Are Hindus dangerous?

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

I would not like it at any cost.

If we have political control of the subcontinent we can do what we want with the muslims:p

 

[Durrak]

If we have political control of the subcontinent we can do what we want with the muslims:p

You wish. .

You couldn't stop Islam from spreading when you were ruling sub-continent neither you were able to rule your own land. . keep dreaming

 

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

You wish. .

You couldn't stop Islam from spreading when you were ruling sub-continent neither you were able to rule your own land. . keep dreaming

You seem to forget India is the only land that despite being under 1000 years muslim rule still remains majority hindu unlike all other countries which were under muslim rule got islamized completely

 

[Durrak]

You seem to forget India is the only land that despite being under 1000 years muslim rule still remains majority hindu unlike all other countries which were under muslim rule got islamized completely

Because the rulers weren't imposing their religion on others and it shouldn't be. You must appreciate that

 

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

Because the rulers weren't imposing their religion on others and it shouldn't be. You must appreciate that

90 million(80 million hindus,10 million buddhists)genocided people would not agree.Only muslim ruler who had something good about him was akbar,who had killed hindus in the start of his reign but later softened,explored the culture of India,and encompassed all aspects of Indian culture in his thought,he was the only ruler who removed jizya and reverted the dhimmi status of non muslims as normal citizens,though after his death his son reinstated all discriminatory and genocidal practices.The last muslim ruler of India aurangjeb alone killed 5 million hindus.However for muslim rulers it had proven most difficult to convert hindus to islam.Besides that hindu kingdoms kept fighting all the time with them giving muslim rulers headache.

 

[Indischer]

You seem to forget India is the only land that despite being under 1000 years muslim rule still remains majority hindu unlike all other countries which were under muslim rule got islamized completely

I really expect Indians at least to know our history better mate. Where I come from, Muslims have NEVER ruled that part of India. This 1000 year rule myth is largely applicable only to modern-day Pakistan, if anywhere.

 

[A Town]

Puny little Bangladeshis, okay then lmao. Pipe down son, down here your Tamil Nadou brothers keep to themselves, but on here you are showing some bravado, 'punjabbi mundeh'.

Are you crazy? Tamils in UK are nutters lmao. I'm in Alperton and not even Somalians say shit to Tamils. Even Ross Kemp covered London Tamils.
Didn't you hear about that Pakistani that got stabbed in Tooting by Tamils? You Bangladeshis are quiet nowadays, no hood videos or anything. Sit back down. No one is intimidated by Bengalis anymore, maybe in the 90's but now you guys are quiet.

 

[KingMamba]

You seem to forget India is the only land that despite being under 1000 years muslim rule still remains majority hindu unlike all other countries which were under muslim rule got islamized completely

Only because of two reasons, Muslim leaders never tried to Islamicize India despite hindutva propoganda claims. The closest leader to try was Aurangzeb and that was near end of Muslim rule in India. Second reason Indians breed like rabbits so numbers were always going to remain high meanwhile other areas under Muslim rule got attacked by Mongols who destroyed almost everything which had to do with non Islamic religion and massacred millions but Mongols were never able to get to Islamic heartland so Islam itself was saved and in fact most Mongol khanates later Khans became Muslims themselves. India was saved from Mongol onslaught by the Muslims themselves named the Khilijis.

 

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

I really expect Indians at least to know our history better mate. Where I come from, Muslims have NEVER ruled that part of India. This 1000 year rule myth is largely applicable only to modern-day Pakistan, if anywhere.

Northern India did come entirely under muslim rule for 700-800 years,with gaps in between.South did not come until late mughal times,extreme south and northeast never came.From where do you come though.

 

[KingMamba]

90 million(80 million hindus,10 million buddhists)genocided people would not agree.Only muslim ruler who had something good about him was akbar,who had killed hindus in the start of his reign but later softened,explored the culture of India,and encompassed all aspects of Indian culture in his thought,he was the only ruler who removed jizya and reverted the dhimmi status of non muslims as normal citizens,though after his death his son reinstated all discriminatory and genocidal practices.The last muslim ruler of India aurangjeb alone killed 5 million hindus.However for muslim rulers it had proven most difficult to convert hindus to islam.Besides that hindu kingdoms kept fighting all the time with them giving muslim rulers headache.

Akbar also allowed Hindus who were forced to convert to Islam to revert to Hinduism if they chose, Jahangir continued this practice as well and it is noted as such idk where you getting your claims. As for number of Hindus and Buddhist killed give me source for such numbers.

I really expect Indians at least to know our history better mate. Where I come from, Muslims have NEVER ruled that part of India. This 1000 year rule myth is largely applicable only to modern-day Pakistan, if anywhere.

You must be from extreme South India or North east which Mughals never bothered with. Anyway the more accurate number is 600 years or so.

 

[अखण्ड भारत!!!]

Akbar also allowed Hindus who were forced to convert to Islam to revert to Hinduism if they chose, Jahangir continued this practice as well and it is noted as such idk where you getting your claims. As for number of Hindus and Buddhist killed give me source for such numbers.

I know akbar did good things.Jahanghir imposed dhimmitude again and genocided sikhs and hindus,i suggest you research.Numbers are estimates made by historians such as will durant,they are made based on accounts of muslim courtiers and writers.

 

[Indischer]

Northern India did come entirely under muslim rule for 700-800 years,with gaps in between.South did not come until late mughal times,extreme south and northeast never came.From where do you come though.

Not all parts of Northern India, and certainly not for 700-800 years. You can check yourself about the extent and reign of Muslim kingdoms in India. Since the India of today includes the South in full measure, why club it under the so-called 1000 year rule? And if modern India indeed began from 1947 as many Pakistanis here like to stress so much, I guess that 1000-year rule is a moot point to begin with.
My ancestry is from the only coastal district of Karnataka that borders Goa.

 

[KingMamba]

I know akbar did good things.Jahanghir imposed dhimmitude again and genocided sikhs and hindus,i suggest you research.Numbers are estimates made by historians such as will durant,they are made based on accounts of muslim courtiers and writers.

So what? Your numbers are based on modern hindutvas lol, Muslim courtiers and writers had little reason to lie they had no fear of scrutiny.

 

[Indischer]

You must be from extreme South India or North east which Mughals never bothered with. Anyway the more accurate number is 600 years or so.

I'm neither. The region south of Goa too never came under the Mughals or any other Islamic kingdoms of the South.

 

[KingMamba]

Not all parts of Northern India, and certainly not for 700-800 years. You can check yourself about the extent and reign of Muslim kingdoms in India. Since the India of today includes the South in full measure, why club it under the so-called 1000 year rule? And if modern India indeed began from 1947 as many Pakistanis here like to stress so much, I guess that 1000-year rule is a moot point to begin with.
My ancestry is from the only coastal district of Karnataka that borders Goa.

That is because as much as South Indian dislike it when people say India people tend to think North India specifically whether it comes to food, art, architecture etc.