As soldiers fought terrorists, mosques nearby played recordings Jivey, jivey Pakistan!

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Once upon a time, there was East Pakistan.

Kashmir was ,is and will remain with India.

"Was"? Kashmir was never apart of India - they look different, they have different cultures, practices and beliefs - they are completely different.

"Is"? We own around 40% of Kashmir and the people decide who they are with not some foreign aliens.

"will"? History repeats it self - if a people are suppressed or does not support the current government - they will revolt; and no matter how many revolts or protests, they will eventually break away.

In India they dont need 4 witnesses bro,so its obvious the numbers of reported crimes will me more,and by the way do you know country has more rape cases.

That's a misconception - and never enforced. According to Islam you need 4 witnesses to accuse someone of adultery; it says nothing about rape. The 4 witnesses rape thing is very unheard of in Pakistan - although there have been rare reports of it being enforced in lawless, uneducated and isolated areas in Pakistan.

Lmao, who are the rulers? There are records of aristocracy/nobles in the Mughal era for example. Look at how many were Marathi/Hindu/Muslims, or Hindi belt in the Mughal aristocracy, and compare that to Punjabi, especially Baloch numbers. They were being ruled over, no different to anyone else.

And the land of Pakistan were ruled over far, far longer than anyone else in the Subcontinent, especially if you're talking to an Indian from the Deccan or South.

Statements like these have been debunked over and over - first off, even the word 'Punjabi' was not used back then - people used their baradari or clan (for Muslims) and castes (for Hindus) as identities.

Also - the only times 'Indians civilizations' have ruled over large portions of Pakistan have been brief and insignificant - with only two being capable of doing so - that being Mauryan Empire and Maratha Confederacy. Dont let me remind you why Hindu Kush is named Hindu Kush.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

Statements like these have been debunked over and over - first off, even the word 'Punjabi' was not used back then - people used their baradari or clan (for Muslims) and castes (for Hindus) as identities.

Also - the only times 'Indians civilizations' have ruled over large portions of Pakistan have been brief and insignificant - with only two being capable of doing so - that being Mauryan Empire and Maratha Confederacy. Dont let me remind you why Hindu Kush is named Hindu Kush.

Same for Deccanis, people of Hindi belt, Turanis, Iranis, Afghans. All outnumbered Punjabis and Balochis for example in the nobility.

The ones who had a significant presence in the nobility were Iranis, Central Asians, Rajputs, and later even Deccanis.

So I dont get what's with people who are Baloch, Punjabi even talking about being rulers, or what not, especially when talking to Indians from the Deccan or deep South.

 

[American Pakistani]

Indian Occupied Kashmir need to be flushed out from 7 lakh indian occupper terrorists.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

Lmao, who are the rulers? There are records of aristocracy/nobles in the Mughal era for example. Look at how many were Marathi/Hindu/Muslims, or Hindi belt in the Mughal aristocracy, and compare that to Punjabi, especially Baloch numbers. They were being ruled over, no different to anyone else.

And the land of Pakistan was ruled over far, far longer than anyone else in the Subcontinent, especially if you're talking to an Indian from the Deccan or South.

To add, the people inhabiting regions of modern day Pakistan have been subjugated almost continuously for over 2400 years

Earliest records starting from 515 BC subjugation by Persian Achaemenid empire all the way till British Raj. The long list of conquerors in between includes Greeks, Huns, Sythicians, Afghans, Turks and even Mongols.

There is absolutely not a single instance of successful resistance against any of these conquerors.
Its a stark contrast to what Afghans despite being smaller than combined Pakistan, have been able to achieve.

Apparently the twist here is, it was victories of empires from modern day India against these invaders such as Prathihara against Arabs, Mauryans against Greeks, Guptas against Huns and Sythicains, Sikhs against Durranis allowed ancestors of current day Pakistanis had some relief.

In fact if wasn't for Sikh expulsion of Durrani influence from Punjab all the way till borders of modern day Afghanistan, modern nation of Pakistan would have existed as a province in Greater Afghanistan i.e with durrand line being radcliffe line.

So with such an embarrassing history and the only thing in common with some of the conquerors is a religious affiliation, a platform to leech upon the victories of these conquerors as their own has been exploited.

Another ironical and rather a hilarious part of leeching off on these Muslim conqueror achievements was, each succeeding Muslim empire exterminated the preceding one. So Pakistanis here are celebrating an individual as well as his murderer at the same time.

 

[nik141993]

This is painful idea of Jivey by the way.. which you look so proud of.... now STFU and stay on topic.
One rape every 20 minutes in india

@waz @Oscar @Icarus @WAJsal

 

[SQ8]

Mosques would need Pakistan to supply recordings in todays age of youtube and mp3.

Bravo Toilet news.

Where is the saner report from the Hindu?

 

[for truth]

To add, the people inhabiting regions of modern day Pakistan have been subjugated almost continuously for over 2400 years

Earliest records starting from 515 BC subjugation by Persian Achaemenid empire all the way till British Raj. The long list of conquerors in between includes Greeks, Huns, Sythicians, Afghans, Turks and even Mongols.

There is absolutely not a single instance of successful resistance against any of these conquerors.
Its a stark contrast to what Afghans despite being smaller than combined Pakistan, have been able to achieve.

Apparently the twist here is, it was victories of empires from modern day India against these invaders such as Prathihara against Arabs, Mauryans against Greeks, Guptas against Huns and Sythicains, Sikhs against Durranis allowed ancestors of current day Pakistanis had some relief.

In fact if wasn't for Sikh expulsion of Durrani influence from Punjab all the way till borders of modern day Afghanistan, modern nation of Pakistan would have existed as a province in Greater Afghanistan i.e with durrand line being radcliffe line.

So with such an embarrassing history and the only thing in common with some of the conquerors is a religious affiliation, a platform to leech upon the victories of these conquerors as their own has been exploited.

Another ironical and rather a hilarious part of leeching off on these Muslim conqueror achievements was, each succeeding Muslim empire exterminated the preceding one. So Pakistanis here are celebrating an individual as well as his murderer at the same time.

Some Afghan national once said it more beautifully, though I don't remember it in exact words, but here it goes...

"..........Pakistanis claim that they taught us(afghans) war fighting, when Pakistanis are yet to win a single war and afghans have not lost a single war."

Although, afghans I believe were conquered my mongols.

"Was"? Kashmir was never apart of India - they look different, they have different cultures, practices and beliefs - they are completely different.

yes, kashmiris are different. Just the same way a Bengali is different to manipuri, a tamil is different to Assamese, a bhopali is different to keralite, a karnatakan is different to Sikkimese....."they" look different, just like the same way everyone in India look different with different culture and beliefs.

"will"? History repeats it self - if a people are suppressed or does not support the current government - they will revolt; and no matter how many revolts or protests, they will eventually break away

the only thing about "history" is to "learn from history". Else, keep repeating the same buffoonery again and again which is being done from 1947.

 

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Same for Deccanis, people of Hindi belt, Turanis, Iranis, Afghans. All outnumbered Punjabis and Balochis for example in the nobility.

The ones who had a significant presence in the nobility were Iranis, Central Asians, Rajputs, and later even Deccanis.

So I dont get what's with people who are Baloch, Punjabi even talking about being rulers, or what not, especially when talking to Indians from the Deccan or deep South.

I'm saying this again - There was no word of 'Punjabi' - people used other Idendities, and there are currently around 50 million Punjabis with Pasthun descent, like Imran Khan. Your just proving to me - that Muslims outnumbered Hindus in nobility.

 

[Water Car Engineer]

I'm saying this again - There was no word of 'Punjabi' - people used other Idendities, and there are currently around 50 million Punjabis with Pasthun descent, like Imran Khan. Your just proving to me - that Muslims outnumbered Hindus in nobility.

Yes, no different to all the others mentioned in the list. Iranis, Turanis, etc. are large umbrella terms as well. It's just that the tribes, etc. from Punjab are just group as, "Indian Muslims".

Baloch, or the people in the region of Punjab did not make up a significant portion of the nobility. In the Mughal aristocracy, it's the Iranis, Turanis, Rajputs. Iranis due to cultural ties, Central Asians due to ancestral ties, and Rajputs due to marriage alliances.

Yes, Muslims will outnumber Hindus in nobility, that's going to be obvious due to them being an Islamic empire. What difference does it make if your ancestors were some farmers under some rulers in Delhi?