Mahmud of Ghazni vs Rajendra Chola

[Ajai Ghale]

Mahmud was a piece of shyt subhuan who didn't contributed much to the civilization on the other hand cholas apart from being great Generals possess superior Navy capable of invading far off lands.

Culturally Mahmud was a Neanderthal compared with Cholas as Architectural Marvel and Rock cut art of Cholas are world famous.

They are among first to successfully implemented Local Government.


Even today their legacy is evident,we have Tamil Nadu (Earlier Chola Mandalam) which is Economically Developed with good HDI and on the other hand we have Ghazni, (Afghanistan) where Mahmud Belonged a piss poor virtual Village with no development and no culture to offer to the world and living on AID from countries like India.

 

[luoshan]

Rajendra chola will hands down

 

[Tiger Genie]

don't compare the two. Ghazni was a barbaric power grabber whose main weapons of war were rape and pillage. Rajendra adhered to rules of engagement that included prohibition of attacks on civilians, preservation of colony resources in situ etc.

 

[Ajai Ghale]

Absolutely right , ppl who appreciate and idolize mercenaries simply are Neanderthals.

Akbar,ashoka and others were considered great bcos not of big army but bcos they gave better life to ppl. Inferior ppl who cannot create any thing and only destroy hardly have contributed to society other than violence.

Strong armies stand ,fight and defend . Take example of russian army the way they defended their country during world war 2. If hitler had acted like ghazni he would have achieved far more success. Ghazni is at the best a terrorist of 12th century. Instead of gun he must have a arrow or throw knife.

Large armies are required for dominating not only the fight but also sustaining the advantage won.

He was not even a great commander either if it wasn't for the internal rivalry of Rajputs He would have been butchered like pig as He was.

Even unknown Mughal Prince Dara Shikoh deserve more respect than him although He sucked as a military Leader.

 

[bsruzm]

He was not even a great commander either if it wasn't for the internal rivalry of Rajputs He would have been butchered like pig as He was.

Even unknown Mughal Prince Dara Shikoh deserve more respect than him although He sucked as a military Leader.

That's what I call success you posted 116 times only and yet have your ratings: -3

 

[Ajai Ghale]

That's what I call success you posted 116 times only and yet have your ratings: -3

I don't care Negative Ratings given by descendants of Mahmud.

 

[Kabira]

Actually that is not true.

If we discount some rabbles assembled in a hurry, in pre-modern time, Large armies defeated small armies 9 out of 10 times. The instances of smaller armies defeating larger armies are famous only because they buck a trend. For every such famous victory, there are 100 of battles in which larger army won, but is not much appreciated as such a result was expected.



I know I know.

There is this tendency among inferior muslims (and have no doubt Pashtuns are inferior as Infact, Pashtuns hardly had any status ever and were opportunist mercenaries at best which they remained till 15th century) to venerate their conquerors as heroes, even if they have been enslaved by that supposed "hero". Thus is pretty natural for them to admire and feel proud of their conquerors like Greek feel proud of Suleiman the magnificent , or Persians admire Chengis Khan or Khalid-ibn-al-Waleed ( ) . Here talk of enslavement of one's ancestors is futile. Isn't it @Samandri ?

BTW, your hero is not an undefeated General. He lost two battles in India, and may have lost more elsewhere.

You are butt hurt, considiring all Indian empires came around 500 BC and after that. Coincidence? Nope just aryans installing all over India.

 

[Shark2]

Mahmud was a piece of shyt subhuan who didn't contributed much to the civilization on the other hand cholas apart from being great Generals possess superior Navy capable of invading far off lands.

Culturally Mahmud was a Neanderthal compared with Cholas as Architectural Marvel and Rock cut art of Cholas are world famous.

They are among first to successfully implemented Local Government.


Even today their legacy is evident,we have Tamil Nadu (Earlier Chola Mandalam) which is Economically Developed with good HDI and on the other hand we have Ghazni, (Afghanistan) where Mahmud Belonged a piss poor virtual Village with no development and no culture to offer to the world and living on AID from countries like India.

This is true.
Afghanistan and Pakistan are the least developed countries in South Asia because these regions were
for the longest time under Turkic rule.
On the other hand Sri Lanka, Maharashtra and south India are the most developed regions in South Asia
because Sri Lanka and major parts of south India were never under Turkic rule and Maharashtra was
only for a short period of time under Turkic rule.
The Turks have completely destroyed Afghanistan and Pakistan and were responsible for the spread
of a barbaric culture in these regions. This is one of the main reasons why Afghanistan and Pakistan
have the lowest literacy rate and lowest Human Development index in South Asia.

 

[Ajai Ghale]

You are butt hurt, considiring all Indian empires came around 500 BC and after that. Coincidence? Nope just aryans installing all over India.

And what about Kushans successors of Kanishka who ruled you from Peshawar

They were vassals of Samudragupta sending their women folk and tribute as his Vassals.

 

[Shark2]

And what about Kushans successors of Kanishka who ruled you from Peshawar

They were vassals of Samudragupta sending their women folk and tribute as his Vassals.

View attachment 222050

Ignore the ghenda user. He is butt hurt as he knows that Pakistan was never able to establish a great native
Kingdom in the past because Pakistan was ruled for more than 2500 years by foreign invaders.
The greatest heroes of the Pakistanis are Bin Qasim an Arab invader, Mahmud Ghazni a Turkic invader
and Aurangzeb half Indian and half Mongol.

 

[Providence]

So rajendra chola is supposed to be an "indian empire" and ghanzne from where exactly ?

 

[Mike_Brando]

That's what I call success you posted 116 times only and yet have your ratings: -3

Lol,so what do you expect from us!That man Mahmud was a central Asian barbaric bigot who indiscriminately killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Indians in the name of his religion.On the other hand Rajendra Chola was a highly civilized person who built a vast marine empire ranging from South India to the entire S.E.Asia.He was probably the first historical ruler to unify all these territories under a single empire.Even though he was a devout Shaivaite(a sect of Hinduism) he neither discriminated nor persecuted people from other religions and even patronised Buddhism.He was a great patron of architecture and built thousands of marvelous rock cut temple throughout his empire.He was the first in the world to successfully introduce local self government in his extensive empire.Comparing him ith that barbaric Mahmud is like comparing Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. with say Adolf Hiter or Joseph Stalin!!

 

[Ajai Ghale]

Lol,so what do you expect from us!That man Mahmud was a central Asian barbaric bigot who indiscriminately killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Indians in the name of his religion.On the other hand Rajendra Chola was a highly civilized person who built a vast marine empire ranging from South India to the entire S.E.Asia.He was probably the first historical ruler to unify all these territories under a single empire.Even though he was a devout Shaivaite(a sect of Hinduism) he neither discriminated nor persecuted people from other religions and even patronised Buddhism.He was a great patron of architecture and built thousands of marvelous rock cut temple throughout his empire.He was the first in the world to successfully introduce local self government in his extensive empire.Comparing him ith that barbaric Mahmud is like comparing Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. with say Adolf Hiter or Joseph Stalin!!

No Atleast Hitler accomplished many things.

But comparing Mahmud with Chola is like comparing a Neanderthal with Homo Sapiens.

Legacy of Cholas are Recognized by UNESCO (Great living Chola Temple) as world Heritage Sites but what it the legacy of Mahmud,He don't even had a proper Mausoleum

 

[Shark2]

So rajendra chola is supposed to be an "indian empire" and ghanzne from where exactly ?

The rulers and soldiers of the Ghaznavid Kingdom were Turkic slave soldiers who were also called as
Mamluks. Their history dates back to the Arab invasion of Central Asia. The Arabs captured and
enslaved the Turks and made them to loyal slave soldiers. Later these Turkic soldiers revolted
and established their own Kingdom.

The Chola Emperors were true Indians who are of noble descent. All the medieval Chola Emperors
traced their genealogy back to famous ancient Chola Kings. Unlike the Turkic Slave rulers
the Chola Emperors had royal blood.

 

[Shark2]

The Chola dude wins.

I thought that all Pakistanis support Mahmud Ghazni.