History of Pakistan from 3000 BC to the present

[OrionHunter]

Pakistan was never a part of india, i don't know where these indians get this hilarious claim from.

Thank you for your very detailed and cogent analysis!

It was a pleasure to read through your thesis! It took me a good part of the day to wade through your detailed exposition and elucidation on why Pakistan was never part of India.

Keep up the good work!

Cheers!

 

[solidstate]

Moreover,

Technically speaking, present India's claim on Indus civilization is as good as Pakistan's claim on Taj Mahal or India Gate. Since all these structures were built when both Pakistan and India were part of the same nation

So le de ke baat khatum karte hain ke jo hamare paas hai woh hamara, jo aap ke paas hai woh aapka

taj mahal is equally as heritage of arabs as it is indian. we respect it. btw no matter which website or book u read it will always say that ivc was an indian civilisation which was located in todays pakistan.

Pakistan was never a part of india, i don't know where these indians get this hilarious claim from.

from here

PAKISTANIS ARE INDIANS, NOT ARABS - YouTube

 

[Ammyy]

taj mahal is equally as heritage of arabs as it is indian. we respect it. btw no matter which website or book u read it will always say that ivc was an indian civilisation which was located in todays pakistan.

Because logically only this is correct ....

 

[solidstate]

Because logically only this is correct ....

yes thats what i am saying for the last 2 hrs, that remains of the ivc is pakistans property but the heritage is 100% indian or hindustani. similarly the taj mahal is the property of india but we can never deny that the heritage is shared with the ppl who built the beauty.

 

[Developereo]

What our Indian friends are saying is that they are proud to be converts to a belief system that started in the IVC. The fact that the IVC region may have been briefly part of wider regional empires is secondary. The political conquests may have gone either way, but the cultural conquest was predominantly (strictly?) one way.

So, welcome, converts!

 

[solidstate]

What our Indian friends are saying is that they are proud to be converts to a belief system that started in the IVC. The fact that the IVC region may have been briefly part of wider regional empires is secondary. The political conquests may have gone either way, but the cultural conquest was predominantly (strictly?) one way.

So, welcome, converts!

hinduism started much before ivc.

 

[yyetttt]

@solidstate

Retarded.

1300 BC was when IVC started.
3000 BC was when Hinduism at it's early stage started.

 

[Hulk]

idiot hinduism started much before ivc.

You can say your point without using the word idiot.

 

[Developereo]

idiot hinduism started much before ivc.

But you guys are loudly proclaiming that your current culture "inherits" from IVC, which means you converted to accept various parts of IVC.

So, which one is it? Is your culture completely indigenous, or did it accept outside influences from the IVC?

Or, if you are going to claim that IVC was indigenous, then how do you make that claim? The IVC was not conquered by anyone else during their heydey -- they were a distinct civilization and political entity. In later years, the region was conquered by various invaders (some from north/central India) but, as we noted, the conquest was only political. The cultural influence was strictly in reverse -- from IVC to central India.

So, everyone other than NW Indians are converts to a foreign belief system.

 

[solidstate]

@solidstate

Retarded.

1300 BC was when IVC started.
3000 BC was when Hinduism at it's early stage started.

3000 comes before 1300 bc so hinduism started earlier

But you guys are loudly proclaiming that your current culture "inherits" from IVC, which means you converted to accept various parts of IVC.

So, which one is it? Is your culture completely indigenous, or did it accept outside influences from the IVC?

Or, if you are going to claim that IVC was indigenous, then how do you make that claim? The IVC was not conquered by anyone else during their heydey -- they were a distinct civilization and political entity. In later years, the region was conquered by various invaders (some from north/central India) but, as we noted, the conquest was only political. The cultural influence was strictly in reverse -- from IVC to central India.

So, everyone other than NW Indians are converts to a foreign belief system.

ivc is not a culture its a civilisation. now i am not a historian use google bering digging ur brain for delusions.

 

[yyetttt]

^^^

IVC at it's earliest stages started at 3300 BC.
Hinduism at it's earliest stages started at 3250 BC.

Hahahahaha..

 

[Hulk]

3000 comes before 1300 bc so hinduism started earlier



ivc is not a culture its a civilisation. now i am not a historian use google bering digging ur brain for delusions.

1700 years before to be precise.

 

[yyetttt]

Solidstate you really need a brain check.. IVC was where Hinduism started dearie

 

[solidstate]

^^^

IVC at it's earliest stages started at 3300 BC.
Hinduism at it's earliest stages started at 3250 BC.

Hahahahaha..

lets for a sec agree to what u said.
so what does it even prove thats giving u so much happiness?

 

[SamantK]

Moreover,

Technically speaking, present India's claim on Indus civilization is as good as Pakistan's claim on Taj Mahal or India Gate. Since all these structures were built when both Pakistan and India were part of the same nation

So le de ke baat khatum karte hain ke jo hamare paas hai woh hamara, jo aap ke paas hai woh aapka

You are wrong even technically, India and Pakistan both have natural claims to what is on both the sides. However I have seen only some Pakistanis claiming exclusive rights.