Betrayed, Arabized

[Kinetic]

You need foreigners to give you an identity and a name for your land? Where do you live in India? Do you see the Indus River anywhere around you? You have the Ganges River all around you so if you want a river to determine your identity or your home country, use the Ganges.

Foreigners did not give it from their mind, like some people goes to a meeting and decide to make a new country. Yes Indus river flows through India's north most region. And the name like the country itself is thousands of years old and cannot be changed if some people decides.

What its too polluted, well so is your country.

No river is without pollution. See the Indus, it is also polluted but we did not let your mind to be polluted like you.

As for thousands of years nonsense. What is today known as "india" was not even one entity a thousand years ago, just forget about the Indus Valley.

Everything credible is equal to nonsense for you and nonsense equal to credible. And hatred disease is the reason behind that.

Today's India is just 64 years old. The history of our Pak Sarzameen doesn't belong to you and never will. The history surrounding ganges where your family come from is all yours.

Today's India is as old as civilization goes back. India was there, it is not some people's creation. I have no interest in the history of Pakistan after partition but before that I do. My family does not come from the sides of Ganges but from Peshawar, India. They left after partition.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/genera...2-pictures-cities-peshawar-10.html#post768497

 

[Sinnerman108]

okay,there are many hindus/sikhs who left pakistan and came to india.what about them?

I personally know many people including my girlfriend's family who were from lyallpur.They are not from there?

There are more Muslims who migrated from the rest from Hindu-stan to Pakistan than the other way around ...
do you really want to carry on with this line of debate ?

 

[yusufzoi]

No,i dont think Jinnah is all that.I think Jinnah did it for his ego,just to get some kicks out of doing something big.I dont think he had the complete knowledge and understanding of a lot of muslims.

I feel the british had to divide the subcontinent,else the new country would be too big a power to handle and this country had intellectual wealth also,so they just got these guys Jinnah and the great poet and stoner Allama Iqbal to come up with a strategy to push for a muslim motherland.

The reality is partition did a lot of good for the hindus more than muslims as it finally united them.Otherwise if together the muslims would be much higher in number and add the apologist secular self loathing congressmen,hinduism would have been wiped out.This way,it suits us better.

British were responsible for the division as they felt the new country would be too big and powerful , never heard so much rubbish.

Before the british and partition you were one country pakistan and india, before the rule of called barbarians.

You were big wealthy and a super power and one big country, so why did you guys lose to ghaznavi, ghurids, lodhis, baburids, timurids?

Please explain why?

Being one big country and united didn't save you then, so its just a poor excuse to blame it on the british.

Facts is you are destined to be conquered and ruled as history shows wether united or not.

 

[Omar1984]

Foreigners did not give it from their mind, like some people goes to a meeting and decide to make a new country. Yes Indus river flows through India's north most region. And the name like the country itself is thousands of years old and cannot be changed if some people decides.

The only places where Indus River flows through is Tibet, Occupied Kashmir, Azad Kashmir, and Pakistan. and Occupied Kashmir is not India, it is an internationally recognized disputed territory, recognized by the UN as a disputed territory. Your country's name "india" was created by Europeans. My country's name, PAKISTAN, was created by a Muslim Punjabi son of our soil, Chaudhry Rahmat Ali.

Today's India is as old as civilization goes back. India was there, it is not some people's creation. I have no interest in the history of Pakistan after partition but before that I do. My family does not come from the sides of Ganges but from Peshawar, India. They left after partition.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/genera...2-pictures-cities-peshawar-10.html#post768497

Today's India was a part of "British India Empire" before 1947 and before that india didn't exist. South Asia were just smaller independent countries that the British combined to make their empire. Peshawar itself was part of many empires, most being very distinct from the land of today's india's history.

The point is, the white man saw the river flowing through present day Pakistan, made up a new word derived from that river...the white man ruled over your land an my land gave that name to us and our land...you people kept that word, we came up with our own word for our country and people...and since you people kept those foreign created words you think you have the right to all of SOuth Asia's history.

India's history started in AUgust 15,1947 a day after Pakistan's.

 

[Kinetic]

The only places where Indus River flows through is Tibet, Occupied Kashmir, Azad Kashmir, and Pakistan. and Occupied Kashmir is not India, it is an internationally recognized disputed territory, recognized by the UN as a disputed territory. Your country's name "india" was created by Europeans. My country's name, PAKISTAN, was created by a Muslim Punjabi son of our soil, Chaudhry Rahmat Ali.

When the name of India came, Indus was fully under India. Thats is why we have the word 'Sindhu' in our national anthem. About naming by Europeans, Egypt also named by foreigners. But like India that also have a reason behind it. The land of Indus is India. Thats why I said my country's name is not came someone's name and given, it has long history. We all know what happened to Chaudhry Rahmat Ali and how he was treated.

Today's India was a part of "British India Empire" before 1947 and before that india didn't exist. South Asia were just smaller independent countries that the British combined to make their empire. Peshawar itself was part of many empires, most being very distinct from the land of today's india's history.

The point is, the white man saw the river flowing through present day Pakistan, made up a new word derived from that river...the white man ruled over your land an my land gave that name to us and our land...you people kept that word, we came up with our own word for our country and people...and since you people kept those foreign created words you think you have the right to all of SOuth Asia's history.

India's history started in AUgust 15,1947 a day after Pakistan's.

Not just British India but pre British India was named as India as well. India/Bharat was there from historic times.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Really? What very large period?

Sikh period

Maratha period

Mughal period

Delhi Sultanates

Pala period

Gupta period

I went back 1600 years but every Indian empire had Indus valley in it.

But the 'Indus Valley' regions were also part of other empires:

Persian Empire:

Greek Empire:

Mongol Empire:

Arab Empire:

Durrani Empire

Ghaznavi Empire:

So why would the Indus Valley civilization (and the lands of Pakistan) belong more to the invaders and Empires that arose out of the East, rather than the West/South West?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And most of history of South Asia, the Indus Valley has always been distinct and separate from what is "india" today. The only time we were one is when the British and Muslims wanted to rule over all of South Asia. The Sikh empire didnt even last 50 years by the way and didnt even touch most of what is today called "India".

Indus Valley Civilization

Ghaznavid Empire

Durrani Empire

Alexander the Great's Empire

Achaeminid Persian Empire

The Persian Sassanid Empire

Ummayad Caliphate

Extent and expansion of Umayyad rule under Muhammad bin Qasim

Ahh, you beat me to it already ....

 

[Kinetic]

But the 'Indus Valley' regions were also part of other empires:


So why would the Indus Valley civilization (and the lands of Pakistan) belong more to the invaders and Empires that arose out of the East, rather than the West/South West?

None of them were Indian empires all of them are foreigners invading India and took over part of it. The western part o India was always prone to foreign attacks but almost all of them were controlled from outside India. They called it invasion of India. They considered it as foreign land.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Not most of but all of the history it was India. None of them are Indian empires and are under foreign invasions whom took over part of India. All of them written in history as invasion of India by Greeks, Huns, Arabs, Afghans. All of them those conquered any eastern side of Hindukush mountain is considered as India.

The reference to India historically in that context is as a 'region', not a nation.

Had India splintered into more nations post her creation in 1947, the context in which it is used currently would not apply - this is more of a retroactive reference that is erroneously conflated with the modern concept of the 'Indian nation' (which only started existing post 1947).

 

[Subramanian]

There are more Muslims who migrated from the rest from Hindu-stan to Pakistan than the other way around ...
do you really want to carry on with this line of debate ?

yeah 5 million and 7 million and u r playing which number is greater number games with such big numbers.Cant u think practically man?

There were so many people who moved from UP and Rajasthan also but nobody came from the further west inside.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

None of them are Indian empires all of them are foreigners invading India and took over part of it. The western part o India was always prone to foreign attacks but almost all of them were controlled from outside India.

Invading 'India' as a region, not a 'nation'.

Technically, for the peoples and Kingdoms conquered by the 'Indian' empires you mentioned, these 'empires' were also 'invaders'.

It isn't like the peoples of the lands currently comprising Pakistan 'voted democratically to join the 'Maratha, Pala, Mughal and Gupta empires' ...... they were all conquered by Autocrats and Dictators looking to expand their territory, power, influence and riches.

Why distinguish between 'Invaders' from the West vs 'Invaders' from the East, at least as far as Pakistanis are concerned?

 

[Kinetic]

The reference to India historically in that context is as a 'region', not a nation.

Had India splintered into more nations post her creation in 1947, the context in which it is used currently would not apply - this is more of a retroactive reference that is erroneously conflated with the modern concept of the 'Indian nation' (which only started existing post 1947).

The concept of 'Indian nation' was there just like the concept of other big countries with different provinces like China, Greece etc. The land from Hindukush to Burma, Himalaya to Indian ocean as a country was always there. Emperors tried to win Hindustan/Bharat/India when they go western side of Hindukush, they considered it as outside Hindustan/India/Bharat.

 

[Tshering22]

Invading 'India' as a region, not a 'nation'.

Technically, for the peoples and Kingdoms conquered by the 'Indian' empires you mentioned, these 'empires' were also 'invaders'.

It isn't like the peoples of the lands currently comprising Pakistan 'voted democratically to join the 'Maratha, Pala, Mughal and Gupta empires' ...... they were all conquered by Autocrats and Dictators looking to expand their territory, power, influence and riches.

Why distinguish between 'Invaders' from the West vs 'Invaders' from the East, at least as far as Pakistanis are concerned?

Because these "invaders" were our own people having the same culture, faith and language (Sanskrit) or derivative state languages as most other people. BTW to the person who brought a flurry of maps, he forgot Mauryan Empire that stretched much beyond Indus and Afghanistan itself.

The invaders of the west were nothing but barbaric tribes with an alien culture and an organized religion that is not a part of this land. Simple as that.

 

[fd24]

The concept of 'Indian nation' was there just like the concept of other big countries with different provinces like China, Greece etc. The land from Hindukush to Burma, Himalaya to Indian ocean as a country was always there. Emperors tried to win Hindustan/Bharat/India when they go western side of Hindukush, they considered it as outside Hindustan/India/Bharat.

Kinetic can you please stick to the thread. I can see you are in love with your "periods" and the indian nation but this isnt what this thread is about. Either start your own thread to satify your kinetic theory or be on topic.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Agnostic,

Tell me if you believe the prophet's life was true and complete personification of Islam ?
Did the prophet ever carried out this act of going to the graves ?

I can tell you now, that Islam is VERY VERY strict on the concept of Tauheed and Shirk, and Islam does not allow any thing
which even potentially can equal the role of deity.

Isn't this enough of a deterrent ?

Did the Prophet (PBUH) drive cars, use explosives, build with concrete and steel, smoke tobacco, read and write non-Arabic literature, wear synthetic clothing, play cricket, travel into space, practice Chemistry ....

Where do you want to take this flawed line of thinking? It is merely an excuse invented by those who are intolerant of a difference of opinion and difference of belief to vilify and denigrate those who act in a manner that is different from their own.