India has NEVER been a unified entity.

[ares]

The difference is that China as a nation has existed for thousands of years. The borders have not always been the same of course, but the nation existed.

Whereas the concept of India is a relatively new one, named after the Indus River which existed in British India, not in modern India. Today, the Indus River flows almost entirely through Pakistan.

Yet the British Empire named many different people across the planet with the name Indus, not only Indians, but Red Indians, West Indians etc. that also existed within the British Empire.

Is it??!!....your knowledge or rather lack of it should not change the history... the name India come from not from British but rather Greek..first known mention of 'India'(land beyond Indus) comes from Greek Historian Heorodotus(in book of Heorodotus) who lived in 500 BC.

Alexander, who conquered the present day Pakistani lands in 327 BC, actually came looking for land called Ἰνδία (India in ancient greek),

But then again its is the same story, empires changed, maps changed, but this entire subcontinent was called India to an outsider.

 

[manojb]

Another troll thread by mod!!! 

Troll thread.

You give mod a bad name.

You spoke my mind!

Last week he started a poll for bangladesh and india.. dont know how this guy became mod. @WebMaster ???

Edit: went through the posts, many believe Mod is trolling..
@toipc

Whats the point?

+1

it doesnt matter .. dont know what folklore OP wants to keep it rest. and dont know why chinese dancing either!! guess everyone is in trolling mood. All good!

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

LOL you once claimed that Punjabis are identical to Pashtuns and other central Asians Do you want me to tell me the words Afghans use for Pakistanis.

lol

You are liar as expected, i never said that once. lol There are a lot of differences between punjabis themselves let alone other groups. Do you think jatt and chamars are same genetically?  

@INDIC @shan

Bruhai people origins:

The ethnonym "Brahui" is a very old term and a purely Dravidian one. The fact that other Dravidian languages only exist further south in India has led to several speculations about the origins of the Brahui. There are three hypotheses regarding the Brahui that have been proposed by academics.
1) One theory is that the Brahui are a relic population of Dravidians, surrounded by speakers of Indo-Iranian languages, remaining from a time when Dravidian was more widespread.
2) Another theory is that they migrated to Baluchistan from inner India during the early Muslim period of the 13th or 14th centuries.
3) A third theory says the Brahui migrated to Balochistan from Central Indiaafter 1000 AD. The absence of any older Iranian (Avestan) influence in Brahui supports this last hypothesis. The main Iranian contributor to Brahui vocabulary is a northwesternIranian language, Baluchi, Sindhi and southeastern Iranian language, Pashto.

Sorry but migrating from inner India theory is proved wrong by genetic tests. Brahui have lowest amount of 12% ASI genes out of any South Asian ethnic group, apart from Indian punjabis rest of Indians have 55-80% of ASI genes in them.

 

[pk_baloch]

Do you want me to tell me the words Afghans use for Pakistanis.

why do u make fights among the pakistanis ...i saw u another thread that u were saying some thing about punjabis to muhajirs and to afghanis ,u were saying about pakistanis .....why do u create flame ?what is problem with u ...why so much insecurity?? and complexes ???

wht do u show to others ?

 

[INDIC]

lol

You are liar as expected, i never said that once. lol There are a lot of differences between punjabis themselves let alone other groups. Do you think jatt and chamars are same genetically?

Hey wannabe snowwhite, are all Punjabis Jatts, do you want me to post pictures of your snowwhite nation

Do you know Jaat live as far as central UP and Madhya Pradesh.

 

[Srinivas]

lol

You are liar as expected, i never said that once. lol There are a lot of differences between punjabis themselves let alone other groups. Do you think jatt and chamars are same genetically?  


Sorry but migrating from inner India theory is proved wrong by genetic tests. Brahui have lowest amount of 12% ASI genes out of any South Asian ethnic group, apart from Indian punjabis rest of Indians have 55-80% of ASI genes in them.

Most of the people in South Asia is a mixture of multi ethnic groups , regarding your signature you have little understanding of race in S.Asia particularly in India.

Andamanese are mainly aborigines are also a part of India, But most of the south Indians and people in North India resemble North east Africans, Wheatish and some facial resemblances. Which shows that the migrations happened along the coast lines of seas to India.

North Indians also share Iranian genes.

 

Hey wannabe snowwhite, are all Punjabis Jatts, do you want me to post pictures of your snowwhite nation

Do you know Jaat live as far as central UP and Madhya Pradesh.

He has little understanding of ethinc groups and races, I think his signature is wrong. He is mixing Aryan(noble) and a some call a language group to race.

 

[INDIC]

Sorry but migrating from inner India theory is proved wrong by genetic tests. Brahui have lowest amount of 12% ASI genes out of any South Asian ethnic group, apart from Indian punjabis rest of Indians have 55-80% of ASI genes in them.

Punjabis have 35% ASI. You also forget South Indian too have ANI as high as 35-55%.

 

[manojb]

Most of the North Indians share Iranian genes. .

DOnt know about that , but North Indian Muslims (i guess it includes Pakistanis) share 20% Israelites genes. There was a TV program where they took sample of genes from different religious leaders, one of the muslim leader was originally from India settled in USA

 

[INDIC]

Most of the people in South Asia is a mixture of multi ethnic groups , regarding your signature you have little understanding of race in S.Asia particularly in India.

Andamanese are mainly aborigines are also a part of India, But most of the south Indians and people in North India resemble North east Africans, Wheatish and some facial resemblances. Which shows that the migrations happened along the coast lines of seas to India.

North Indians also share Iranian genes.

 


He has little understanding of ethinc groups and races, I think his signature is wrong. He is mixing Aryan(noble) and a some call a language group to race.

I have read that genetic studies, it says ASI were distantly related to native Andamanese. Most of the South Indians were found with very high percentage of ANI ranging from 35-55%. Even adivasis of South have high percentage of ANI. 

He has little understanding of ethinc groups and races, I think his signature is wrong. He is mixing Aryan(noble) and a some call a language group to race.

I was told that 'Arya' means nobles mainly for the people following Vedic culture.

 

[Shadow_Hunter]

it does not say Tibet is an Independent country....it is just you who are trying to brainwash everyone to think so !

Ok

 

[American Pakistani]

Whats the point?

Edit the title replacing India with china and you can sing a new song.

It is only indians who claims Pakistan was part of their fairy tale land not the Chinese. The OP want to teach them something so whats all that whinning?

@Aeronaut nice thread. Keep up the good work.

 

[American Pakistani]

Historically it wasnt..

That du3b only knows history taught by his indian army propagandists so you can't blame him totally. For him Sind exists only from British era.

 

[Contrarian]

The name China is derived from the Qin (Chin) Dynasty, which existed in 221 BC.

Which, needless to say, was over 2000 years ago.

The Indus on the other hand, is a River in Pakistan. Yet Indians, Red Indians, and West Indians were named after this river, even though it is not their River, but Pakistan's river. They were named so by the colonialists, since at that time the Indus existed within their Empire.

This new found identity and unity was not a domestic phenomenom, but a foreign one.

@Chinese-Dragon
Either do your research before you post or don't post at all. You sound ridiculously ignorant.

The Constitution of our land gives two official names to this nation.
1. India - Colonial name - which we have retained along with our traditional name
2. Bharat - The name used for India over thousands of years together because of the ruler who came here and started it all - his name was King Bharat.

Dont preach when you dont know. 

It is only indians who claims Pakistan was part of their fairy tale land not the Chinese. The OP want to teach them something so whats all that whinning?

@Aeronaut nice thread. Keep up the good work.

Pakistani Punjab and Sindh have always been part of the Indian empires or countries of almost the entire times.
And frankly it is the only land worth any effort in your country.

Just because the inhabitants of those regions became Muslims does not mean that history can be changed. They have always been a part of Bharat.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Punjabis have 35% ASI. You also forget South Indian too have ANI as high as 35-55%.

Punjabis 30%, pashtuns around 20%, baloch 15, sindhis maybe around 28%. South Indians brahmins have 50% and other people 70-80%.

Basically only brahmins of India have lower ASI in them.

 

[Shabaz Sharif]

Bhartis are biggest liar of all times, baghwan se dharon.

History of Sindh BC era.

BC
Soanian People~500,000
Mehrgarh Culture7000–2500
Indus Valley Civilization3300–1700
Vedic Civilization2000–500
Achaemenid Empire550–330
Maurya Empire322–252
Seleucid Empire312–63
Greco-Bactrian Kingdom252–125
Indo-Scythian Kingdom200 BC–400 AD
Gandhara Civilization200 BC–1021 AD
Indo-Greek Kingdom180 BC–10 AD

Only Indian empire which ruled and conquered Sindh in BC era was Maurya and for only 70 years. Now lets look at AD era.

AD
Indo-Parthian Kingdom21–130
Kushan Empire30–375
Sassanid Empire224–641
Indo-Sassanids240–410
Gupta Empire320–600
Hephthalite Empire420–567
Rai Dynasty489–632
Kabul Shahi Dynasty500–1100
Umayyad Caliphate661–750
Pala Empire770–850
Ghaznavid Empire963–1187
Mamluk dynasty1206–1290
Khilji dynasty1290–1320
Tughlaq dynasty1320–1413
Sayyid dynasty1414–1451
Lodhi dynasty1451–1526
Mughal Empire1526–1858
Durrani Empire1747–1823
Sikh Confederacy1733–1805
Maratha Empire1758–1760
Sikh Empire1799–1849
British Indian Empire1849–1947
Dominion of Pakistan1947–1956
Islamic Republicsince 1956

So Sindh was part of Indian empires Gupta and Pala for 360 years out of last 2000 years. I dont why Sikh empire is there, maybe they ruled some parts of Sindh. Otherwise at that time Baloch were actual rulers of Sindh. Later on i will get in to Punjab. But its clear thousands of years of history and only couple of times being part of any Indian empire lol.