Pakistani Punjabi hero since his(poster's) folks belong to Porus' clan, surely he cannot refute the fact that Porus was a Hindu and therefore an Indian king as several posters have already established with references that Porus was a Hindu.
> Calling Porus a Pakistani is just so much humbug and with such bigotted views of history this gentleman will never get the stautue up.
> Also by claiming ancestry of Porus clan, he is also rubbishing the oft heard Pakistani claim that Pakistanis are not Indians but are of Irano-Turkic-Afghano-Arab origin.



WTF, did you just register to bump this thread? And flags Spain and Russia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## TheRafael00000

Veeru said:


> 1. In a Islamic nation????
> 
> 2. What is "Jatt" ?? i was in impression that Islam and pakistan don't belive in jaat-paat.




It's not for praying nonsense. To pay tribute.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## bronxbull

Sedqal said:


> Build a statute dude if Indians are to be trusted every thing from Vatican city to Kaaba is a Hindu relic  It befitting that the most famous building in India is Taj Mahal, a fine specimen of Muslim Architecture (though a state policy has been started to convert it into Tejo Mahalaya.
> 
> Google P. N. Oak to check the intellectual level of the most popular Historain in India and get familiar with the term 'deep punning'



There is no state policy on the Taj Mahal,even though i wish there was one as you suggested.

We have more than ample proof about specific mahals being built upon destroyed temples,so we have leverage on it.

And regarding Porus,you certainly have zero argument there.

Prous ll always remain a hindu king and Kshatriyas who convert for money/land are dalaals,hence cease to have izzat/honour.


----------



## r3alist

Masterchief said:


> both indians and pakistanis have an equal claim on the man's legacy, lets stop this tera-mera attitude brother.



do the scottish have a claim on what happened in english lands?


----------



## Leader

Rafi said:


> My ancestral family village is in Jhelum - close to the site of the historical battle of Hydaspes River with Alexander the Great, our Jatt village is known for producing Warriors for generations, we have oral tradition of fighting in the battle against Alexander, right up to the modern day, when we send our sons and daughters to fight for the Pakistani Armed Forces.
> 
> To cut a long story short, our village is thinking of erecting two statues and a monument to Alexander and Porus. To pay tribute to the two great warriors of their times, one a Greek Macedonian and the other a Pakistani Punjabi
> 
> It is a shame that their is no significant monument to this ancient battle.



you keep thinking, the greek govt and some people from Pakistan who consider Alexander the loser as alexander the great, are going to built a memorial for Alexander near janab where the battle is suppose to have taken place. 

read Mustansar Hussain tarrar's latest article.


----------



## RazPaK

Leader said:


> you keeping thinking, the greek govt and some people from Pakistan who consider Alexander the loser as alexander the great, are going to built a memorial for Alexander.
> 
> read Mustansar Hussain tarrar's latest article.



He conquered a vast part of the world, BUT....
He ran with his tail down his legs from Indus to Multan?

A worthy adversary, but he couldn't handle the *** whoopings.


----------



## Jackdaws

Isn't statue building akin to idol worshipping? But then again - so is the construction of the idols of various missiles which adorn Pakistan. Why Porus - you can claim Lincoln, Mandela and Gandhi also - why not build one for L.K. Advani too - a Pakistani Sindhi.


----------



## Awesome

Think about security. Erecting an idol would attract Islamists as well.

Good luck!


----------



## Spring Onion

ghaja said:


> I don't get it.
> *Why do Pakistanis want to build a statue for Porus. Porus lost the battle against Alexander and
> didn't achieve anything.*
> Its understandable if people from Bihar want to build a statue for Chandragupta who defeated the Greek invaders or if people from south India decide to build a statue for Pulakesi who defeated the Arab invaders in the 8th century. There should also be a statue for Skandagupta who defeated the Hun invaders in the 5th century in central India.
> These kings defeated the foreign invaders and protected the major part of India but Porus
> didn't achieve anything so there shouldn't be a statue for him.



 So that Indians could blame his Pakistani identity for his defeats .


----------



## Leader

RazPaK said:


> He conquered a vast part of the world, BUT....
> He ran with his tail down his legs from Indus to Multan?
> 
> A worthy adversary, but he couldn't handle the *** whoopings.



he was defeated by Raja Porus. this is a fact, and actually died on his way back due to wounds.

read Aitzaz Ahsan's book The Indus Saga to know the truth about Alexander's defeat in the very first battle with Punjab's Raja Porus.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Leader

@Rafi @RazPaK and to be honest there should be a museum showing the true fact about Macedonian alexendar's defeat... and one statue of Raja Porus guarding the border from western invaders !


----------



## RazPaK

Leader said:


> @Rafi @RazPaK and to be honest there should be a museum showing the true fact about Macedonian alexendar's defeat... and one statue of Raja Porus guarding the border from western invaders !



I have no part in this.

It was @Rafi 's glorious ancestors that charged the greek forces with their cavalry, strike fear into their hearts. The Greeks never realized that they were stumbling unto an entire continent.


----------



## bronxbull

There were no Jatts in this region in 340 BC,only Rajputs/Rajas.

And he is Purush,not Porus.

Puru king,not pakistani.


----------



## INDIC

RazPaK said:


> I have no part in this.
> 
> *It was @Rafi 's glorious ancestors *that charged the greek forces with their cavalry, strike fear into their hearts. The Greeks never realized that they were stumbling unto an entire continent.


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

bronxbull said:


> There were no Jatts in this region in 340 BC,only Rajputs/Rajas.
> 
> And he is Purush,not Porus.
> 
> Puru king,not pakistani.



It would be funny if you a tamil indian claim Porus aswell...

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## INDIC

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> It would be funny if you a tamil indian claim Porus aswell...



What about yourself.


----------



## bronxbull

DESERT FIGHTER said:


> It would be funny if you a tamil indian claim Porus aswell...



Kid,just stick to your cessna,yeh tumhari aukaat ke baahar hain.

Kya Bache wache aa jaate hain baat krne,yeh maidan sab ke liye nahi hain bhai.


----------



## Awesome

I hate it when people revive old threads.


----------

