What's new

Question about Ottoman rule in Eastern Europe

Status
Not open for further replies.
I never said never,read my posts again.
Islam did not start by conquest. Arabs, who adopted Islam as the first people, were united by Islam and after this unification went to reconquer their ancient native lands that were occupied by Byzantines and Persians. Hence once when they defeated those two foreign occupiers the locals, Jews included, welcomed them with open arms as liberators.

Christianity spread through missionary work initially by a small group of Jewish converts and Christian Arabs that migrated to Caucasus and Anatolia and from there Greece but afterwards, once established as a state religion, Christianity was used as an weapon and excuse for conquest by leading European powers of the time. There is no denying that.
You,rewriting history now.I agree that Christianity was weaponised by Europeans later on but you,re idealising the beginings of Islam and its spread and by doing so,you re going against established historical facts.
 
.
You,rewriting history now.I agree that Christianity was weaponised by Europeans later on but you,re idealising the beginings of Islam and its spread and by doing so,you re going against established historical facts.

My point is that the spread of Christianity and Islam, looking at the wider picture, does not differ much from each other. Both religions have been the greatest "missionary religions" and neither have ever hidden this. Contrary to for instance Judaism which was always a more "exclusive religion" where conversion is notoriously difficult and which never had any ambitions of growing in size. The closest to this are ancient Hebrew/Israelite kingdoms or ancient Arabian/Ethiopian Jewish kingdoms.

As a Christian this story might interest you for instance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_community_of_Najran

Also the oldest standing church in the world can be found in KSA (Jubail Church) from the 3th or 4th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jubail_Church

http://www.aina.org/ata/20080828165925.htm
 
.
Because most Europeans were not sellouts to their faith ,prefering a life in misery than to trade their souls.
euorope under muslims rule was never oppressed and both communties lived in peace and harmony.
It prove another point that islam was never spread through sword.
 
.
You,rewriting history now.I agree that Christianity was weaponised by Europeans later on but you,re idealising the beginings of Islam and its spread and by doing so,you re going against established historical facts.

Actually it was weaponized in the very beginning, christianity was forcefully spread in the beginning. I assume you have heard of the Charlemagne?

He campaigned against the Saxons to his east, Christianizing them upon penalty of death and leading to events such as the Massacre of Verden.


"Unlike his father, Pippin, and uncle, Carloman, Charlemagne expanded the reform Church's programme. The deepening of the spiritual life was later to be seen as central to public policy and royal governance. His reform focused on strengthening the church's power structure, improving clergy's skill and moral quality, standardizing liturgical practices, improvements on the basic tenets of the faith and the rooting out of paganism."

Christianity was a minority religion during much of the Roman Empire, and the early Christians were persecuted during that time. When Constantine I converted to Christianity, it became the dominant religion in the Roman Empire. Already under the reign of Constantine I, Christian heretics had been persecuted; beginning in the late 4th century, the ancient pagan religions were also actively suppressed. In the view of many historians, the Constantinian shift turned Christianity from a persecuted religion into one capable of persecution and sometimes eager to persecute.[2]There are a number of examples of forced conversion throughout the history of Christianity: during the Roman Empire, in the Middle Ages, inquisitions in Spain and Goa, and campaigns by Russian rulers.


Late Antiquity[edit]
In 392
Emperor Theodosius I decreed that Christianity was the only legal religion of the Roman Empire and forbade pagan practices:

It is Our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the administration of Our Clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans.... The rest, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative" (Codex Theodosianus XVI 1.2.).[3]


Medieval western Europe[edit]
During the
Saxon Wars, Charlemagne, King of the Franks, forcibly Roman Catholicized the Saxons from their native Germanic paganism by way of warfare, and law upon conquest. Examples are the Massacre of Verden in 782, when Charlemagne reportedly had 4,500 captive Saxons massacred upon rebelling against conversion, and the Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae, a law imposed on conquered Saxons in 785 that prescribed death to those who refused to convert to Christianity.[5]

Forced conversion that occurred after the seventh century generally took place during riots and massacres carried out by mobs and clergy without support of the rulers. In contrast, royal persecutions of Jews from the late eleventh century onward generally took form of explulsions, with some exceptions, such as conversions of Jews in southern Italy of the 13th century, which were carried out by Dominican Inquisitors but instigated by King Charles II of Naples.[4]

Jews were forced to convert to Christianity by the Crusaders in Lorraine, on the Lower Rhine, in Bavaria and Bohemia, in Mainz and in Worms.[6]

Pope Innocent III pronounced in 1201 that if one agreed to be baptized to avoid torture and intimidation, one nevertheless could be compelled to outwardly observe Christianity:

"[T]hose who are immersed even though reluctant, do belong to ecclesiastical jurisdiction at least by reason of the sacrament, and might therefore be reasonably compelled to observe the rules of the Christian Faith. It is, to be sure, contrary to the Christian Faith that anyone who is unwilling and wholly opposed to it should be compelled to adopt and observe Christianity. For this reason a valid distinction is made by some between kinds of unwilling ones and kinds of compelled ones. Thus one who is drawn to Christianity by violence, through fear and through torture, and receives the sacrament of Baptism in order to avoid loss, he (like one who comes to Baptism in dissimulation) does receive the impress of Christianity, and may be forced to observe the Christian Faith as one who expressed a conditional willingness though, absolutely speaking, he was unwilling ..."[7]



Eastern Europe[edit]
Upon converting to Christianity in the 10th century, Vladimir the Great, the ruler of Kievan Rus', ordered Kiev's citizens to undergo a mass baptism in the Dnieper river.[12]

In the 13th century the pagan populations of the Baltics faced campaigns of forcible conversion by crusading knight corps such as the Livonian Brothers of the Sword and the Teutonic Order, which often meant simply dispossessing these populations of their lands and property.[13][14]

After Ivan the Terrible's conquest of the Khanate of Kazan, the Muslim population faced slaughter, expulsion, forced resettlement and conversion to Christianity.[15]

In the 18th century, Elizabeth of Russia launched a campaign of forced conversion of Russia's non-Orthodox subjects, including Muslims and Jews.[16]


Goa inquisition[edit]
Main article: Goa Inquisition
The Portuguese practised religious persecution in Goa, India in the 16th and 17th centuries. The natives of Goa, most of them Hindus, were subjected to severe torture and oppression by the zealous Portuguese rulers and missionaries, and forcibly converted to Christianity.[17][18][19][20][21][22]

In 1567, the campaign to destroy temples in Bardez met with success, with 300 Hindu temples destroyed. Prohibition was laid from December 4, 1567 on rituals of Hindu marriages, sacred thread wearing and cremation. All persons above 15 years of age were compelled to listen to Christian preaching, failing which they were punished. In 1583, Hindu temples at Assolna and Cuncolim were destroyed byh army action. "The fathers of the Church forbade the Hindus under terrible penalties the use of their own sacred books, and prevented them from all exercise of their religion. They destroyed their temples, and so harassed and interfered with the people that they abandoned the city in large numbers, refusing to remain any longer in a place where they had no liberty, and were liable to imprisonment, torture and death if they worshiped after their own fashion the gods of their fathers", wrote Filippo Sassetti, who was in India from 1578 to 1588. An order was issued in June 1684 for suppressing the Konkani language and making it compulsory to speak Portuguese, on pain of severe penalties. All non-Christian cultural symbols and books written in local languages were also ordered to be destroyed.[23]


That and so much more, Christianity was spread by the sword by your fellow Europeans. Also forced conversions are prohibited in Islam so don't go around saying that Islam was spread by the sword.
 
.
.
Bleep. Why are you using a demonym that was not in use by people who resided in the Holy Land at that time? When Jesus preached to his followers were they Arabs? The Arab demonym would only get used after the Islalmic invasion by Arab tribes from Arabia in 7th century. Ony after did they become 'Arab' speakers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamization_of_Palestine

Don't comment on topics that you have no clue about if you don't want to embarrass yourself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Christians

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabataeans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghassanids

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakhmids

Nothing like foreigners, some Pashtun in the UK of all people moreover, thinking they know it all better than Arabs actually living in the region.

Let me quote from one of those 4 articles above to make it easier for your likes:

The Ghassanids (Arabic: الغساسنة‎‎‏; al-Ghasāsinah, also Banū Ghassān "Sons of Ghassān") were a group of Arabs, descended from the Azd tribes, that emigrated in the early 3rd century from the Southern Arabian Peninsula to the Levant region,[1][2] where some merged with Greek-speaking Christians' communities,[3] converting to Christianity in the first few centuries AD while others were already Christians before emigrating north to escape religious persecution.[2][4] Few Ghassanids became Muslim following the Islamic Conquest; most Ghassanids remained Christian and joined Melkite and Syriac communities within what is now Jordan, Palestine, Israel, Syria and Lebanon.[2]

Arab presence in Levant dates back to 1000 BC. In fact the word Arab was first recorded in Levant and Mesopotamia and the borderlands of Northern Arabia.

Actually it was weaponized in the very beginning, christianity was forcefully spread in the beginning. I assume you have heard of the Charlemagne?

He campaigned against the Saxons to his east, Christianizing them upon penalty of death and leading to events such as the Massacre of Verden.


"Unlike his father, Pippin, and uncle, Carloman, Charlemagne expanded the reform Church's programme. The deepening of the spiritual life was later to be seen as central to public policy and royal governance. His reform focused on strengthening the church's power structure, improving clergy's skill and moral quality, standardizing liturgical practices, improvements on the basic tenets of the faith and the rooting out of paganism."

Christianity was a minority religion during much of the Roman Empire, and the early Christians were persecuted during that time. When Constantine I converted to Christianity, it became the dominant religion in the Roman Empire. Already under the reign of Constantine I, Christian heretics had been persecuted; beginning in the late 4th century, the ancient pagan religions were also actively suppressed. In the view of many historians, the Constantinian shift turned Christianity from a persecuted religion into one capable of persecution and sometimes eager to persecute.[2]There are a number of examples of forced conversion throughout the history of Christianity: during the Roman Empire, in the Middle Ages, inquisitions in Spain and Goa, and campaigns by Russian rulers.


Late Antiquity[edit]
In 392 Emperor Theodosius I decreed that Christianity was the only legal religion of the Roman Empire and forbade pagan practices:

It is Our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the administration of Our Clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans.... The rest, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative" (Codex Theodosianus XVI 1.2.).[3]


Medieval western Europe[edit]
During the Saxon Wars, Charlemagne, King of the Franks, forcibly Roman Catholicized the Saxons from their native Germanic paganism by way of warfare, and law upon conquest. Examples are the Massacre of Verden in 782, when Charlemagne reportedly had 4,500 captive Saxons massacred upon rebelling against conversion, and the Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae, a law imposed on conquered Saxons in 785 that prescribed death to those who refused to convert to Christianity.[5]

Forced conversion that occurred after the seventh century generally took place during riots and massacres carried out by mobs and clergy without support of the rulers. In contrast, royal persecutions of Jews from the late eleventh century onward generally took form of explulsions, with some exceptions, such as conversions of Jews in southern Italy of the 13th century, which were carried out by Dominican Inquisitors but instigated by King Charles II of Naples.[4]

Jews were forced to convert to Christianity by the Crusaders in Lorraine, on the Lower Rhine, in Bavaria and Bohemia, in Mainz and in Worms.[6]

Pope Innocent III pronounced in 1201 that if one agreed to be baptized to avoid torture and intimidation, one nevertheless could be compelled to outwardly observe Christianity:

"[T]hose who are immersed even though reluctant, do belong to ecclesiastical jurisdiction at least by reason of the sacrament, and might therefore be reasonably compelled to observe the rules of the Christian Faith. It is, to be sure, contrary to the Christian Faith that anyone who is unwilling and wholly opposed to it should be compelled to adopt and observe Christianity. For this reason a valid distinction is made by some between kinds of unwilling ones and kinds of compelled ones. Thus one who is drawn to Christianity by violence, through fear and through torture, and receives the sacrament of Baptism in order to avoid loss, he (like one who comes to Baptism in dissimulation) does receive the impress of Christianity, and may be forced to observe the Christian Faith as one who expressed a conditional willingness though, absolutely speaking, he was unwilling ..."[7]


Eastern Europe[edit]
Upon converting to Christianity in the 10th century, Vladimir the Great, the ruler of Kievan Rus', ordered Kiev's citizens to undergo a mass baptism in the Dnieper river.[12]

In the 13th century the pagan populations of the Baltics faced campaigns of forcible conversion by crusading knight corps such as the Livonian Brothers of the Sword and the Teutonic Order, which often meant simply dispossessing these populations of their lands and property.[13][14]

After Ivan the Terrible's conquest of the Khanate of Kazan, the Muslim population faced slaughter, expulsion, forced resettlement and conversion to Christianity.[15]

In the 18th century, Elizabeth of Russia launched a campaign of forced conversion of Russia's non-Orthodox subjects, including Muslims and Jews.[16]


Goa inquisition[edit]
Main article: Goa Inquisition
The Portuguese practised religious persecution in Goa, India in the 16th and 17th centuries. The natives of Goa, most of them Hindus, were subjected to severe torture and oppression by the zealous Portuguese rulers and missionaries, and forcibly converted to Christianity.[17][18][19][20][21][22]

In 1567, the campaign to destroy temples in Bardez met with success, with 300 Hindu temples destroyed. Prohibition was laid from December 4, 1567 on rituals of Hindu marriages, sacred thread wearing and cremation. All persons above 15 years of age were compelled to listen to Christian preaching, failing which they were punished. In 1583, Hindu temples at Assolna and Cuncolim were destroyed byh army action. "The fathers of the Church forbade the Hindus under terrible penalties the use of their own sacred books, and prevented them from all exercise of their religion. They destroyed their temples, and so harassed and interfered with the people that they abandoned the city in large numbers, refusing to remain any longer in a place where they had no liberty, and were liable to imprisonment, torture and death if they worshiped after their own fashion the gods of their fathers", wrote Filippo Sassetti, who was in India from 1578 to 1588. An order was issued in June 1684 for suppressing the Konkani language and making it compulsory to speak Portuguese, on pain of severe penalties. All non-Christian cultural symbols and books written in local languages were also ordered to be destroyed.[23]


That and so much more, Christianity was spread by the sword by your fellow Europeans. Also forced conversions are prohibited in Islam so don't go around saying that Islam was spread by the sword.

Don't bother with logic. 1 Semitic religion (Christianity) originating from the Middle East is not a "foreign" religion but a fellow Semitic religion that appeared some 500 years after just south of Southern Levant (the origin of Christianity) is completely foreign despite this religion having a longer presence in parts of Southern Europe than Christianity has had in much of Northern, Central and Eastern Europe. Funny world.
 
Last edited:
.
Religion is outdated, ALL religions. People need to evolve beyond fairytales already it's getting ridiculous!
 
.
Nothing like foreigners, some Pashtun in the UK of all people moreover, thinking they know it all better than Arabs actually living in the region.
I don't need lessons from some semi-negro who hit oil lottery teaching me history. Generic Arabs were limited to the Arabian peninsula. After 7th century with rise of Islam they subjugated other peoples. That included the Levants, Egyptians and the Berbers. Over time through acculturation these people began to speak Arabic - in Palestine this process might have matured by 12th century. So stop seeing Arabs behind every camel, please.


f5829e65f97d7506692bd11836129d4b.jpg
 
.
I don't need lessons from some semi-negro who hit oil lottery teaching me history. Generic Arabs were limited to the Arabian peninsula. After 7th century with rise of Islam they subjugated other peoples. That included the Levants, Egyptians and the Berbers. Over time through acculturation these people began to speak Arabic - in Palestine this process might have matured by 12th century. So stop seeing Arabs behind every camel, please.


f5829e65f97d7506692bd11836129d4b.jpg

I won't waste my time on ignorant Gypsy Dravidian Negritos full of complexes whose sole presence on this section is somehow to prove how big an attachment my Gypsy Dravidians have with the Middle East, in particular the Arab world, when they have greater affinity with the jungles of India and Bangladesh. It is like comparing apples and oranges. Hijaz and Levant are extensions of each other. Similar to how Davidian jungles are extensions of Bangladeshi jungles.

Go focus on your Bacha Bazi pedophilia culture. You might know something more about that topic than Arab topics.

And blondie bitch please, you think that I remotely care what some failed 50 something year old Pashtun migrant (I have seen your photo here and you look exactly like the Gypsies - after all you are closely related to them as a people, I spot in Europe begging) in the UK thinks about anything remotely related to the word Arab? You can't even count to 10 in Arabic and you think that you are going to teach us our own history?:lol:

All Semitic languages and peoples originate from Arabia and Aramaic and Arabic are closely related languages and Aramaic was spoken in KSA indigenously as well. Once again, don't waste my time and focus on issues that you know more about such as Bacha Bazi and how many Pashtun mercenaries were employed by the British conqueror and send to the frontline to die.
 
Last edited:
.
I won't waste my time on ignorant Gypsy Dravidian Negritos full of complexes whose sole presence on this section is somehow to prove how big an attachment my Gypsy Dravidians have with the Middle East, in particular the Arab world, when they have greater affinity with the jungles of India and Bangladesh.

Go focus on your Bacha Bazi pedophilia culture. You might know something more about that topic than Arab topics.

Sad case.

Sargon you are going to get banned again if you keep insulting people dude.


I don't need lessons from some semi-negro who hit oil lottery teaching me history. Generic Arabs were limited to the Arabian peninsula. After 7th century with rise of Islam they subjugated other peoples. That included the Levants, Egyptians and the Berbers. Over time through acculturation these people began to speak Arabic - in Palestine this process might have matured by 12th century. So stop seeing Arabs behind every camel, please.


f5829e65f97d7506692bd11836129d4b.jpg

I disagree my friend, here check out these previous posts of mine.


Sargon's Kingdom used a Semitic language.

"Sargon of Akkad (Akkadian Šarru-ukīn or Šarru-kēn; sometimes known as "Sargon the Great"[4]) was the first ruler of the Semitic-speaking Akkadian Empire, known for his conquests of the Sumerian city-states in the 24th to 23rd centuries BC.[3]"

"Semitic |səˈmidik| adjective1 relating to or denoting a family of languages that includes Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic and certain ancient languages such as Phoenician and Akkadian, constituting the main subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic family.2 relating to the peoples who speak the Semitic languages, especially Hebrew and Arabic."
-dictionary






(Some would Place Egypt with the Semitics, I think it's a Mix)

They may not have used Arabic but they are closely connected blood-wise. Right Now Syrians,Egyptians,Iraqis all have blood ties to Arabs and are ethnically and culturally Arab.

"The earliest written evidence of an Afroasiatic language is an Ancient Egyptian inscription of c. 3400 BC (5,400 years ago).[17] Symbols on Gerzean (Naqada II) pottery resembling Egyptian hieroglyphs date back to c. 4000 BC, suggesting an earlier possible dating. This gives us a minimum date for the age of Afroasiatic. However, Ancient Egyptian is highly divergent from Proto-Afroasiatic (Trombetti 1905: 1–2), and considerable time must have elapsed in between them. Estimates of the date at which the Proto-Afroasiatic language was spoken vary widely. They fall within a range between approximately 7,500 BC (9,500 years ago), and approximately 16,000 BC (18,000 years ago). According to Igor M. Diakonoff (1988: 33n), Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken c. 10,000 BC. Christopher Ehret (2002: 35–36) asserts that Proto-Afroasiatic was spoken c. 11,000 BC at the latest, and possibly as early as c. 16,000 BC. These dates are older than those associated with most other proto-languages."

Far older then Islam,


"In addition to languages spoken today, Afroasiatic includes several important ancient languages, such as Ancient Egyptian, Akkadian, Biblical Hebrew, and Old Aramaic. It is uncertain when or where the original homeland of the Afroasiatic family existed. Proposed locations include North Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Eastern Sahara, and the Levant."

Not Post-Islamic, it's Pre-Islamic Hence why hebrew and Aramaic is included.

"The most widely spoken Afroasiatic language is Arabic, including literary Arabic and the spoken colloquial varieties. It has around 200 to 230 million native speakers concentrated primarily in the Middle East, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and Malta.[6] Tamazight and other Berber varieties are spoken in Morocco, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, northern Mali, and northern Niger by about 25 to 35 million people."

"
Ancient Semitic-speaking peoples[edit]
Main article: Ancient Semitic-speaking peoples
There are several locations proposed as possible sites for prehistoric origins of Semitic-speaking peoples: Mesopotamia, The Levant, Mediterranean, the Arabian Peninsula, and North Africa.[18]"
Map showing the historical distribution of Semitic (yellow) and other Afro-Asiatic language speakers about 1000 - 2000 years ago.



Semitic_languages_-_Chronology.png


Please excuse my friend, he get's riled up when you insult arabs.

Love Pakistan bro:pakistan::smitten:
 
.
Sargon you are going to get banned again if you keep insulting people dude.




I disagree my friend, here check out these previous posts of mine.







Please excuse my friend, he get's riled up when you insult arabs.

Love Pakistan bro:pakistan::smitten:

Don't care the slightest about this Gypsy Dravidian that thinks that he knows our region better than Arabs actually living in the region. His people have nothing to do with us or our region. Let him focus on like-minded people, Dravidians, Gypsies etc.

Next time he will claim that Sargon of Akkad was some Dravidian or Gypsy from South Asia.
 
. .
Sargon you are going to get banned again if you keep insulting people dude.




I disagree my friend, here check out these previous posts of mine.







Please excuse my friend, he get's riled up when you insult arabs.

Love Pakistan bro:pakistan::smitten:

Look brother, you should not waste your time on this "something". It was wracked by some Black person in the UK hence its obsession about Black people. However foolish and ignorant as it is about anything remotely related to the Arab world,it is unaware of the fact that there are more Black people (Nubians etc.) in Egypt than any other Arab country outside of Sudan and that native Egyptians, especially Southerners, would be considered as "Black" by it and similar likes despite it being dark itself.

I would have laughed if it was in its early 20's as we are but it could be a grandfather or great-grandfather. In any case I can happily say that 99% of all Arabs have no clue that the people it belongs to even exists. I guess that bothers it immensely among many other issues as it is one-sided obsession as you can see and have seen previously.

Do yourself a favor and ignore it.
 
Last edited:
.
Don't care the slightest about this Gypsy Dravidian that thinks that he knows our region better than Arabs actually living in the region. His people have nothing to do with us or our region. Let him focus on like-minded people, Dravidians, Gypsies etc.

Next time he will claim that Sargon of Akkad was some Dravidian or Gypsy from South Asia.
Look brother, you should not waste your time on this "something". It was wracked by some Black person in the UK hence his obsession about Black people. However the fool, ignorant as he is about anything remotely related to the Arab world, is unaware of the fact that there are more Black people (Nubians etc.) in Egypt than any other Arab country outside of Sudan and that native Egyptians, especially Southerners, would be considered as "Black" by his likes despite him being dark himself.

Do yourself a favor and ignore it.
No, problem. I will rely on you for anything related to Arab world rather than the Bilal the negro from KSA.


There is no need to hate each other guys, we are all muslims here. Sargon you are an amazing source of knowledge about the Arab world and the cradle of civilization and Kaptaan is a wonderful source for info on Pakistan and the Indus. You guys would make amazing friends.


We can all admit that we are strong in some areas and stronger in others. You guys should be learning from each other with civilized debate not throwing insults at each other.


Flag-Pins-Saudi-Arabia-Pakistan.jpg



@Sargon of Akkad I would suggest you go this thread and check out Kaptaan's posts and learn a little about Pakistan

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/spectacular-architecture-and-art.467122/


@Kaptaan I would suggest you go this thread and read up a bit on Arab culture and check out Sargon's posts

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/traditional-clothing-from-the-arab-world.262640/
 
.
There is no need to hate each other guys, we are all muslims here. Sargon you are an amazing source of knowledge about the Arab world and the cradle of civilization and Kaptaan is a wonderful source for info on Pakistan and the Indus. You guys would make amazing friends.


We can all admit that we are strong in some areas and stronger in others. You guys should be learning from each other with civilized debate not throwing insults at each other.


Flag-Pins-Saudi-Arabia-Pakistan.jpg



@Sargon of Akkad I would suggest you go this thread and check out Kaptaan's posts and learn a little about Pakistan

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/spectacular-architecture-and-art.467122/


@Kaptaan I would suggest you go this thread and read up a bit on Arab culture and check out Sargon's posts

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/traditional-clothing-from-the-arab-world.262640/

This all sounds great and everything but trust me, I tried being civil with that individual, to no avail, and I am not longer going to tolerate his little obsessions or pathetic insults that ironically only showcase his lack of knowledge more than anything else. I will reply in kind. I used to deal with Iranians successfully single-handedly so dealing with him won't be a problem at all. The only disadvantage is that I am on foreign ground as are you and every other Arab user. I have a no-nonense approach in "real life" as well. We are Arabs and we don't take shit from anyone. Least of all some Pashtun in the UK of all people with due respect. It's a joke.

You can have him bro.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom