Arabs invasion of India - Long Story Short

[mauka]

the fact is that the muslims beat Indians due to superior technologies and also because they were always the attackers and never the defenders. a lot of water has passed. those muslims never eveolved and are current day afghans, pathans Pakistanis , turks , arabs uzbeks who are really not capable of much apart from being prolific in the maternity ward.
So accept history , move on and be happy.

 

[Indian Patriot]

the fact is that the muslims beat Indians due to superior technologies

Superior tactics, not technology. Central asian cavalry archers were undefeated until gunpowder cam into existence.

 

[indianBong]

Buddy Muhammad Bin Qasim invaded under Ummayad Caliphate, the invasion was cuz of strategic and trade reasons, plus the local population had turned against Sindhi ruler Raja Dahir, the notorious king who married his own sisters, they found it a brilliant opportunity, Ummayad empire was huge on one end it had sindh and multan, on the other it had Lisbon in Portugal, as far as the plunder is concerned this has always happened throughout human history, in europe, in africa or in asia, the victorious always did plunder the wealth of defeated army, Nadir Shah u r referring to also defeated and killed Ottoman Caliphate's Grand Vazir Osman Topal Pasha and then plundered Dehli, however the invasions under Rashidun Caliphate were different, that is the first 4 caliphs and companions of Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W), when Sassanids were defeated and Pakistan's baluchistan was captured, even the people of Sassanid empire and Byzantine empire rejoiced when under Caliph Umar (R) their lands were liberated, cuz their reign wasnt guided by lust for materialism rather spiritualism, after those 4 caliphs (around 30 years after death of Prophet (S.A.W) arab nationalism and materialistic kingdoms (just like any other kingdom) like ummayads started

You know an afghan friend of mine once told me sadly(he was a student of history) "with the death of our prophet, most of his good spiritual values also died"... maybe he was right....maybe prophet would have been deeply saddend by the present form of islam... maybe!

 

[mauka]

Superior tactics, not technology. Central asian cavalry archers were undefeated until gunpowder cam into existence.

partially agree, babar introduced cannons.
the fact is that the asia minor region which was the meeting point of cultures from Africa, central Asians, Europeans had a lot of intermingling of ideas and minds and thus created newer technologies and tactics.
also that region was more aggressive in nature and a bit more dogmatic and rule based compare to eastern cultures that were more questioning and philosophical in nature.

You know an afghan friend of mine once told me sadly(he was a student of history) "with the death of our prophet, most of his good spiritual values also died"... maybe he was right....maybe prophet would have been deeply saddend by the present form of islam... maybe!

I don't think there was any spirituality with the propohet. it was more of, I say, you obey.

 

[Indian Patriot]

partially agree, babar introduced cannons.
the fact is that the asia minor region which was the meeting point of cultures from Africa, central Asians, Europeans had a lot of intermingling of ideas and minds and thus created newer technologies and tactics.
also that region was more aggressive in nature and a bit more dogmatic and rule based compare to eastern cultures that were more questioning and philosophical in nature.

It was not only tactics but also other factors. Being nomads they could live a hard life and sustain on very little food and requirements. They were used to moving from one place to another and as a result had better mastery over cavalry and cavalry tactics.

Indian rulers were dumb. Not only were they divided but also played stupid moves. Rana Sanga should have never invited Babur to attack Lodhi. Lodhi empire was anyway crumbling down and most probably become extinct. In the battle of Khanwa Babur had did a strategic recce of the battlefield and placed his soldiers well, he marked all the water sources in the desert and denied the same to the rajput army.

I hate to say this but Indians that era fought like novices.

Also caste system did not help. The lower castes were oppressed by upper caste Hindus. They were not allowed in the army and administration and in turn they remained indifferent on who ruled over the land.

 

[mauka]

It was not only tactics but also other factors. Being nomads they could live a hard life and sustain on very little food and requirements. They were used to moving from one place to another and as a result had better mastery over cavalry and cavalry tactics.

Indian rulers were dumb. Not only were they divided but also played stupid moves. Rana Sanga should have never invited Babur to attack Lodhi. Lodhi empire was anyway crumbling down and most probably become extinct. In the battle of Khanwa Babur had did a strategic recce of the battlefield and placed his soldiers well, he marked all the water sources in the desert and denied the same to the rajput army.

I hate to say this but Indians that era fought like novices.

Also caste system did not help. The lower castes were oppressed by upper caste Hindus. They were not allowed in the army and administration and in turn they remained indifferent on who ruled over the land.

cant really refute that. but I would say that they were dumb or novices. it is important to keep adapting and infuse new ideas. that is why we should kep reinventing our way of life, religion etc. and that's the reason why in spite of being on top of the world many centuries ago, the muslim world is wallowing in muck. its almost like heisenbergs principle. you change and progress or stay still and decay. but you cant stay still and progress.

It was not only tactics but also other factors. Being nomads they could live a hard life and sustain on very little food and requirements. They were used to moving from one place to another and as a result had better mastery over cavalry and cavalry tactics.

Indian rulers were dumb. Not only were they divided but also played stupid moves. Rana Sanga should have never invited Babur to attack Lodhi. Lodhi empire was anyway crumbling down and most probably become extinct. In the battle of Khanwa Babur had did a strategic recce of the battlefield and placed his soldiers well, he marked all the water sources in the desert and denied the same to the rajput army.

I hate to say this but Indians that era fought like novices.

Also caste system did not help. The lower castes were oppressed by upper caste Hindus. They were not allowed in the army and administration and in turn they remained indifferent on who ruled over the land.

cant really refute that. but I would say that they were dumb or novices. it is important to keep adapting and infuse new ideas. that is why we should kep reinventing our way of life, religion etc. and that's the reason why in spite of being on top of the world many centuries ago, the muslim world is wallowing in muck. its almost like heisenbergs principle. you change and progress or stay still and decay. but you cant stay still and progress.

 

[MadDog]

I don't think there was any spirituality with the propohet. it was more of, I say, you obey.

I disagree buddy, u have to check history, When muslims returned from madina to makkah with 1000 muslim soldiers under the prophet (PBUH) he forgave all those who had killed his loved ones, the orders to the army were dont harm any person , dont damage any tree, if some one fights u then fight, dont enter anyone's home and when this happened the makkans who had persecuted the prophet and even planned to kill him in the past accepted Islam just by looking at this behaviour, same spiritualism remained there during rule of 4 caliphs (for around 30 yrs) and then other kingdoms with lust for power and greed started to appear in the name of religion

 

[MadDog]

You know an afghan friend of mine once told me sadly(he was a student of history) "with the death of our prophet, most of his good spiritual values also died"... maybe he was right....maybe prophet would have been deeply saddend by the present form of islam... maybe!

Agreed buddy, The prophet even foretold the things that would happen to muslims, how they will become corrupt, will be abundant in number yet will be weak , how they will be divided into many sects etc

 

[mauka]

I disagree buddy, u have to check history, When muslims returned from madina to makkah with 1000 muslim soldiers under the prophet (PBUH) he forgave all those who had killed his loved ones, the orders to the army were dont harm any person , dont damage any tree, if some one fights u then fight, dont enter anyone's home and when this happened the makkans who had persecuted the prophet and even planned to kill him in the past accepted Islam just by looking at this behaviour, same spiritualism remained there during rule of 4 caliphs (for around 30 yrs) and then other kingdoms with lust for power and greed started to appear in the name of religion

he also killed unarmed women who merely insulted him. so its a chequered history that he had. He could propel his religion only because he was a successful warrior and he also did a good job of inspiring his followers. I am not saying that what mahammad did was bad or good. I am merely saying that there was any spirituality involved. It had everything to do with making political alliances, winning war, strategy and influeing people. all other things were just show-shaw.
List of Killings Ordered or Supported by Muhammad - WikiIslam

No18 on list

 

[MadDog]

he also killed unarmed women who merely insulted him. so its a chequered history that he had. He could propel his religion only because he was a successful warrior and he also did a good job of inspiring his followers. I am not saying that what mahammad did was bad or good. I am merely saying that there was any spirituality involved. It had everything to do with making political alliances, winning war, strategy and influeing people. all other things were just show-shaw.
List of Killings Ordered or Supported by Muhammad - WikiIslam

No18 on list

Buddy again u quote a website which is biased and known for bashing islam using unauthentic examples, had this been true there wouldnt be 1.6 billion followers today and islam wouldn't have been the fastest growing religion in the world today, when i say growing it means through conversions not through birth, now lemme narrate a true event, prophet (pbuh) used to pass through a street , a woman used to throw garbage on him everyday, once he passed the woman wasnt there, he inquired and found that she was sick, prophet visited her since she was sick, just this act caused her to convert , please i request u again dont use sites about islam run by non muslims and islamophobes just google the site u quoted, if i start a website about judaism, christianity or hinduism being a muslim and being biased against those religions , would u consult my site to know about that religion ???

 

[rmi5]

bro... its not about spread of islam... its about arab invasion/plunder .... if u remember when nadir shah conquered delhi he did "qatl-e-aam" in chandni chowk... hindus as well as muslims were slaughtered mercilessly... these plunderers never cared about religion

It was not a plunder. Nader asked for delhi giving back Afghan rebels, but delhi refused it. Hence Nader shah invaded India. BTW, the money, gold, and diamond that Nader received was part of an official compensation for war that delhi agreed to pay to Nader Shah.

 

[mauka]

Buddy again u quote a website which is biased and known for bashing islam using unauthentic examples, had this been true there wouldnt be 1.6 billion followers today and islam wouldn't have been the fastest growing religion in the world today, when i say growing it means through conversions not through birth, now lemme narrate a true event, prophet (pbuh) used to pass through a street , a woman used to throw garbage on him everyday, once he passed the woman wasnt there, he inquired and found that she was sick, prophet visited her since she was sick, just this act caused her to convert , please i request u again dont use sites about islam run by non muslims and islamophobes just google the site u quoted, if i start a website about judaism, christianity or hinduism being a muslim and being biased against those religions , would u consult my site to know about that religion ???

No worries, thanks

 

[hussain0216]

Arabs never got beyond Sindh. Arabs are notorious losers who rarely won wars. It was the non-Arab muslims who kept Islam flag flying.

Muhammed Ghaznavi was a Turk not Arab. The Seljuks were a central Asian nomadic tribe that was Islamised and later became Ghazis. The Mameluks were the "slave" turks. Babur was a Chagtai Turk who also claimed lineage from Genghiz Khan ( which is doubtful, lineage from Genghiz was considered a mater of pride for Central asian warlords).

Your talking rubbish

The arabs were far far better warriors then indians

They conquered the persian and byzantine empires, swept across the middle east and north africa, rode up across spain and half way up france

Even sicily and half of italy were occupied


The arabs went from tribes in Arabia two conquering much of the known world


If they were losers indians were turd status

the fact is that the muslims beat Indians due to superior technologies and also because they were always the attackers and never the defenders. a lot of water has passed. those muslims never eveolved and are current day afghans, pathans Pakistanis , turks , arabs uzbeks who are really not capable of much apart from being prolific in the maternity ward.
So accept history , move on and be happy.

Muslims beat you because they were better, stronger, faster, braver and better warriors


Have you seen turkey its a frigging paradise compared to the shit hole that is india

Dare i say it most central Asians are in better condition them most poverty striken indians

Even Pakistan for the most part was a better society than india will less hunger and poverty, if pakistanis economic growth continues then dont be suprised we beat you on most indicators like hunger or poverty


Its amazing how a couple of years of economic growth makes indians mental

 

[Indian Patriot]

Your talking rubbish

The arabs were far far better warriors then indians

Yea, for sure. How long did US take to defeat Iraq?

And if Indians have turd status what status would be Pakistan that lost to India?

Even Pakistan for the most part was a better society than india will less hunger and poverty, if pakistanis economic growth continues then dont be suprised we beat you on most indicators like hunger or poverty

Chal, chal. India is poor, Pakistan is even worse. Look at yourself before you criticise others.

 

[Shark2]

Your talking rubbish

The arabs were far far better warriors then indians

They conquered the persian and byzantine empires, swept across the middle east and north africa, rode up across spain and half way up france

Even sicily and half of italy were occupied


The arabs went from tribes in Arabia two conquering much of the known world


If they were losers indians were turd status



Muslims beat you because they were better, stronger, faster, braver and better warriors


Have you seen turkey its a frigging paradise compared to the shit hole that is india

Dare i say it most central Asians are in better condition them most poverty striken indians

Even Pakistan for the most part was a better society than india will less hunger and poverty, if pakistanis economic growth continues then dont be suprised we beat you on most indicators like hunger or poverty


Its amazing how a couple of years of economic growth makes indians mental

Not really. The Arabs tried to invade what is modern India but they failed as the Arab armies were
destroyed by the Chalukya Dynasty of south India and the Pratihara Dynasty of north India.
After these losses the Arabs gave up their dream to conquer any part of India in the
8th century.