Indian version of the 1962 Sino-India war

[Fattyacids]

your claim is too stupid to be even looked at let alone researched. do you even realize that or are deliberately humiliating yourself ?

Look, neither you nor me have the authority to change history. You can cry and deny, you can insult me, but historical facts are historical facts. Why not go read up some history book and see for yourself? I can even recommend you some book. For a start, try Cambridge history of India. It is commonly available.

 

[faithfulguy]

That's why I said learn history thru academic books, not wikipedia or blog. It is not reliable. The map that you posted is from wiki LOL.
Go read any academic books of South Asia by prominent university, you will know ancient India was never one country. Do you know what is the Mandate of Heaven? There was never a political concept of one country in India.

They have concept of empires and kingdoms and countries. But it never mean the entire Indian subcontinent. The empires and kingdoms are for themselves. India never have terms like dynasties. That term is foreign to Indians until recent historian apply that term to former Indian empires. So instead of Maurya or Gupta empire as historically it was, they shamelessly change it to Maurya or Gupta dynasty. Its a subtle change but they are trying to change history a little bit at a time.

 

[Fattyacids]

They have concept of empires and kingdoms and countries. But it never mean the entire Indian subcontinent. The empires and kingdoms are for themselves. India never have terms like dynasties. That term is foreign to Indians until recent historian apply that term to former Indian empires. So instead of Maurya or Gupta empire as historically it was, they shamelessly change it to Maurya or Gupta dynasty. Its a subtle change but they are trying to change history a little bit at a time.

That's what I was putting across to that guy. There is no political concept of one country.
The history of South Asia was 3500 years. Maurya lasted only for 130 years. Gupta 250 years. That's not even 400 years in total. What happened to the rest of the historical period? They were all separate kingdoms with their own Kings.
Not to mention, the last 1000 years, the Indian subcontinent was lost to the central asian muslims.

 

[phylumchordata]

Look, neither you nor me have the authority to change history. You can cry and deny, you can insult me, but historical facts are historical facts. Why not go read up some history book and see for yourself? I can even recommend you some book. For a start, try Cambridge history of India. It is commonly available.

Timeline

China History: Chronology, Dynasty Qin Han Tang Song Yuan Ming Qing

This is how china looked in most of its history . Uighur and Tibet not part of China while Eastern China itself divided into several states.

 

[Fattyacids]

Timeline

China History: Chronology, Dynasty Qin Han Tang Song Yuan Ming Qing

This is how china looked in most of its history . Uighur and Tibet not part of China while Eastern China itself divided into 5 states.

Do you even know which dynasty is that? I'm afraid you are trolling me with your straw men knowledge.

 

[faithfulguy]

That's what I was putting across to that guy. There is no political concept of one country.
The history of South Asia was 3500 years. Maurya lasted only for 130 years. Gupta 250 years. That's not even 400 years in total. What happened to the rest of the historical period? They were all separate kingdoms with their own Kings.
Not to mention, the last 1000 years, the Indian subcontinent was lost to the central asian muslims.

Your version of their history sound sad but its the truth. Maybe that is why they are deceiving themselves about their history. Otherwise, the only reason to stay together as a country is to continue and glorify British imperialism. Which is something they would not do. So in another word, if Indians know their history, they would not accept that they are 1 country. But would go back to their real history. The nation of India would be no more and India would revert back to a geographical expression.

Timeline

China History: Chronology, Dynasty Qin Han Tang Song Yuan Ming Qing

This is how china looked in most of its history . Uighur and Tibet not part of China while Eastern China itself divided into several states.

Actually, China was unified with one single emperor through out most of its history. When its divided, more than one person would claim to be emperor of one whole China. That is why both the ROC government and PRC government both claim to be the legitimate government of the whole China.

 

[phylumchordata]

Do you even know which dynasty is that? I'm afraid you are trolling me with your straw men knowledge.

am I trolling you ? You say that India was never a united country .. that''s hurtful , utter fake and trollish. DO you even realize how acerbic you sound ? I may get opinionated about Chinese people thanks to you , I was a neutral chap before but such statements make me take sides.

 

[Fattyacids]

am I trolling you ? You say that India was never a united country .. that''s hurtful , utter fake and trollish. DO you even realize how acerbic you sound ? I may get opinionated about Chinese people thanks to you , I was a neutral chap before but such statements make me take sides.

Maybe you weren't trolling. But you have no idea about the Chinese map you posted, how do you expect me to debate with you? It's not my intention to hurt your feeling, it is a historical fact that ancient India was never one country. What is also true is that ancient India is one of the oldest civilization with a long history. No one can that take away from you.

 

[Snomannen]

Timeline

China History: Chronology, Dynasty Qin Han Tang Song Yuan Ming Qing

This is how china looked in most of its history . Uighur and Tibet not part of China while Eastern China itself divided into several states.

This image is not fully correct, there was no such country called "China"中國, but ancient Chinese nations. Ancient Tibetan nation and Uighur nations (there wasn't even a country called Uighur) are part of them.

People always make the same mistake, which always consider only Han nations are Chinese and "China(s)". The fact is that Han people is only part of Chinese.

 

[Lux de Veritas]

That's what I was putting across to that guy. There is no political concept of one country.
The history of South Asia was 3500 years. Maurya lasted only for 130 years. Gupta 250 years. That's not even 400 years in total. What happened to the rest of the historical period? They were all separate kingdoms with their own Kings.
Not to mention, the last 1000 years, the Indian subcontinent was lost to the central asian muslims.

India's great Maurya and Mughal that you see on map started from the conquest and lasted till the death of Ashoka and Aurangzeb respectively. The conquest of Kalinga, which make the greatest span of Muaryan lasted a little more than 28 years. The Aurangzeb Mughal which added Decan lasted a little more than 26 years. For most period, the Mauryan and Mughal were reigning only along the Indus Ganges plains.

In addition, Indians added a lot of vassal states and more ridiculously tributary states, that is not directly administered by Mughal into the Mughal map. By such standards, Vietnam, Ryukyu and Korea, the closest China' tributaries could be added on China's map.

And how Mughal is Indian is questionable? The real founder of Mughals Babur was from Ferghana valley of Uzbekistan. Ferghana valley was longed a vassal of China's Han and Tang dynasty. I do not see why someone can be proud by being conquered by Turkic tribe.

All Indian empire are pathetically small. Indians brag hard on their map giving a impression of unity state. There is no such thing. India's "empire" are actually result of mobsters raiding land with very little administration instituted. China is different. All Chinese empires are characterize by the highly consummated and centralized civil service system. The land are garrisoned.

 

[Side-Winder]

we have never attacked any country through a neutral border , we have never supported terrorism on other lands, we provide refuge to traumatized people from China , Myanmar , Sri Lanka , Bangladesh and Pakistan , we are building destroyed nations , we operate largest welfare programs on the planet ... rest is all the propaganda spread by morally degraded nations who find our efforts in their way of spreading violence and hatred.

that's just a myth you never invaded any country...

1971 war speaks for itself,you trained the rebels muktibahnis --- you interfered in our internal matter ---
then the great morality you showed capturing kashmir,since then kashmiris are spitting on your faces

 

[Asian.Century]

Indians lost the war but won a higher moral ground.

What does that suppose to mean ?

 

[nomi007]

situation still same

 

[rott]

A revived thread. I see a lot of old members and miss those days.
The likes of fatty acids, armchair private, lux DE Veritas.

 

[Nan Yang]

India's great Maurya and Mughal that you see on map started from the conquest and lasted till the death of Ashoka and Aurangzeb respectively. The conquest of Kalinga, which make the greatest span of Muaryan lasted a little more than 28 years. The Aurangzeb Mughal which added Decan lasted a little more than 26 years. For most period, the Mauryan and Mughal were reigning only along the Indus Ganges plains.

In addition, Indians added a lot of vassal states and more ridiculously tributary states, that is not directly administered by Mughal into the Mughal map. By such standards, Vietnam, Ryukyu and Korea, the closest China' tributaries could be added on China's map.

And how Mughal is Indian is questionable? The real founder of Mughals Babur was from Ferghana valley of Uzbekistan. Ferghana valley was longed a vassal of China's Han and Tang dynasty. I do not see why someone can be proud by being conquered by Turkic tribe.

All Indian empire are pathetically small. Indians brag hard on their map giving a impression of unity state. There is no such thing. India's "empire" are actually result of mobsters raiding land with very little administration instituted. China is different. All Chinese empires are characterize by the highly consummated and centralized civil service system. The land are garrisoned.

Another problem is that there are little of any written record of the history of India. So most of Indian history are myth.

On the otherhand, China have tons and tons of records from important records of SIMA Qian to even my own ancestors book with records of all my ancestors.

A good example is The Xuan Zang journey to India or Tian Zhu. When the Tang dynasty monk Xuan Zang visited TianZhu (India) he recorded over 70 kingdoms. His book "Great Tang Records of the western regions" provided valuable and accurate records of all the places he visited in India and Central Asia. And it was a Westerner that rediscover all the "lost" Buddhist kingdoms in India using his book. Even Indians today have to read Chinese to learn about their own history.