Did Ancient Pakistanis Defeated The Mighty Alexander The Great.,

[r3alist]

So turns out that Dravidians are actually the descendants of the IVC, and you guys are the people who came riding on camels from Saudi Arabia (Arbaic descent remember ? )

and the whole world is proto hindu according to you, right from iran to japan you see proto hinduism everywhere, delusion is for free so eat your heart out

 

[PakiiZeeshan]

LoL /Now you are just being silly, what we are trying to tell you, is our pre-Islamic Civilization was mainly independent of the Ganges River Civilization which the the modern state of india is based upon.

Yes our country is a mix there are people who claim Arab, Persian, Afghan, Turkish origin, and there are just as many who claim Jatt, Gujjar, Rajput, Kashmiri origin.

The people who claim Turkish, Arab and Persian origin are brainwashed and have some sort of complex issues...but thankfully most of those people can only be found on the internet and not in reality.
Most Pakistanis are native to modern day Pakistan, and we are proud of it

 

[Rafi]

and the whole world is proto hindu according to you, right from iran to japan you see proto hinduism everywhere, delusion is for free so eat your heart out

Nice one bro, that is a beautiful shot to their solar plexus.

 

[StingRoy]

how can pakistan be a part of india if it never existed according to you?
how can india be a part of a country that was given its name and power by the mughals then british?
we are not letting tamils, dravidans and such ilk as somehow being the descendants of the IVC, its plain common sense

Read the whole thread to get answers to your first 2 questions.
On the third question... Thats where you are missing the identity of India... It is a multi cultural region and IVC was similarly a part of the south asian civilization which we term as India.... as are the Dravidians, Tamils, Marathas, Rajputs, Odras and Bengalis.

 

[justanobserver]

what a joke, show me a non hinduvata source for this

Enjoy reading 'your' history Indus writing: Sanskrit or Dravidian?

d the whole world is proto hindu according to

proto-Dravid, I was talking linguistically about the Indus Valley Civilization (Hindu is not a linguistic group )

 

[gubbi]

Because the creature lived millions of years ago, but because it belonged to the geo-graphic are of Pakistan, it has been given that name, by science - that is millions of years before human beings. And what we and my brothers and sisters have been arguing about.....

It was found in 1983. Read the report again. In 1983, in present day Pakistan. So it was quite obvious that the creature would carry Pakistan's name as is the wont of many archeologists in naming fossils according to the places where they are found.

Again, I repeat. There is no such thing as "Ancient Pakistani". Period.

 

[Rafi]

Read the whole thread to get answers to your first 2 questions.
On the third question... Thats where you are missing the identity of India... It is a multi cultural region and IVC was similarly a part of the south asian civilization which we term as India.... as are the Dravidians, Tamils, Marathas, Rajputs, Odras and Bengalis.

No the IVC is a distinct and separate civilisation to the ganges based civilisation of bharat, india has no claim on IVC

 

[StingRoy]

Because the creature lived millions of years ago, but because it belonged to the geo-graphic are of Pakistan, it has been given that name, by science - that is millions of years before human beings. And what we and my brothers and sisters have been arguing about.....

This argument is almost a laughable metaphor if you are trying to establish your regional identity in the region.

 

[gubbi]

This is going to be an Epic thread. Having lost all its seriousness due to some thickskulled individuals, its now officially time to let hair down and enjoy!

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

What the Heck.Indus didn't Flow in India.

Kashmir is occupied by India not Part of India.

Thats your notion,but the point it is a part of India as of now.

The significance of INDIA is that this name was originated from word INDUS.

Isn't that what i said,The Indus river was used to

India never exists at that time.

Yes we did,both as a state and nation.

How the word Indus can be named after India when the word INDUS born first and the word INDIA Born and originated from INDUS after a long long time??

You seem to have misinterpreted my post

I don't recall mentioning/hinting Indus was derived from India.

No one knows the origins of the name Indus,but we do know India was derived from Indus.

The ganges civilization(Original civilization of modern day india)
Was the extension of Indus civilization.

I prefer not to discriminate between the two.

The word is YINDU not India.

YINDU is derived from the Sanskrit name for Indus ,Sindhu

The original name was Shendu ,i guess over time it got pronounced as Yindu.

This is according to Zhang Qian an imperial envoy to the world outside of China in the 2nd century BC, during the time of the Han Dynasty.

"Southeast of Daxia is the kingdom of Shendu (India)... Shendu, they told me, lies several thousand li southeast of Daxia (Bactria). The people cultivate the land and live much like the people of Daxia. The region is said to be hot and damp. The inhabitants ride elephants when they go in battle. The kingdom is situated on a great river (Indus)" (Shiji, 123, Zhang Qian quote, trans. Burton Watson).

The word India didn't even existed at those times.

The word India is never used in any ancient History.

The term India The English term one is from Greek Ἰνδία (Indía), via Latin India. Iindía in Byzantine (Koine Greek) ethnography denotes the region beyond the Indus (Ἰνδό&#962 river, since Herodotus (5th century BC) ἡ Ἰνδική χώρη, hē Indikē chōrē; "Indian land", Ἰνδός, Indos, "an Indian", from Avestan Hinduš (referring to Sindh, and listed as a conquered territory by Darius I in the Persepolis terrace inscription). The name is derived ultimately from Sindhu, the Sanskrit name of the river, but also meaning "river" generically. Latin

Even if we claim it on river flow base then still it is ours Because the Indus's flow is all along Pakistan.

No nation has authority over an entire course of river.

Just like Pakistan has no authority over part of Indus river flowing in China or India.

Similarly neither India nor China have any authority over part of the river flowing inside Pakistani territory.

Looks like it has already hurted you badly.. isn't it??

Thanks for your concern,but patience and persistence are my strong points

I said that the history Of SIKH INVASION IN INDOPAK parts is mutually shared by both countries because it is present in both countries.

Sikhs merely engaged the Durrani and Mughal empire ,and they gained lands.

Please leave this mentality that whole south asia is yours.

Did any of post mention India claiming SA?

Hinduism is not a culture.

Being born a Hindu i know what i am talking about.

 

[justanobserver]

This is going to be an Epic thread. Having lost all its seriousness due to some thickskulled individuals, its now officially time to let hair down and enjoy!

Best time I've had on PDF so far, epic thread
.

Some people seem to stuck on a 'mantra' however. Well here's my mantra

Moral of the story:

There exist two kinds of Pakistanis

1.Who believe Pakistan was born when Mohhamed Bin Qasim (from Arabia) invaded and civilized the barbaric masses

2.Who claim that ancient India was actually Pakistan, and hence all Indian heritage is Pakistani

There is however a third confused type (this state of mind is temporary) which tries to claim both 1 and 2, but fails utterly in the process (and mentally reverts back to either 1 or 2).

 

[UnitedPak]

Moral of the story:

There exist two kinds of Pakistanis

1.Who believe Pakistan was born when Mohhamed Bin Qasim (from Arabia) invaded and civilized the barbaric masses

2.Who claim that ancient India was actually Pakistan, and hence all Indian heritage is Pakistani

There is however a third confused type (this state of mind is temporary) which tries to claim both 1 and 2, but fails utterly in the process (and mentally reverts back to either 1 or 2).

You clearly misunderstood.

Bin Qasim origin refers to the birth of our Islamic identity/nation. Our history of living in the Indus Valley goes back to the birth of IVC.

We claim the pre Islamic identity on the basis that it belongs to our ancestors and therefore is part of our identity. We can claim both because both belong to us. Nobody is claiming Indian heritage. Name one person who argues that the Muslim empires of South India belong to Pakistanis.

I dont see how we are being "selective" as we embrace all of our history regardless of religion. Only Indian members are upset about this.

 

[Rafi]

It was found in 1983. Read the report again. In 1983, in present day Pakistan. So it was quite obvious that the creature would carry Pakistan's name as is the wont of many archeologists in naming fossils according to the places where they are found.

Again, I repeat. There is no such thing as "Ancient Pakistani". Period.

If there was no ancient Pakistan why is an animal that lived millions of years before human beings, and also coincidently the ancestor of all living whales and dolphins, named after Pakistan. It does not matter if it was found in 1983, it as the IVC was found in Geographic Pakistan, that is why it was named after our glorious motherland,,,,,,,,

Check and mate

 

[justanobserver]

Nobody is claiming Indian heritage.

You did

When you claimed that "Indika" referred to present day Pakistan, when in actuality it described the Mauryan Empire

Alexander only came into contact with the Indus valley, which he referred to as Indika.

Wrong

 

[Rafi]

Pakistani's believe their Geographic territory was separate and distinct from india, you will never convince us other wise, and claiming people are "thick skulled" is just a sign of a lost argument.

I'm sure there are plenty of things in the Ganges planes that are exclusively "bharati" that indians can be proud of. Sing their praises as those are your ancestors and leave our ancestors to us.