you are not getting the point here. I was explaining the indian point of view to talon because she was not getting what you and roy was talking about.
Secondly i cannot speak for others but i am not confuse about my identity. my position is very clear. My primary identity is Islam and then come my nationality. So if there will be a clash between Islam and nationality then i will chose Islam over nationality then does it mean i cannot claim to be Pakistani because i consider myself Muslim before Pakistani? If some Muslim rulers committed atrocities in past then let you make sure that God will judge them according to it because he is fair and just in his judgement unlike us who are bias and read history through the eyes of Hindu or Muslim
I never said that IVC and their ideologies or ways of life were Islamic but their ways of life were ialso different to Hinduism. There were no clash of IVC and islam because Islam did not even exist during IVC period. No islam. No hinduism. No India. No Pakistan. No Muhammad bin Qasim. No gauri. No mughul. So i dont understand when you say that against India mean against IVC so either i would have to pick Pakistan or india because according to you india mean ideology of IVC and Pakistan mean ideology of Islam. The problem of you guys is that you are not happy either way, If some pakistani will claim to be the inheritor of IVC you will tell them no they are muslim arab and cannot claim IVS because their ideologies is islamic or arabic. If some Pakistani claim that they were Muslims who rule India/Hindus then you will remind them that they are liar and their ancestors were Hindus. Dude you guys also need to make up mind.
I again ask this simple question . let say you are Hindu and your one son is Muslim( converted from Hinduism) and the other son is Hindu then can not they both claim to be your children? Or only the Hindu son will get share in your inheritance and Muslim son will not be your son any more because his Islamic ideology is different than your Hindu ideology. Similarly if a native Chinese person convert into Islam then according to your logic he cannot claim of Chinese civilisation because they were different. You apply same concept to Muslim countries like Iran, Egypt and KSA then they all had civilisation, ideologies and ways of life in past which were completely different to Islam then according to your logic they should also have no claim over past history because their past practices contradict with their present beliefs.
Third IVS is not something we should fight over because its something gone long time ago and has been wipe out completely and worse we had no clue about their ways of life. If you guys feel happy to claim the exclusive ownership of IVS and believe that Pakistani people pop up on this land in 1947 then i personally have no problem with it because it don't change anything for me or you so i personally disown the claim of IVC if it make you happy