When coterminous Pakistan fought Alexander the Great and almost brought him down to his knees.

[Talwar e Pakistan]

Your national river flows through India first and originates in Tibet. So much for the national river.

The Nile is undoubtedly associated with Egypt, Egypt's many Kingdoms and civilizations were centred on the river. Today it continues to provide life and sustenance to the country. The Nile being only being 1/5th Egyptian and having an outside course does not void the Nile being a famously associated part of Egypt.

Compare that to the Indus, where over 90% of the River is in Pakistan - the rest of which flows through an internationally disputed territory.

Porus and Panini were neither Pakistani. They were two different people who are alien to what is today's Pakistan.

Panini was from Gandhara, a country that is mentioned as foreign by Vedic texts and grouped along the Bahlikas. Porus came from a country known as Bahlika (made up most of the Indus Kingdoms), which literally means "outsider". They ate meat, buried their dead, rejected Brahminism, were hostile to Vedic Hindus and were feared warriors.

Here is what your Vedic sources say about Sagala, capital of Porus's Kingdom. (Vahika here is just another name for Bahlika).
I remember from the days of my youth that a slaughter-ground for kine and a space for storing intoxicating spirits always distinguish the entrances of the abodes of the (Vahika) kings. On some very secret mission I had to live among the Vahikas. In consequence of such residence the conduct of these people is well known to me. There is a town of the name of Sakala (modern day Sialkote), a river of the name of Apaga, and a clan of the Vahikas known by the name of the Jarttikas. The practices of these people are very censurable. They drink the liquor called Gauda, and eat fried barley with it. They also eat beef with garlic. They also eat cakes of flour mixed with meat, and boiled rice that is bought from others. Of righteous practices they have none. (8,44)

Also, you missed the Marathas who conquered Indus region, now did they come from Karachi or Pindi?

How long were they in the Indus before their asses were humiliatingly booted out? One year. Over a hundred thousand Marathas were killed in the Indus and the descendants of Maratha prisoners can still be found throughout Pakistan. The Marathas were never able to recover from the thrashing they recieved in the Indus.

it was with largely the Persian army (Shaka-Yavana-Kamboja-Parasika-Bahlika)

That's interesting. All of the people mentioned made up the primary ethnic groups of ancient Pakistan during that time.

Name one powerful empire that is centered at Pakistan? Which ruled over without shifting their capital to Delhi or further east or west.

lol... don't even get me started.

No. They are of Gandharan and Porus Kingdom. Pakistan born in 1947.

and where the hell did the descendants of Pakistan come from? Did they come from Mars to populate Pakistan in 1947?
The name Pakistan itself is just an acronym for regions that make up the Indus; Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh, BalochisTAN. The cultures, languages and the various peoples of these regions have been here for thousands and thousands of years.

Because the Mauryans ruled over what's today's Pakistan until Afghanistan and parts of Persia. Appreciate your attempts. But, lacks conclusive evidence. A mere nomenclature of Maurya which has multiple meanings will not suffice your claim.

Mauryans enjoyed loosed control over the Indus before also being kicked out.

Also, they were centered around Ghazni of Afghanistan for the most part.

Ghaznavids shifted towards Lahore and eventually declared Lahore as it's capital.

In other words, you had no wealth. Your Kingdoms were dirt poor due to continuous invasions and geography containing semi-desert or full desert.

This comment really shows me that you have very little credibility and knowledge to say anything about history. You would have better luck spewing garbage in Indian history forums which claim that "Bharat civilization" once spread from Syria to Indonesia and that ancient Indians fought nuclear space battles.

Ancient Pakistan was a bread basket zone and one of the richest regions in the world.

As for easiness, guess who defeated the Ghengiz Khan, Hunas, Greeks.

Ghengiz Khan

If you meant the Mongols then it was a coalition of Punjab, Sindh, Kashmir, Peshawar, the salt range tribes and the Punjabi-Pashtun rulers of the Delhi Sultanate that defeated them.

Hunas

They were temporarily defeated and became tributary states to the Gupta Empire and it wasn't long before they got independence. The Hunas eventually fused with the local peoples and tribes.

Greeks

Greeks were defeated by the Sakas, a people that are predecessors to the Jatts, Rajputs and Gujjars of the Indus region who also most likely mixed with the Hunas as evidenced by their clan names.

 

[Chhatrapati]

If that's not solid enough for you, fine, bury your head in the sand.

Lol! Guess anything that doesn't suit your narrative is wrong. Good luck chum.

Please, you've been invaded plenty of times but what makes it even sadder is most of you aren't descended from these conquerors where as we are.

Blaa. I'm glad I'm not some descendants of some mamluks.

If your land was so great and wealthy, IVC would have started in your country and not ours.

Since IVC there wasn't many wealthy empires. Why IVC died off may be the reason why you are not wealthy. i.e loss of agrarian lands may be because of rivers going dry or invasion. Either way, Ghurids invaded India for wealth. And they weren't aiming for what's today's Pakistan.

No, the Guptas were Bengali, you can find evidence of this easily. Here's just one example:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Gupta

Sorry, your link says they are from Present day Uttar Pradesh.

Also here it says, But very likely they were initially a family of landowners who acquired political control in the region of Magadha and parts of eastern Uttar Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh seems to have been a more important province for the Guptas than Bihar, because early Gupta coins and inscriptions have been mainly found in that region.
http://www.ensyklopedia.com/maharaja-sri-gupta-founder-of-gupta-dynasty-240-ad-280-ad/
http://www.historydiscussion.net/empires/history-of-the-gupta-empire-indian-history/600

Bengal? Want more "examples"?

I already told you, the Huns didn't get kicked out, they assimilated into Pakistani society. They do not count as oppressors, they are the home team. We are a multi-ethnic society and we are proud of this.

If you were born a Muslim, odds are at least one of your ancestors came with these conquerors. Accept it and move on.

You can find sources proving Tipu was Punjabi. Here is just one:

I didn't say the Hunas were killed off. I only meant the king was ousted. If the Hunas assimilated into India and Pakistan, they might have been spared. I don't know.

No, I can trace my family tree further south of India and it isn't going towards North. Which only mean I wasn't from invader rather Muslims in my area aren't from invaders but traders who were given land and area by the Travancore kings for doing business. History of Kerala Muslim, for the most part, is different compared to North.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheraman_Juma_Mosque
We even pray in a different posture compared to others. No need to go further into it. Anyway, coming to Tipu.
Tipu Sultan belongs to the Sayyid lineage, meaning direct descendents of Prophet Mohammad
Stopped reading from there. Any more stupid claims?
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...nd-tumakuru-district/articleshow/61574823.cms

That's because you breed like rats.

Hmm. Let's see, the Fertility rate of Muslims in India is 2.6? and you lot. 3.55....

Again what's breeding like rats? (Talk about self-goal).

Allama Iqbal and Faiz Ahmed Faiz are the best Urdu poets in history, there's no disputing this.

Unless you've got anything intelligent to add, I think this discussion is over.

I just saw your level of intelligence.

Not denying they are anything. But it's stupid to claim something based on few good poets or being national language. A bastardized version of Hindustani is Urdu after all like Hindi.

All you do is hide behind rhetorics and skip questions.

 

[Chhatrapati]

Bahlikas. Porus came from a country known as Bahlika (made up most of the Indus Kingdoms), which literally means "outsider".I remember from the days of my youth that a slaughter-ground for kine and a space for storing intoxicating spirits always distinguish the entrances of the abodes of the (Vahika) kings. On some very secret mission I had to live among the Vahikas. In consequence of such residence the conduct of these people is well known to me. There is a town of the name of Sakala (modern day Sialkote), a river of the name of Apaga, and a clan of the Vahikas known by the name of the Jarttikas. The practices of these people are very censurable. They drink the liquor called Gauda, and eat fried barley with it. They also eat beef with garlic. They also eat cakes of flour mixed with meat, and boiled rice that is bought from others. Of righteous practices they have none.

Are you saying Porus was an outsider?

Sorry, you are referring to (Bahlikas) Bactrians. When you read a source, read it fully.

The name Pakistan itself is just an acronym for regions that make up the Indus; Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, Sindh, BalochisTAN.

Ghengiz Khan never stepped foot in South Asia,

Some level of stupidity. Nah, you are wasting my time.

Greeks were defeated by the Sakas, a people that are predecessors to the Jatts, Rajputs and Gujjars of the Indus region who also most likely mixed with the Hunas as evidenced by their clan names.

Facepalm.

Any idea what we were talking about?

 

[Mirza Jatt]

In the 10,000 year-long history of the Indus region; COMBINED Gangetic "rule" over some parts of the Indus region only lasted around 200 years and that too in a very fragile and loose state. Mauryans were the only ones that successfully "conquered" whole of the Indus but they did not last long and were eventually driven out.

Mauryans may have ruled for approx. 200 years but modern day Pakistan was ruled by indo-greek rulers for years to come since in the Ashoka period, the empire was facing resistance from shungas. Honestly its funny how you people now are trying to taka share of cake that's not even yours. Someone started this thread claiming Pakistanis almost brought Alexander down on his knees.. I mean really ? Oh Your friends also claims Mauryans were from KPK, like really.

please, don't get me started on what Indians are taught.

Lol.. look who is trying to boast on history. When it comes to history, you should ask your historians some serious question and then come and do chest thumping you.. your kids are not even aware of Pauravas and understandably so.. cause accepting that Porus was a Hindu king was acceptable to your forefathers. Forget that.. your kids are not even aware of independence struggle properly. So when it come to comparing teaching history in schools, please keep your ego under the carpets.[/QUOTE]

Incorrect, you can read the evidence provided for my claim in my previous posts.

Porus came from Jhelum, stop stealing our history .

No. I am not debating the fact the he was from the land that is modern day Pakistan. But he was a Paurava. Pakistan never existed then, the land was ruled by Hindu Kings. At max you can say your fore fathers were Hindu kings who resisted Alexander, but you cant say they were Pakistanis.

 

[Hamza913]

.
No. I am not debating the fact the he was from the land that is modern day Pakistan. But he was a Paurava. Pakistan never existed then, the land was ruled by Hindu Kings. At max you can say your fore fathers were Hindu kings who resisted Alexander, but you cant say they were Pakistanis.

No, they are Pakistani since the land is called Pakistan and if they were born today they would be considered Pakistani.

The title of Pakistani is far more appropriate than Hindustani, your nation only came into existence in 1947 too you know.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

No, they are Pakistani since the land is called Pakistan and if they were born today they would be considered Pakistani.

The title of Pakistani is far more appropriate than Hindustani, your nation only came into existence in 1947 too you know.

Hindustani the term itself is wrong. Please help.me understand where it came from. Call it India, or Bharatvarsh...both of which existed way before the term Hindustani.

There was never an identity called Pakistan in that era. It was India. Calling Porus Pakistani because he existed from the modern, newly created term Pakistan (you can't even compare to the antiquity of the term India with the word Pakistan .. lol). then, Manmohan Singh is a Pakistani and and Musharraf is an Indian since they came from Pakistan and India respectively..lol. That's your logic.

Don't try to compare the term Pakistan (created few decades back) with the term Hindustan to save your argument...compare it with India (created thousand of years ago).

Porus was a Hindu king so saying he was a Pakistani, makes your forefather Hindus who gave a huge fight to Alexander.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Prophet Muhammad saws referred to modern-day Pakistan as Sindh and modern-day India as Hind when he prophesied that Islam would reach to as far as Sindh wal Hind.

Not to mention the stories of Sinbad was about 2 Sind-ibadis in Basra discussing their adventures.

We have had relations with Arabia, Babylon, Persia, and Central Asia since antiquity due to our geographical location.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

Prophet Muhammad saws referred to modern-day Pakistan as Sindh and modern-day India as Hind when he prophesied that Islam would reach to as far as Sindh wal Hind.

Not to mention the stories of Sinbad was about 2 Sind-ibadis in Basra discussing their adventures.

We have had relations with Arabia, Babylon, Persia, and Central Asia since antiquity due to our geographical location.

Is that how you call it Hindustan ? well sorry to say your history might starts from Islamic history...for the rest of the world it doesn't.. no one even referes to India as Hindustan.. the term is relatively modern compared to the terms India and Bharatvarsh. Even if purely for the sake of argument if I take it as true... still, see the antiquity between the word Hindustan and the term Pakistan. Just no comparison and even a kid can say which is older. But anyhow, the word Hindustan itself is invalid, in terms of Modern India as well as from the historical facts.

 

[Hamza913]

Hindustani the term itself is wrong. Please help.me understand where it came from. Call it India, or Bharatvarsh...both of which existed way before the term Hindustani.

There was never an identity called Pakistan in that era. It was India. Calling Porus Pakistani because he existed from the modern, newly created term Pakistan (you can't even compare to the antiquity of the term India with the word Pakistan .. lol). then, Manmohan Singh is a Pakistani and and Musharraf is an Indian since they came from Pakistan and India respectively..lol. That's your logic.

Don't try to compare the term Pakistan (created few decades back) with the term Hindustan to save your argument...compare it with India (created thousand of years ago).

Porus was a Hindu king so saying he was a Pakistani, makes your forefather Hindus who gave a huge fight to Alexander.

The term India comes from the Indus River. I will not call Hindustan that because the term doesn't apply to you, you are not from the Indus.

Just because we changed our name doesn't mean we popped into existence out of nowhere, and just because you named yourselves after us doesn't make our history yours.

Musharraf was born into a Muslim family and Pakistan was literally made as a state for South Asian Muslims, he's Pakistani. So is that Singh guy (if he really was born in Pakistan).

The term India is not yours, the Indus almost entirely exists in our lands.

Our forefathers would be mixed, Pakistan has been at the crossroads of many great civilisations.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

The term India comes from the Indus River. I will not call Hindustan that because the term doesn't apply to you, you are not from the Indus.

Just because we changed our name doesn't mean we popped into existence out of nowhere, and just because you named yourselves after us doesn't make our history yours.

Musharraf was born into a Muslim family and Pakistan was literally made as a state for South Asian Muslims, he's Pakistani. So is that Singh guy (if he really was born in Pakistan).

The term India is not yours, the Indus almost entirely exists in our lands.

Our forefathers would be mixed, Pakistan has been at the crossroads of many great civilisations.

Lol.. let me educate you...the term India was coined from Indika, not Indus.. its your Islamic history that uses Indus to name it Hindustan (again your history, not the rest of the world, who knew to refer India after the word Indika)

And lol..no..you never changed your name..you did not even had a word to call the current Pakistani region separately.. as much it might hurt your ego, it was called India (even the britishers called it India although they never vistied India earlier..you think that's because of Indus river? No. Megasthenes was popular and so was the term India even before you had any concentration of Islamic followers in the Indus valley region. Does that ring any bell? Thanks to the him, we still can claim what's ours, or else the way you people are trying to call every Hindu heritage as yours, you may have even called everything under the sky as Pakistani.

Oh did we.name.ourselves after Indus? Lol.. again..read what I wrote above.

Your 4th para - Hell no..you can't get funnier than that. Indus has been a Hindu land until Islamic invasion, please follow your fellow Pakistani members atleast. India was coined after Indika ..though I agree that it may have been named after Indus, its funny , you claim it to be not a part of India. Well i don't blame you after you tried links after links tried to prove all the established historians in the planet as wrong after claiming Mauryans as Pakistani. (you can learn feom your fellow poster who understands he was from Bihar). Also can't blame your historians to have taught you because of the allergy you have from everything Indian and thus you are not even taught in your books about these events. Your history starts from Mohammed Bin Qasim. Hell you are even taught a shorter version of (or tell me if you are taught at all) all Indian freedom fighters. Your heroes are only the Islamic conquerors who invaded your region, and thanks to you people, you have not been able to resist them and we saw Islamic invasion.

Infact about almost entire freedom struggle. Your kids are not even taught about Bhagat singh who was from current Pakistan and was proudly calling himself Indian (He would have died again if he knew that coming from that part of India would mean everything including him is a Pakistani.) Lmao.

3rd Para - yes I agree with you that being born in Pakistan doesn't make him Pakistani, or being born in India doesn't make Musharraf Indian. Please apply the same thing for Porus and other Hindu kings who existed on the current side of Pakistan. Infact those Hindu Kings were the first to have resisted Alexander even before Porus (the Hindu King) , and after he failed it was the fear of Nandas that stopped Alexander. Just to give you a hint -Porus used elephants in the battles. But am sure you wont even undwrstand what I am saying. These things come from basics, which unfortunately you have missed in your Pakistani school and all your theories are based on your Google (thank google please)but am sure your searched hasn't reached to that point while you will be stuck to Huns.

 

[xyxmt]

Pakistan has also kicked asses of some other "greats" too
and pre-empted 2030 great already

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Is that how you call it Hindustan ? well sorry to say your history might starts from Islamic history...for the rest of the world it doesn't.. no one even referes to India as Hindustan.. the term is relatively modern compared to the terms India and Bharatvarsh. Even if purely for the sake of argument if I take it as true... still, see the antiquity between the word Hindustan and the term Pakistan. Just no comparison and even a kid can say which is older. But anyhow, the word Hindustan itself is invalid, in terms of Modern India as well as from the historical facts.

This is the language used by the pre-Islamic Arab society in which Prophet Muhammad grew up. Arabs in that time were sea-farers and traders who had extensive networks in Sindh and Hind.

There has always been a dichotomy of Indus and Gangetic civilization.

The fact we embraced Paganism akin to Babylon, then Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, and finally found permanence in Islam proves our different cultural outlook.

While you in India are insular, protectionist, and revisionist about your culture, language, city names, and history, We Pakistanis were never averse to borrowing what is good from other cultures.

Whether Babylonian culture, Greek science, Persian philosophy, Arab religion, or Turkish military.

You forget that we were important parts of the Greek, Persian, Abdali/Hepthalite, Scythian/Saka, Parthian, Arab empires which India never was.

 

[Hamza913]

Lol.. let me educate you...the term India was coined from Indika, not Indus.. its your Islamic history that uses Indus to name it Hindustan (again your history, not the rest of the world, who knew to refer India after the word Indika)

And lol..no..you never changed your name..you did not even had a word to call the current Pakistani region separately.. as much it might hurt your ego, it was called India (even the britishers called it India although they never vistied India earlier..you think that's because of Indus river? No. Megasthenes was popular and so was the term India even before you had any concentration of Islamic followers in the Indus valley region. Does that ring any bell? Thanks to the him, we still can claim what's ours, or else the way you people are trying to call every Hindu heritage as yours, you may have even called everything under the sky as Pakistani.

Oh did we.name.ourselves after Indus? Lol.. again..read what I wrote above.

Your 4th para - Hell no..you can't get funnier than that. Indus has been a Hindu land until Islamic invasion, please follow your fellow Pakistani members atleast. India was coined after Indika ..though I agree that it may have been named after Indus, its funny , you claim it to be not a part of India. Well i don't blame you after you tried links after links tried to prove all the established historians in the planet as wrong after claiming Mauryans as Pakistani. (you can learn feom your fellow poster who understands he was from Bihar). Also can't blame your historians to have taught you because of the allergy you have from everything Indian and thus you are not even taught in your books about these events. Your history starts from Mohammed Bin Qasim. Hell you are even taught a shorter version of (or tell me if you are taught at all) all Indian freedom fighters. Your heroes are only the Islamic conquerors who invaded your region, and thanks to you people, you have not been able to resist them and we saw Islamic invasion.

Infact about almost entire freedom struggle. Your kids are not even taught about Bhagat singh who was from current Pakistan and was proudly calling himself Indian (He would have died again if he knew that coming from that part of India would mean everything including him is a Pakistani.) Lmao.

3rd Para - yes I agree with you that being born in Pakistan doesn't make him Pakistani, or being born in India doesn't make Musharraf Indian. Please apply the same thing for Porus and other Hindu kings who existed on the current side of Pakistan. Infact those Hindu Kings were the first to have resisted Alexander even before Porus (the Hindu King) , and after he failed it was the fear of Nandas that stopped Alexander. Just to give you a hint -Porus used elephants in the battles. But am sure you wont even undwrstand what I am saying. These things come from basics, which unfortunately you have missed in your Pakistani school and all your theories are based on your Google (thank google please)but am sure your searched hasn't reached to that point while you will be stuck to Huns.

You also call yourselves Hindustan. What do you think HAL stands for?

Yes we did, it was called the Indus Valley. it was only part of the same region of Hindustan (and even then, that's only the eastern half, the western half was considered part of the same region as Afghanistan). As @Talwar e Pakistan showed before, your Gangadeshi ancestors considered us as aliens.

It's not our fault that IVC, Panini, Porus, etc come from Pakistan. Them being Hindu can at best mean they only belong to Pakistani Hindus, but certainly not Gangadeshis.

No, the Indus followed a variety of religions, and was in fact a major centre for Buddhism.

Of course we support the Islamic invasions, our nation exists because of them. Why would we oppose the invaders? We are descended from them as well as people who fought with them, and not all of them were foreign (you had Pashtuns like Muhammad Ghor, Allaudin Khiliji, Ahmed Shah Durrani and Sher Shah Suri, Punjabis like Hyder Ali, Tipu Sultan and Shahrullah Khan, Kashmiris like Sikander Shah Mir, Baluchis like Mir Chakar Rind, etc).

Why would we teach about those idiots who thought they were the same as people in Tamil Nadu or Bangalore?

You didn't read my last paragraph right.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

You also call yourselves Hindustan. What do you think HAL stands for?

Yes we did, it was called the Indus Valley. it was only part of the same region of Hindustan (and even then, that's only the eastern half, the western half was considered part of the same region as Afghanistan). As @Talwar e Pakistan showed before, your Gangadeshi ancestors considered us as aliens.

It's not our fault that IVC, Panini, Porus, etc come from Pakistan. Them being Hindu can at best mean they only belong to Pakistani Hindus, but certainly not Gangadeshis.

No, the Indus followed a variety of religions, and was in fact a major centre for Buddhism.

Of course we support the Islamic invasions, our nation exists because of them. Why would we oppose the invaders? We are descended from them as well as people who fought with them, and not all of them were foreign (you had Pashtuns like Muhammad Ghor, Allaudin Khiliji, Ahmed Shah Durrani and Sher Shah Suri, Punjabis like Hyder Ali, Tipu Sultan and Shahrullah Khan, Kashmiris like Sikander Shah Mir, Baluchis like Mir Chakar Rind, etc).

Why would we teach about those idiots who thought they were the same as people in Tamil Nadu or Bangalore?

You didn't read my last paragraph right.

1st Para - HAL does stand for Hindustan..now how does that mean it came into being before the term India or how is Pakistan older than Hindustan? Lol.. it simply means Pakistan is a modern term and not even comparable to your own invented term call Hindustan, forget about the actual word India. Again thanks to Indus and Indika... the word India is older than there was any term Islam in Indus valley...should not even talk about the term Pakistan, which is carved on the principles of Islam Itself.

2nd para - Indus valley was never used as a region for Muslims. If there was any term invented at all after the concentration of Muslims in the Hindu region of Indus Valley it was Pakistan. Also ask your older generation if the region was ever called as Indus Valley before partition ? They simply didn't have any teem to use other than Hindustan Or India (for the england returned educated population.like Nehru and Jinnah ). That will give you enough clue.

3rd para - Of course they are Hindus (thanks for accepting, it will be easier henceforth ). As I said, calling them Pakistanis is like Calling Bhagat Singh Pakistani just because he was born there. They fought for a land that was 'Never Islamic' but being a Hindu, it was their motherland. And Dharti mata or Soil Goddess( and you are aliens to that concepts). The fact that you had to abolish everything Non Islamic and choose purely Islamic heroes, tell us a great deal, how your Hindu ancestry is accepted. The fact that Porus a Hindu king and ALL other Hindu kings (yes they existed ) in indus valley civilisation resisted invasions should be enough to tell you, you guys can either claim to be is descendent's (which you refuse) or tell us that you came from the Islamists (non Hindus). Now if you claim the first , it makes sense, but if you claim to have come either from India (1947) or to have to have genes of those islamic invaders .. then even a kid can understand the equation , thart you didn't stop Alexander (as you were simply not present ). Tell me if you still didn't get it. I can repeat.

4th Para - I so agree with you. This is the only accepted historical fact that you are talking about. Yes Multi religion did exist . Those 200 odd years of Maurya empire played the most Imoortant role to spread them. I can even name them fir your education.. and guess what the list does not contain Islam. Infact all those religion suffered the most due to Islamic invasion your proud of but now to save your theory of cultural Pakistan
, You are willing to accept those religions as your. Very Hypocritical.

5th Para - Now this is the best thing you have written so far. Yes you don't oppose Islamic Invasion and your entire existence exists becahse of those invaders who were 'Not the part of land'. You used the word 'also' which means you are ready to agree that Porus was part of your ancestry. Now see this - From your own arguments :- Porus who fought Alexander were hindus and a large chunk of them later converted to Islam. The remaining chunk who are part of the invaders did not even fight Alexander. there is another chunk from india of course. Hence you do have a mixed race and none of them fought Alexander.

6th Para - Again.. we are so synced and are in agreement now . Yes ..thanks for accepting you are not taught about them, and that should be the clue how history in Pakistan is subject to edition according to the principles of Islam. You might have a rich past, but your Islamic principles don't allow your kids to read about them. so I don't expect you people to even know properly about pre Islamic Insdus history and your arguments are jus reflective of that. I am still laughing on Maurya na were from Pakistan.

6th Para - I might have missed it. Running fever and am using a mobile to type. Very uncomfortable.. kindly post it again..I will surely answer.

 

[Mirza Jatt]

This is the language used by the pre-Islamic Arab society in which Prophet Muhammad grew up. Arabs in that time were sea-farers and traders who had extensive networks in Sindh and Hind.

There has always been a dichotomy of Indus and Gangetic civilization.

The fact we embraced Paganism akin to Babylon, then Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, and finally found permanence in Islam proves our different cultural outlook.

While you in India are insular, protectionist, and revisionist about your culture, language, city names, and history, We Pakistanis were never averse to borrowing what is good from other cultures.

Whether Babylonian culture, Greek science, Persian philosophy, Arab religion, or Turkish military.

You forget that we were important parts of the Greek, Persian, Abdali/Hepthalite, Scythian/Saka, Parthian, Arab empires which India never was.

Agreed. That's a term used by Islamic followers and not by anyone in the world except the people who are aware of local.language.

Invaders were fought before they lost bro..and then the conversion happened. People who were brave , resisted and got killed and their idols broken. It was a bloody forceful spread bro..don't tell me you don't know that. Ir might be peacefulater on, but the penetration was bloody. I being a sikh also can relate to it. (Different era though.)

Open to new ideas ? I dnt want to talk about it bro. I might end up sounding very offending. On a different topic, I can te you that you should realise that you are talking to a Sikh, which was started by Khatri Hindus. Enough prove dor you to know how open Indians were to new thoughts. Infact even Islam found many appreciated in historic as well as modern India., So your argument go for a toss here...oh I should also tell you Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism all were started by the people who belong to Hindus because they were open to ideas..you argument is absolutely not valid.

Yes you did come from partly from those invaders.. agreed. That tells you that chunk didn't existe when Alexander was here.