India gets short end in NATO bargain

[Gandhi G in da house]

Nothing at all.

However, if aunty had balls she would have been an uncle.

What is your obsession with Aunties and their hypothetical balls ?

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

Nothing at all.

However, if aunty had balls she would have been an uncle.

What is your obsession with Aunties and their hypothetical balls ?

 

[ajtr]

You claim to talk history yet you seem unable to figure out whether you are talking about the Bijapur sultanate or "dilli". You create a fantastic story of how taxes were not paid yet that is undermined by your own source. Ha ha yourself. Gibberish still stands.

Dynamics matters..one is fight with in the family other fight between the neighbours.

 

[Ticker]

Two top trolls,
On the roll.

What do you mean by this tin horn.

You are the biggest troll yourself, this side of Suez Canal.

 

[bee3690]

indians first need to learn to wipe themselves before they go around making tall claims

Go wipe ur sorry taliban's @$$ ..... Oh?!! Wait ....u cant
Because ur too busy cleaning the @$$ of usa ....lol

 

[Bang Galore]

Why you grinning. Do you know the correct history.

No but he knows the correct bigotry. His argument is trained towards this end. This was his post.

Vijyanagar was a state Indians talk about with pride. It was a rich state and had defied the Dilli Sarkar for years by refusing to pay the yearly taxes. When the forces of Dilli Sarkar reached the gates of his capital, the economically strong raja could not fight the might and paid lot more than what he owed, including his own daughter as alms to the King in Dilli.

The money does matter, but at the end of the day, it is not the money alone which saves your honour and dignity - it is an all inclusive and all encompassing strength which protects you.

He therefore concocts his own history about the Vijaynagar king owing taxes to "dilli" whereas anyone with the slightest knowledge of the Vijaynagar empire would have known that their main rivals were the Bahmani sultanate not "dilli". His purpose of concocting this history ( he obviously connects only to a dilli Muslim not a deccan muslim) was to make the point of how a Hindu king was forced to give his daughter to an enemy. History not being his strong point (or only selective history being his forte), he seems to think this is somehow unique. Guess he never read about Seleucus Nicator and Chandra Gupta Maurya way back in BCE. His main point is somehow proving the superiority of a "Muslim" ruler who did such an act while conveniently forgetting (or not bothering with) an opposite story in similar circumstances involving a Muslim woman of the very same Bijapur

During the raid on Kalyan (October 1667), the Bijapuri Governor Mulla Ahmed's young daughter-in-law, who was extremely beautiful, fell in the hands of a Maratha officer Abaji Sondev. Abaji sent the lady with a suitable escort to Poona thinking that she would be an acceptable present for his young master, but Shivaji, on her arrival exclaimed, "Oh, how nice would it have been if my mother were as fair as you are", implying that in that case, he too would have been equally fair, and at once sent her to her home with apologies for her capture. He also issued a stern warning that in future, during raids and war with the enemy, women on no account should be made to suffer or treated as booty.

Notice the difference. While most of us regard this behavior as being morally right, he prefers the former example. Bigotry comes easy to those so inclined.

 

[KRAIT]

^ Yaar leave it. Its about NATO and India. These few posters have unique ability to derail every thread. Come back to actual matter of discussion.

I am still wondering how can so many threads be derailed by one single posters over and over again without any action against him.

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

No but he knows the correct bigotry. His argument is trained towards this end. This was his post.




He therefore concocts his own history about the Vijaynagar king owing taxes to "dilli" whereas anyone with the slightest knowledge of the Vijaynagar empire would have known that their main rivals were the Bahmani sultanate not "dilli". His purpose of concocting this history ( he obviously connects only to a dilli Muslim not a deccan muslim) was to make the point of how a Hindu king was forced to give his daughter to an enemy. History not being his strong point (or only selective history being his forte), he seems to think this is somehow unique. Guess he never read about Seleucus Nicator and Chandra Gupta Maurya way back in BCE. His main point is somehow proving the superiority of a "Muslim" ruler who did such an act while conveniently forgetting (or not bothering with) an opposite story in similar circumstances involving a Muslim woman of the very same Bijapur



Notice the difference. While most of us regard this behavior as being morally right, he prefers the former example. Bigotry comes easy to those so inclined.

Did you really expect anything better ? I didn't

 

[INDIC]

No but he knows the correct bigotry. His argument is trained towards this end. This was his post.
He therefore concocts his own history about the Vijaynagar king owing taxes to "dilli" whereas anyone with the slightest knowledge of the Vijaynagar empire would have known that their main rivals were the Bahmani sultanate not "dilli". His purpose of concocting this history ( he obviously connects only to a dilli Muslim not a deccan muslim) was to make the point of how a Hindu king was forced to give his daughter to an enemy. History not being his strong point (or only selective history being his forte), he seems to think this is somehow unique. Guess he never read about Seleucus Nicator and Chandra Gupta Maurya way back in BCE. His main point is somehow proving the superiority of a "Muslim" ruler who did such an act while conveniently forgetting (or not bothering with) an opposite story in similar circumstances involving a Muslim woman of the very same Bijapur

Notice the difference. While most of us regard this behavior as being morally right, he prefers the former example. Bigotry comes easy to those so inclined.

But he skipped to explain how subsequent rulers in Dilli treated his fellow Pashtun people.

 

[Ticker]

^ Yaar leave it. Its about NATO and India. These few posters have unique ability to derail every thread. Come back to actual matter of discussion.

I am still wondering how can so many threads be derailed by one single posters over and over again without any action against him.

Funny man, I don't derail threads.

It is you who conduct stealth trolling and derail anything that goes against Indian thinking.

It is you who incite Indian posters here.

And then conveniently vanish.

 

[Ticker]

No but he knows the correct bigotry. His argument is trained towards this end. This was his post.




He therefore concocts his own history about the Vijaynagar king owing taxes to "dilli" whereas anyone with the slightest knowledge of the Vijaynagar empire would have known that their main rivals were the Bahmani sultanate not "dilli". His purpose of concocting this history ( he obviously connects only to a dilli Muslim not a deccan muslim) was to make the point of how a Hindu king was forced to give his daughter to an enemy. History not being his strong point (or only selective history being his forte), he seems to think this is somehow unique. Guess he never read about Seleucus Nicator and Chandra Gupta Maurya way back in BCE. His main point is somehow proving the superiority of a "Muslim" ruler who did such an act while conveniently forgetting (or not bothering with) an opposite story in similar circumstances involving a Muslim woman of the very same Bijapur



Notice the difference. While most of us regard this behavior as being morally right, he prefers the former example. Bigotry comes easy to those so inclined.

I narrated an event. One of the Indian posters wanted me to paste the link. I did that.

And he didn't ask me to present link to dilli ki sarkar - he asked me to quote from where I got the event from, where I said that a raja offered his daughter.

You started another troll - that it was not dilli ki sarkar.

You see, we don't perceive Old India's history as you do.

Why, because we belong to a different country and this country is called Pakistan. You can have your own perceptions and laugh about it, for all I care.

 

[SinoChallenger]

And then conquered by Japan in less than 2 years The Japanese did not see any 'Sino Challenge' when they trooped in! You got LIBERATED by the Americans and british INDIAN army That would hurt real bad

Actually it was indians who were liberated by the British Empire from Central Asian rulers who "bred" indians only for the purpose of building monuments in the Middle East for 800 years!

Japan was beaten by China so badly we occupy their former territories like Manchukuo and Taiwan

Right after we grabbed massive territories, we turned around and spanked you in 1962. And that's why you feel so inferior

 

[surya kiran]

Actually it was indians who were liberated by the British Empire from Central Asian rulers who "bred" indians only for the purpose of building monuments in the Middle East for 800 years!

Japan was beaten by China so badly we occupy their former territories like Manchukuo and Taiwan

Right after we grabbed massive territories, we turned around and spanked you in 1962. And that's why you feel so inferior

Ok Krait my last reply to the troll please!

Japan was defeated by China in WW II hahahahahahaa Man you got it from Japan and how. Communist Party History sucks! My last reply to you. You got so beaten so beaten so beaten you had to be again I say LIBERATED by the British INDIAN army and US army. that must really hurt. And it shows in your posts! Enjoy your existence saved by the above 2 armies

There Krait! I am out discussing with the troll

 

[surya kiran]

Yaar India foreign policy will not be part of any NATO or SEATO or Asian NATO. Its stated policy. Our forces will be part of only UN mandated missions. Only exceptions are Maldives and Qatar, where India will retaliate with military forces if these 2 are under attack.

 

[Rig Vedic]

If you are talking about BJP and the ilk, they were much more pro-America. Vajpayee wrote a letter to the world leaders after the 1998 nuclear tests and openly blamed China as the main reason for conducting tests and crossing the rubicon. Indian defence ministers have time and again made public statements that China is their number one enemy.

Modi would be balanced, he is somewhat annoyed with the west for their sanctimonious preaching, whereas he has been received cordially by the Chinese.