Invasion of India: Doc

[jbond197]

I hate one thing though - Ambi and Puru should have joined hands to fight the invader.. Idiot Ambi laid down weapons without fighting and instead helped Alexander to fight against his enemy Puru.. Such traitors were the reason that invaders were able to step foot in our territories for the times to come..

A grand alliance among Dharmic kings, would have repelled all the invaders from then and seventh century and later like mosquitoes..

 

[Rafi]

When Pakistanis can claim the exploits of Muhammed Bin Qasim , Ghaznavi,Khalid bin Waled, all those arab caliphs based on religion, why not Indians who have a far more authentic claim ?

Because they do not belong to our land and never have, we do and therefore it's history belongs to us, and no crying by indians can change that.

I hate one thing though - Ambi and Puru should have joined hands to fight the invader.. Idiot Ambi laid down weapons without fighting and instead helped Alexander to fight against his enemy Puru.. Such traitors were the reason that invaders were able to step foot in our territories for the times to come..

A grand alliance among Dharmic kings, would have repelled all the invaders from then and seventh century and later like mosquitoes..

The Sufi's would have still converted the vast majority to Islam.

 

[illusion8]

Because they do not belong to our land and never have, we do and therefore it's history belongs to us, and no crying by indians can change that.



The Sufi's would have still converted the vast majority to Islam.

who's claiming who's history is quite evident to everybody...pathetic.

 

[SamantK]

Because they do not belong to our land and never have, we do and therefore it's history belongs to us, and no crying by indians can change that.
The Sufi's would have still converted the vast majority to Islam.

Claim what you want, I and all the Indians will claim we are also the descendants of IVC, now cry me a river.

 

[Rusty]

I hate one thing though - Ambi and Puru should have joined hands to fight the invader.. Idiot Ambi laid down weapons without fighting and instead helped Alexander to fight against his enemy Puru.. Such traitors were the reason that invaders were able to step foot in our territories for the times to come..

A grand alliance among Dharmic kings, would have repelled all the invaders from then and seventh century and later like mosquitoes..

If India was ever united against invaders then you would not have the vadas and Hinduism would be completely different today.
After all, the first great invasion was by the Aryans.

 

[SamantK]

If India was ever united against invaders then you would not have the vadas and Hinduism would be completely different today.
After all, the first great invasion was by the Aryans.

it is Veda.Everything would be different.. you guys would have stayed Hindus in that case.

 

[jbond197]

The Sufi's would have still converted the vast majority to Islam.

Lol, you believe that BS..

 

[Rusty]

it is Veda.Everything would be different.. you guys would have stayed Hindus in that case.

Yes, but would Hinduism stay Hinduism. That is the real question

 

[jbond197]

If India was ever united against invaders then you would not have the vadas and Hinduism would be completely different today.
After all, the first great invasion was by the Aryans.

Lol, this is Pakistani version of history.. No one else believes in your $hitty stories..

 

[Rusty]

Lol, this is Pakistani history.. No one else believes in your $hitty stories..

Really, then I guess most objective western scholars are "no body"

I know why you people have to lie to yourself about this.
It challenges your narrative to the core.
How can invaders be bad when your entire society is based on glorifying invaders?

Still, you people need to come to terms with this reality and stop the extreme hatred.

 

[manofwar]

If India was ever united against invaders then you would not have the vadas and Hinduism would be completely different today.
After all, the first great invasion was by the Aryans.

Indo-Aryans were the original Hindus........and it was a migration not an invasion, though I admit their dominance is the reason why South Indians our also hindu today-
The Vedas were written well before Chritianity or Islam were even thought of so nothing would have changed them due to those invasions.......
Rig Veda- 1700 BC
Sama Veda-1700 BC
Atharveda-1200 BC
Yajur Veda-1000 BC

 

[Vinod2070]

Sadly for Pakistanis, just Islam has not been enough for their identity.

So they are trying to claim the Dharmic history! That too exclusively.

It just goes against the very basis of the creation of Pakistan.

What is now called Pakistan was the smaller wing (West Pakistan) of some lands that were separated from India just because they "happened to have Muslim majority".

Not a great idea to start claiming history based on that accident of location.

Claim the Arab and Moor history and hear the Arabs, Persians, Turks, Mughals and sundry others laugh in your face.

Like Indians do when you try to claim pre Islamic history.

Fact is, you have nothing left now to call your own. Neither here nor there.

 

[SamantK]

Yes, but would Hinduism stay Hinduism. That is the real question

It will remain a question since it has not come to pass, but history has shown that we have maintained a good resemblance to the Hindu culture.. So the benefit of doubt can be given to Hinduism surviving.

 

[Rusty]

Indo-Aryans were the original Hindus........and it was a migration not an invasion, though I admit their dominance is the reason why South Indians our also hindu today-
The Vedas were written well before Chritianity or Islam were even thought of so nothing would have changed them due to those invasions.......
Rig Veda- 1700 BC
Sama Veda-1700 BC
Atharveda-1200 BC
Yajur Veda-1000 BC

So when your people invade then its a "migration" but when ours invade it's a "barbarian invasion"
But still it's progress. At least you guys are moving from complete denial to slow acceptance to the fact that the Aryans were foreigners.

As for "migration" that's completely not true. The Vedas are their story an it's all about invasion and destroying the indigenous Dravidian people (under the guise of good vs evil of course)

Besides, if it was a migration then how did they force North India to give up their Dravidian language in favor for the Indo European language of Sanskrit?

It will remain a question since it has not come to pass, but history has shown that we have maintained a good resemblance to the Hindu culture.. So the benefit of doubt can be given to Hinduism surviving.

That was not the point.
The point was that if Indians never allowed any one to invade then Hinduism would be completely different.
For one you would not have the Vedas, 2nd you would not have Sanskrit, and also interestingly enough you would not have horses since it was the Aryans who brought them first to India.

 

[SamantK]

So when your people invade then its a "migration" but when ours invade it's a "barbarian invasion"
But still it's progress. At least you guys are moving from complete denial to slow acceptance to the fact that the Aryans were foreigners.

As for "migration" that's completely not true. The Vedas are their story an it's all about invasion and destroying the indigenous Dravidian people (under the guise of good vs evil of course)

Besides, if it was a migration then how did they force North India to give up their Dravidian language in favor for the Indo European language of Sanskrit?



That was not the point.
The point was that if Indians never allowed any one to invade then Hinduism would be completely different.
For one you would not have the Vedas, 2nd you would not have Sanskrit, and also interestingly enough you would not have horses since it was the Aryans who brought them first to India.

I'm sorry I do not quite understand, it is under consideration that Vedas might have been modified to adjust Aryan race in it. Our cultural has borrowed many things from the invades or settlers. I do not think it would be drastically different.